Filing a T1-ADJ - How likely is this to trigger an audit?

[Senk]

I'm contemplating filing T1-ADJs for 2004, 2005 and 2006 as I understated my employment expenses by about $500 each year.

What are the odds that this will trigger an audit?

[Wonderdollar]

I'm contemplating filing T1-ADJs for 2004, 2005 and 2006 as I understated my employment expenses by about $500 each year.

What are the odds that this will trigger an audit?

Yes there is a likelyhood of CRA looking in to these returns for you in detail.

But, if you can justify all your expenses and have proof to back up your claims, then you do not have to worry for the same.

Good Luck.

[ghostryder]

I'm contemplating filing T1-ADJs for 2004, 2005 and 2006 as I understated my employment expenses by about $500 each year.

What are the odds that this will trigger an audit?

Very slim. Think about how much tax would be "recovered" if your expenses were disallowed. Miniscule. Not worth their time.

[dux]

To file a T1-adj you have to send proof to back up your changes.

[kaycee8877]

To file a T1-adj you have to send proof to back up your changes.

no you don't

you never have to send CRA anything unless they request it (although by sending them all info upfront it avoids said request)


the amount is low so a review will be unlikely ... but if your claiming shady items then really is there a point for such a small amount?

that being said if its all legit then you have nothing to worry about anyways

FYI when CRA conducts an "audit" they generally don't go through everything with a fine tooth comb ..they just ask for info to back up specific items - i.e. 'line xxx employment expenses $3,500', or something to that effect... easy peasy

[ghostryder]

no you don't

you never have to send CRA anything unless they request it (although by sending them all info upfront it avoids said request)

You do for an adjustment. From the back of the form:

"If you are changing a line on which you already claimed an amount (see Example 1, below) and you did not previously provide the
supporting documentation, you now have to provide supporting documentation for the entire revised amount.

Supporting documentation may include receipts, schedules, or other relevant documents. Your request may be
delayed if you do not provide all required information with this form."

The adjustment form is here:
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pbg/tf/t1-adj/README.html


FYI when CRA conducts an "audit" they generally don't go through everything with a fine tooth comb ..they just ask for info to back up specific items - i.e. 'line xxx employment expenses $3,500', or something to that effect... easy peasy

LOL, you've never been through a full audit have you?

[dux]

no you don't

you never have to send CRA anything unless they request it (although by sending them all info upfront it avoids said request)


the amount is low so a review will be unlikely ... but if your claiming shady items then really is there a point for such a small amount?

that being said if its all legit then you have nothing to worry about anyways

FYI when CRA conducts an "audit" they generally don't go through everything with a fine tooth comb ..they just ask for info to back up specific items - i.e. 'line xxx employment expenses $3,500', or something to that effect... easy peasy

Trust me you do, I've done a T1-adj, and it was stated that I needed to provide proof.

[kaycee8877]

You do for an adjustment.

guess im wrong.. so file the supporting docs with

that being said i've filed tons of ADJs without support and never had recourse. maybe i'm lazy .... and lucky ;)

LOL, you've never been through a full audit have you?

and the chances are ?

i was just letting the OP know what a likely scenario is, if anything at all

Ive seen hundreds of item specific reviews and maybe only a couple of 'audits'. I am dealing with professionally prepared returns and that might have some bearing, but i highly doubt the total statistic is much different.

so could they 'audit' him? .. of course ... chances are? ...chances are they won't ... and if he keeps proper files, then supporting a single line item is yes...easy peasy ;)

[Senk]

The adjustment is legit. I neglected to add a taxable benefit
for gasoline paid for by my employer that was buried in box 40
along with my auto allowance.

I was thinking that the adjustments are pretty small so it would not
be worth CRA's time to really look into it.

My only worry is that I don't keep a proper milage log.....

[halflife150]

and the chances are ?

i was just letting the OP know what a likely scenario is, if anything at all

Ive seen hundreds of item specific reviews and maybe only a couple of 'audits'. I am dealing with professionally prepared returns and that might have some bearing, but i highly doubt the total statistic is much different.

so could they 'audit' him? .. of course ... chances are? ...chances are they won't ... and if he keeps proper files, then supporting a single line item is yes...easy peasy ;)

I read somewhere they audit a very small % of all returns. I believe it said the chances of a person being audited even once in their lifetime is unlikely.

[Wonderdollar]

I read somewhere they audit a very small % of all returns. I believe it said the chances of a person being audited even once in their lifetime is unlikely.

Still the chances of an independent contractor or self employed audited are more than a simple employee.

These links http://www.taxwise.ca/fatpages/ccra/taxwiseccrapolicies6.html
http://www.bclocalnews.com/businessexaminer/fraser_valley/community/17357174.html may provide some more information on this subject.

[halflife150]

Still the chances of an independent contractor or self employed audited are more than a simple employee.

These links http://www.taxwise.ca/fatpages/ccra/taxwiseccrapolicies6.html
http://www.bclocalnews.com/businessexaminer/fraser_valley/community/17357174.html may provide some more information on this subject.

According to the info. on the links provided, 1.3% of all personal returns are audited. Add the fact that certain situation/people are considered risky and therefore are more likely to be audited and you get exactly what I said, the chances of someone getting audited in their lifetime is very small.

[grant]

According to the info. on the links provided, 1.3% of all personal returns are audited. Add the fact that certain situation/people are considered risky and therefore are more likely to be audited and you get exactly what I said, the chances of someone getting audited in their lifetime is very small.
If a person files 53 tax returns in their life, the chance of at least one of them being audited is ~50%. (based on the 1.3% figure)

50/50 is hardly "very small"!

[MacGyver]

My only worry is that I don't keep a proper milage log.....If you don't have a mileage log, then how exactly are you going to prove to CRA your vehicle expenses?

[halflife150]

If a person files 53 tax returns in their life, the chance of at least one of them being audited is ~50%. (based on the 1.3% figure)

50/50 is hardly "very small"!

Well that is why I said add the fact that certain high risk situations would be audited more which would overstate 1.3% figure for average people. Certain people doing riskier transactions probably have a higher audit rate so they take up most of the 1.3% figure. They had a list of things on the links, self-employed, foreign holdings etc. So for the average person the chance is a fraction of that 1.3% figure and over 53 tax returns represents a very small life time %.