Ottawa Valley man takes up the financial cause of the growing number of men who share custody of their children Quote:
George Calogeracos didn't set out to become a crusader for fair tax treatment for divorced dads.
But after the Canada Revenue Agency disallowed his claim for a tax deduction, the 52-year-old cook from the Ottawa Valley hamlet of North Gower, Ont., has taken up the cause on behalf of the growing number of men who share custody of their children after a divorce. He takes his case to an Ottawa tax court today.
Calogeracos's story begins in 2006, when he and his wife divorced. After a court battle that cost him $20,000 in legal fees, he won joint custody of their two daughters, Sabrina, now 13, and Victoria, 11. Under the divorce settlement, the girls lived with him from Sunday afternoon until Wednesday at 8 p.m. "I had them for exactly half the week," he says.
When he filed his 2006 tax return, Calogeracos claimed the "equivalent to spouse" deduction for one of his daughters. His ex-wife made the same claim for the other daughter.
The credit allows people who are single, divorced, separated or widowed to deduct about $7,500 from their taxable income for a dependent relative who lives with them.
His ex-wife's claim was accepted. But the Canada Revenue Agency told Calogeracos he wasn't eligible because he was paying $350 a month in child support.
Calogeracos called the Revenue Agency to object. "I didn't think this was fair," he says.
But the person he spoke to explained that the rules were clear: anyone paying child support was disqualified from claiming the equivalent to spouse deduction.
The official told him his only recourse was to appeal to the Tax Court of Canada. "At the end of it all, he says, 'good luck to you and all the other fathers in Canada,'" recalls Calogeracos. "So obviously a lot of people are in the same boat as I am."
Another Revenue official told him he couldn't claim the deduction if he paid even a single dollar of child support in a given year. Calogeracos, who now has full custody of his daughters and no longer pays child support, was also miffed when the agency informed him that, for tax purposes, "the kids aren't even my kids."
A letter to Calogeracos last November from Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, to whom he had fired off a complaint, sheds further light on the taxman's rationale for the rule.
"It is important to recognize, that the income tax system is general in its application, and cannot always be tailored to individual circumstances," the letter reads.
|
Why would he even have to pay child support if he had kids 50% of the time? Oh wait this is Canada the man hating capital of the world.
Yet the government allows his ex wife the credit for one kid and not him for the other which is fair but he is denied, like wtf?? Oh wait, I almost forgot this is Canada. So what if he pays child support?
Sounds like the person at the tax department was rubbing it in. I guess it was a mangina??
I thought things may get better with a conservative government but they are no better in this issue than the socialist governments of the past. The finance minister sure gives an evasive half ass bunch of bull for an answer...
Dam it, I keep forgetting this is Canada.......
Link 
2nd-April-2008
