http://decision.tcc-cci.gc.ca/tcc-cci/decisions/en/item/127125/index.do
Skrien v. The Queen (December 10, 2015 – 2015 TCC 322, V. Miller J.).
Précis: Mrs. Skrien relocated from Saskatoon to Guelph for a new position. She claimed meal expenses of $1,530 for herself and her husband for a period of 15 days as relating to the move. CRA denied the meal expenses because she did not claim any lodging expenses so it assumed she claimed meal expenses when she and her husband were in fact living in their home (old or new). She did not testify but her agent argued that she was entitled to make such claims under CRA’s “simplified method” of accounting for moving expenses. The Tax Court held that “moving expenses” had to result from a move, not just meals consumed in the prior or new home before and after the actual move.
The appeal was dismissed.
Decision: The point was a simple one and the Court dealt with it appropriately:
[15] Although paragraph 62(3)(c) does not contain the word “temporary”, it is obvious that the paragraph refers to temporary living expenses because it only includes the expenses incurred for a period which does not exceed 15 days. The period of time for meals and lodging expenses near the old residence plus the time for those expenses near the new residence cannot exceed 15 days. These are expenses which are incurred for a brief or temporary period.
[16] In conclusion, the Appellant used the simplified method to claim moving expenses and she did not have to submit receipts for her meal expenses but she was required to submit receipts for the cost of lodgings. Apparently, she did not incur an expense for lodgings either near her old residence or her new residence. It is my view that paragraph 62(3)(c) is not applicable in the circumstances of this appeal. For all of these reasons, the appeal is dismissed.
There was no order as to costs as this was an informal procedure appeal.