Has the Disability Tax Credit policy changed? The CRA has not made any formal statement that the program has changed, however, the media implies otherwise. There seems to be an increase in stories about folks either having their applications denied or existing DTC holders having their certificates revoked.
A while ago we had to reapply for my sonâ€™s DTC and it seemed to go fine, however, that is far too small a data set to draw a conclusion from.
There have been stories of the CRA cracking down on false DTC claims (especially in the area of Autism and Brain disorders). There have been allegations that some â€œhelping firmsâ€ have been supplying false applications, and the CRA is investigating these allegations.
There are also stories about an apparent change of policy for diabetics (with type 1 diabetes). If these folks are diagnosed under age 18 they are given the DTC, however, when they reach the age of majority, their DTC has been revoked (in some cases). The argument has been that their disability is not having a significant impact on their daily life (and that is the yard stick the CRA uses for disabilities).
My concern here is that there has not been any statement from the CRA or any apparent consultations with the public about this policy change.
For many folks disabilities there is no question, they are disabled, however there seems to be a push to revisit some areas. If the CRA chooses to change the rules for the DTC there is not much that can be done, aside from contacting your Member of Parliament, The Health Minister and the Minister in Charge of the CRA.
Policy Change ?
Does this apparent change in policy worry me. Yes, and my concern is not simply that my son may lose his â€œdisabledâ€ label (from the CRA), it is the apparent arbitrary nature that the new rules are being implemented, without public consultations.
The CRA can change the rules, but I think they should at least consult the public, or publish these new rules so we know what they are. A statement clarifying things would be helpful as well. It may well be that these are isolated cases, however, they may not be.