“It is clear from the evidence that there is no common sense to the Crown’s interpretation of the 40 kilometre test.”
Now, with de Kruyff’s win, the courts have once again clarified the rules around claiming relocation expenses for urban commuters. The precedent-setting ruling acknowledges the unique challenges faced by those living in densely populated cities like Toronto, where rush hour traffic can drastically affect commute times.
De Kruyff’s case serves as a reminder that the Income Tax Act must be interpreted in a way that reflects the realities of modern urban life. As cities continue to grow and traffic congestion worsens, it is essential that tax laws evolve to accommodate the changing needs of taxpayers.
For de Kruyff, the victory is not just a personal win, but a win for all urban commuters who may now find it easier to claim relocation expenses when moving closer to work. The ruling sets a valuable precedent that could benefit countless Canadians facing similar challenges.
As de Kruyff celebrates his hard-fought victory, he hopes that his case will pave the way for more equitable tax laws that take into account the unique circumstances of urban living. And as for the CRA auditor who suggested taking the Don Valley Parkway at rush hour? Perhaps they’ll think twice before making such a recommendation again.
‘A Victory for Modern Technology’
The recent case of de Kruyff taking on the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) over relocation expense deductions has set a precedent for the use of modern technology in calculating commuting distances. The 40 road zigzag approach may make sense to no one, but thanks to the ruling, Google Maps is now recognized as a reliable means to measure routes for commuting.
De Kruyff, representing himself against the CRA’s lawyers, argued that the CRA’s rules for calculating distance did not take into account the time of day. By cross-examining the Vancouver-based auditor who suggested he travel the Don Valley Parkway during rush hour, he highlighted the need to consider real-time data provided by tools like Google Maps.
Ultimately, Tax Court Judge Bocock agreed with de Kruyff’s argument, stating that ignoring the changing dynamic of technology rendered the law obsolete and inaccurate. The ruling acknowledged the shift towards using smartphones and GPS for navigation, rather than relying on outdated paper-based methods.
De Kruyff received the news of his victory via email on a weekday afternoon, describing it as “a great day.” He shared the news with his family before driving home, content with the outcome of his case.
This ruling not only benefits individuals like de Kruyff but also sets a precedent for future cases involving commuting distances and the use of technology. It highlights the importance of adapting laws to reflect advancements in technology and ensures a fair and accurate assessment of commuting routes for taxpayers.
