GST/HST and income tax — family built home for personal use
My clients were a married couple. The husband ran a business related to construction. He was also a real estate agent. He had his company build two homes in succession for the family to live in, paying the company market value for its services. Each home was customized in many ways, and was intended as the family’s “dream home”.
The family were not intending to sell either home. In both cases, due to unexpected circumstances (within 3 years of each other), they had to sell the home just a few months after they moved in. The first time was due to a combination of circumstances. The second was because the company lost a lot of money during COVID, and the family could not afford to keep the home.
My clients were audited for GST/HST on the sale of the two homes. Their accountant helped them prepare a letter explaining the circumstances and why they had to sell the homes.
The GST/HST auditor did not believe the account. She decided that, since the husband was in construction and real estate and the couple sold both homes very soon after they was built, they must have intended all along to sell them. Thus, in the auditor’s view, my clients were liable for not collecting and remitting HST on the sales. The CRA proposed to assess them for HST accordingly. With interest and penalty, the assessments would have cost well over a million dollars. Worse still, income tax assessments would likely follow, more than doubling the cost.
At this point the accountant came to me for advice, having drafted a letter to reply to the CRA auditor.
I advised that the accountant’s draft response would not work. It did not focus on the right issues, and was not backed up by documentary evidence. Instead, I explained the comprehensive effort that would be needed to win this case, whether at Audit, objection or Tax Court appeal. Of course, winning at Audit would be quickest and most preferable (and cheapest).
The clients then retained me to prepare a comprehensive reply. After I spoke with them at length, I was able to advise that the case could be won, but we would need to assemble a vast amount of evidence, to overturn the auditor’s misunderstandings of the facts.
Over the next few weeks, I collected and organized:
explanations of the family’s cultural customs
photos and invoices showing how the houses were customized in many ways for their needs, with many unusual features
photos and invoices showing how the house was upgraded in many ways that a builder planning to sell the home would not do
many emails showing the wife’s detailed involvement in designing both homes, with language showing she was clearly intending to live in each of them
detailed records of the wife’s personal design work of various specific features in each home
photos and videos of the wife and children (and even a child’s friend) visiting the homes during construction
detailed Affidavits from eight different contractors who had worked on the homes, who testified to the wife’s and children’s involvement in the planning and construction as well as the expensive special features in the homes that would not have been put in by someone intending to sell the home
Affidavits from the husband, the wife and the (now adult) children testifying to their intentions about the home, their personal involvement, and the facts that led to each home having to be sold
evidence (including invoices and Affidavits) about changes made during the middle of construction, as my clients changed their minds and made many design changes even to things that had already been built, resulting in significant extra expense.
In total, I sent the CRA a 70-page analysis and explanation, with over 500 pages of supporting evidence. This took me and my co-counsel many hours and was a very expensive process. But it was well worth it. The auditor called and agreed to concede that one home was built solely for personal reasons. We then scheduled a video call with the auditor, her Team Leader and my clients, and I was able to get my clients to explain in person the background to building the homes and the circumstances that forced them to sell each one. And I showed how the documentation, emails, photos and maps in our submission fully supported what the clients were saying.
A few weeks later, the auditor called to advise that CRA now agreed both homes were built solely as personal residences, and that they would close the file without assessing.