APPEAL# I PART C-Decisi o n under Appeal The decision under app eal is the Mini stry of Child ren and Family D e velopment (the ministry) reconsider at ion de c ision dated May 22, 201 4 which found that the appellant was not entitle d to child care subsidies received, and i s l iable to r epay these amounts, because the family's monthly net i n c ome exceeded the child's thre shold when adjusted to the amount rep orted to the Cana d a Revenue Age ncy (C R A ) for 2011 and 2012, purs uant to Sect ions 7 and 9 of the Child Care Subsidy Regulation ( C CSR). P ART D -R ele va n t Legislat i on Child Care Subsidy Ac t (CC SA ), Section 7 Ch f ld C a r e Subsidy Re gulatio n (CC SR), Se ct io ns 1, 7 , 8 and 9
PART E -Summary of Facts The evidenc e before the ministry at the time of the reconsidera 1) S t atement of Business or Pr ofessional A ctivities sho wi n g in part gr oss sales of $29,127, t o tal ex a d j ustme n t s of $9,224 and net incom e of 'nil'; 2 ) No tice of Assessment for 2011 for the appell 3) Child Care Subsidy Self-Employmen t form dated April 28, 2 co vering the 6 month pe riod to June 30, 2011 and showing gross income of $9,900, Permitted Operating Expenses of $10 ,070 and net loss of-$170; 4) Child Care Subsi dy Self-Employment form dated June 29, 2011 for the appella co vering the 6 mont h pe riod to June 30, 2011 and showing gr Per mit ted Operating Expenses of $9,743 (reduced business insurance by moto r vehic le expense b y $28 9) and net inc om 5) Child C ar e Subsidy Self-Employment form dated Nove b u si n ess, covering the 8 mo nth p eriod to Oc tober $ 11,200 , t ot a l Permitted Oper ating Expen ses 6) C hi ld C a re Sub si dy Self-Em p l oyment f orm dated b u s i n e ss , cove ring th e 1 0 m o nt h p eri od to O $1 7 , 2 53 , t ot a l Permitted Ope rating Expen ses 7 ) St a tem e n t o f Business o r Pro f ess io n a l Activities for t sho wi n g in p art gr o s s sales of $39 , 3 6 4 , t otal exp adjustm e n ts o f $ 13 , 253 and net i n come of 'nil'; 8) Child C a re Sub s id y Self-Employment form dated cove ring th e 6 month p eri od to May 3 1 , 2 012 P ermitte d Opera t ing E xpe n ses o f $ 1 2, 9 79 and 9 ) Child C ar e Sub s id y S elf-E m pl oym en t fo r m da c ove r ing the 1 2 mo nth p er iod to Ma y 31 , 2013 a Per m itte d Op era ting E xpens es o f $ 37 , 566 and 1 0 )Child C a re Sub s i dy Self-E m p loyment f orm dated June 19, 2013 fo c ove r ing t he 13 m o nth p eri od to June 30, 201 P ermitted Ope rat i n g E xpe n ses o f $20,021 and 11 )Handwritten note to the revised statement dated June 19, 2013 stating in part app ellant' s spouse, d e d u cting an amount fo r accountant, and the capital loss that was claimed on taxes and "not sure if usable but included as it i s a busines s expen se/loss that incurred." adjusted from 100% to 50%" and "utilities and re cable, internet and rent as use half for daycare." 12)Stat e ment of Business or Professio nal Activities for the appellant calendar year showin g in part gross sales of $83,758, total expenses of $44,795 and net income aft er adjust m en ts of $38,962 and net income of $36,679; 1 3)Noti ce of Assessment fo r 201 1 for the a pp ella 1 4 ) Child Care Subsidy S elf -Emp loyment form dated April 2 appellant's spouse, covering the 6 month period to June 30, 2011 and showing gross income of $36 , 4 00, total Perm i t ted Operating Expenses of $11,781 and net income of $24,619; 1 5 ) Child Care Subsidy Self-E mployment fo r m date appellant's spouse, covering the 6 month period to June 29, 2011 and showing gross income of $32,915, total Permitted Operating Expenses of $27,912 (added $5,488 paid and increased rent and utilities by $4,320) and net income of $5,003; I APPEAL# t ion decision included : for the a p pellant fo r the 2011 calendar year p ens e s o f $ 19,903 and net income after a n t showing total incom e of $4,443; 0 11 for the appellant's business, tota l nt 's business, oss inco me of $9,900, total $ 4 0 and d ecreased e of $1 57; mber 1, 2011 for t he a p pellant's 31, 2011 and showing gr os s income o f of $10,9 15 a n d n e t in come of $28 5; No v ember 1 5 , 2011 for t h e app ellant's c tober 31, 2 0 11 a nd sho wing gross income of o f $12 , 503 a nd n e t in c o m e of $4, 7 51; he appell ant fo r t h e 2012 calend a r yea r ense s of $ 2 6,111 a n d n et income a f ter Ma y 28 , 20 1 2 for the a ppellant's business , and showing gr oss income o f $2 0 ,4 43, tot al net income o f $7,464; t e d June 1 , 2013 for th e appellan t's bu si ness, nd show i n g gross i nc ome o f $39,369, t otal net income o f $ 1,79 8 ; r the ap pellant's b u s i n e s s, 3 and sho wing gr oss in c om e o f $27,9 74, to tal net income o f $7,95 3; that for the taxes and H ST, that she got this amount from the For the appellant's statement, "car has been nt ha ve been adjusted to 50% of phone, 's spouse for the 2 0 11 nt's s pouse showing total income of $3 7, 158; 8 , 2011 for the business of the d J u ne 29, 2 0 11 for the business of the for HST and taxes
I APPEAL# 16)Child Care Subsidy Self-Employment form dated November 1, 2011 for the business of the appellant's spouse, covering the 8 month period to October 31, 2011 and showing gross income of $33,098, total Permitted Operating Expenses of $24,866 and net income of $8,222; 17) Statement of Business or Professional Activities for the appellant's spouse for the 2012 calendar year showing in part gross sales of $88,069, total expenses of $33,495 and net income after adjustments of $43,459 and net income of $39,464; 18) Notice of Assessment for 2012 for the appellant's spouse showing total income of $39,953; 19)Child Care Subsidy Self-Employment form dated June 1, 2012 for the business of the appellant's spouse, showing gross income of $37,379, total Permitted Operating Expenses of $25,079 and net income of $12,301; 20)Child Care Subsidy Self-Employment form dated June 1, 2013 for the business of the appellant's spouse, covering the 12 month period to May 31, 2013 and showing gross income of $76,954, total Permitted Operating Expenses of $59,320 and net income of $17,634; 21 )Child Care Subsidy Self-Employment form dated June 19, 2013 for the business of the appellant's spouse, covering the 13 month period to June 30, 2013 and showing gross income of $58,574, total Permitted Operating Expenses of $30,170 and net income of $28,404; 22)Child Care Subsidy Claim-Licensed Child Care form dated February 1, 2014 23)Eligibility Calculator for Child Care Subsidy for July 2011 through December 2011 and January 2012 through June 2012 plus September 2012 through December 2012; 24)Child Care Subsidy Payments July 1, 2011 to December 31, 2012; 25)Print Outs of Day Care Claims for an Authorization for the periods July 4, 2011 through June 30, 2012; 26)Print out of Invoice Lines for the period January 1, 2012 through January 31, 2014; 27) Monthly Child Care Subsidy Payment Totals versus Eligibility Amount from July 2011 through December 2012 showing total subsidy paid of $7,939.44 and total subsidy eligible of $125.39 and total overpayment of $7,814.05; 28) Ministry Reconciliation Statements for information from Statement of Business or Professional Activities and from amounts reported for Self-Employment Income and Permitted Operating Expenses; and, 29)Request for Reconsideration dated March 10, 2014. In her Request for Reconsideration with attached letter, the appellant wrote that: • She believes she is being penalized for something that she completed accurately and approved by subsidy at the time of her application. • She requested help from an advocacy agency and they went over her tax information from what the accountant had provided to her and filled out the forms. • After she submitted the forms, she was called and asked questions about her application which she answered and she was asked to change some information on the form. She made adjustments according to the requests and her application was approved. • She wonders why she was not told previously that some write offs could not be used. • She was informed by both subsidy and [the advocacy agency] to apply in her lowest earning period. • After working with the advocacy agency and subsidy directly, having changed her forms multiple times, she is confused as to why she would now owe money when it had been originally approved. • Her husband's earnings included HST/GST which is not being taken into consideration. He has to pay it back and does not i:iet to keep it.
In her N otice of Appeal, the appellant ex pr e s sed he de cisio n and wrote that she had help by a reliable so forms from h er taxe s and as sistance papers. She wonders w S h e talked t o m any staff a nd everything was s h o w n At the hearing the appellant stated th at: • She went to the advoca c y agency right from th advocacy agency assis ted her w ith preparing t rel ied on the advocacy agency as a r el ia b le s • The appellant pointed o u t that some of the forms are marked "corrected" or "revised" beca s he was ask e d by t he min istry to remo v e certain things or called he r a n d tol d her t h a t there we re cert ai n things that we expl ained what items were included in each total. upstairs in the house and her da y care is do wnsta r e nt . A not he r item was the cap i tal cost a l lowance change requ est e d. • The fig ures we r e based on the tax papers g iv 201 O and then 2011 . • She as ked if the cha n g es we r e o kay and sh e • She think s it is unfa i r , af t er 3 y ears , to say she i s no t h er hus ba nd's mo ney an d h e has to pay it back • They a re s t rugg l ing to m ake ends me et and i have be en appro ved. T h ey ha v e d o ne ev erything f rust rat ed th at t he minist ry is now "back -track • She does no t a gr e e w it h t he amount of monthly The min istry reli e d o n its reconsi d eratio n d eci s i o n. • In 2 01 1 and 2 012 th e app e ll ant wa s part o f a w as r e ceived for 2 chil dr en . • Both the ap pellan t an d h er husband ar e se lf employed a and expenses on varia b le Child Care Subsidy Self-Employ 2012. • The base income threshold level for the family of 6 is $1,704, which is increased to $2,219 when the 2 children are assessed at the F2 and F3 care rat $3,204 when th e 2 children are assessed at the N1 rate of care. • In January 2014, a review of the ap pellant's file was conducted and, in February 2014, the appellant provided Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) tax documents for the 2011 and 2012 tax years. • The minis tr y advise d the appellant that the income an not ma tch t he inf ormation r eported to th e C RA in a n overpayment of $7,814.05. At the hearing, th e ministry stated that: • When there is variable income through self-employm that will be received in the year, and there is a provision in the CCSA [Section 9(3)] that the estimate is then divided by 12 to arrive at the monthly income. • The nrevious vear's income tax information is not a auide and the Child Care Subsidv Self-APPEAL j/ I r disagreement wi t h the ministry's recons ide r ation u rce [the a d vo cacy ag ency] to help fill out all the h y, af ter 3 year s, thi ngs have changed. on t he forms and nothi ng was hidde n. e be ginning. Sh e took he r t ax pape rs a nd t he he applicat ion based on her tax return. S h e ource f or inf ormatio n. u se adjust ot h er t h ings . Th e ministry re no longer allowed and sh e One ex a m ple is that her husband's offi c e i s irs but she co uld not submit her husband's (CCA) . They w o ul d tal k he r th rou gh e ach e n, bein g the S t atemen t o f Busi n es s A ctivities fo r was to ld that ii looked g ood . cannot wr ite so m e t h i n gs off. Sinc e HST/GST , it sho u l d n ot be includ ed in the total. f the informa tion was not ok ay, t he y should n o t that w as asked of them, and s he is ing." fami ly ne t i n come s tated by the mini stry. The facts incl ude d: 2-pa rent, six uni t family, a nd chi ld care s ub s idy n d t h e a p pellant reporte d the inc om e ment forms throughout 2011 and e , and is further increased to d expenses repo r t ed to the ministry did fro m J ul y 2 011 to De cemb er 2012 and resulted ent, an estimate is made of the income
Emp l o yment fo rm h as a statement under "De i n f or ma t ion containe d i n th e f o rm ma y be r e viewed • When an es tim ate i s ma de, there is an a udit co With the recon cili at i o n of a m ou nts , t here i s usu min istry or i n fav our of the ap pellant. • There i s no claim th a t t here was anyt hing dish fi n a l inform a t i on reg arding i n come and exp en made for the year. • This is not an unc o mmon oc currence wh e n the fa n u mbers are h igh e r than those esti mated. • It is also t he case th a t th e amounts cons idered b y the family un i t. • One opt i o n for avo idin g an adjustment is to pro the ac t ua l i nv oi c e s a nd receip t s e ach mo nt h, • It is acknowledged t hat it m ay be diffi c ult to han does not ch ange the f in al res ult t ha t t he i n for the mi nistr y . • T h e r ec o mmen dation t o the app e llant to app l p eriod doe s not m ake sense s i n c e it could res • T h e ministry does not have t he abil ity to redu th at are not set out as "p e rmitt e d operati n g exp I AP PEAL# c l ar ation and Consent" , to the eff ec t that , au dited and verif ied. n du cted wh en the fin a l i n f o rmation is avail able. ally a n adju s tment , w heth er it i s in f av o u r of the on est, in a ccura te o r inco rr ec t , bu t s imply that th e ses di d no t c o rrespond with the estimate that was m il y unit's incom e is var i able an d th e final as in clu ded i n i ncome a r e no t always re c e ive d vid e the actu al co sts to t he mi nistr y, to pr ovide but t his involves a lot o f time . d le t ha t a n a djust me n t h as t o be made b ut it mat i o n from C RA is d iffe rent than tha t su ppl ied to y for th e c h il d c are s ub sidy in her l o west ea rning ult i n a larger adjustm ent at th e end of the y e a r. c e t he i n c ome repor t e d by allowing deduc t ions e n s es " i n th e CCSR.
PART F -Reason s fo r P ane l De c ision The issue on th e appe al is whethe r the mi n ist ry's decision, w entitle d to c hil d c a re subsidie s receiv ed, an d i s l i able to re m on t hl y ne t incom e exceeded t h e c hil d 's thr esh o ld for 20 11 a nd 20 12, pursuant to Secti on s 7 an d 9 of the re asona b l y su pport e d by the evidence or a re asona circum s tances of the appel la nt . Sec tion 7 o f the CCSA pr o vides: Overpay me n t s , repaym ents and as sig nme nts 7 (1) If a c h i ld care subs idy is pa id t o or fo r a person who r e pay to t he government the amount to wh ich t he (2) Subj ect to the r egulati ons , the min ist er m a y en ter assigne d , fo r t he r e pa y ment of a ch ild car e s ubs idy (3) A re pa y men t ag r eemen t m ay be entered into bef ore ( 4) A n a mou nt t hat a p e rso n is l iable t o rep ay under subsecti in t o u nder su b sectio n (2 ) i s a deb t due to t he gov e (a) be recove r ed by it i n a c o urt of co m pet ent juri sdi (b) be dedu cted by it fro m any subsequ ent child ca p erson by the go vernme nt und e r a pr escribed ena (5) The minis ter's d ecisio n ab out the amou nt a pe rso n u nd er an a g ree me nt entered into un der sub section Sect i on 7(1) of the CCSR provides : In co me tes t 7 (1) An app licant is not e lig ible for a c hild ca r e subsid y (a) the fam il y's monthly ne t income e x c eeds the chi ( b ) the re su lt of the calculation unde r sect io n 8 (2) for the Section 8 of th e C CS R pr ov ides in par t: A moun t of su bsi dy 8 (1 ) I f a famil y 's mo nthly net inc ome does no t exceed a th e chil d in respe ct of a type of chi ld ca r e is t he amount s whichever i s less , for the type of child care. (1.1) If a parent i s elig ible f or a su bsid y for more than one type of child care set out in Schedule A, the minister may determine which subsidy rate applies. (2) If a famil y's monthly net income exceeds a child's threshold, the amount of child care subsidy for the chi ld in respect of a type of chil d care is A-B where A = the amount set out in Schedule A or the parent fee, whichever is less, for the type of child care; B = the amount of A for the child, divided by the sum of the amounts of A for all children in the family receiving child care described in section 2, multiplied by 50% of the amount by which the family's monthly net income exceeds Section 9(1) of the CCSR provide s: How mo n t hly net income is calculated 9 (1) The monthly net income of a f amily i s calculated by receives per month, including, but not limited to, the following: ( al employment income; A P PEA L# I hi c h f ound t hat t he a p pell an t was n o t pay t hese amounts, b e c aus e the fa m ily' s when adj u s ted to the amo u nt repor t ed to t he CA A C hild C a r e Subsidy R e g u lati on (CCS R) , was bl e applicati on o f th e app l icabl e en act me nt in t he is n ot en titl ed to i t , th a t perso n is liab l e t o p e rson wa s not enti tled . in t o an agreement , or may accept any r ig ht . or after a chi ld car e sub sid y is paid. on (1) or under an agreeme n t entere d rnment an d ma y cti on, or r e subsid y o r f rom an amo un t payabl e t o that ctment. is liable t o re pay u nder su bsec ti on (1) or (2) is not open t o a p peal und er secti on 6 ( 3). for a chil d receivi ng a t y p e of child ca r e if ld's thr esh old, and c hild is not m ore than zero. chi l d's thres h old, t h e amou nt of ch ild ca r e s ubsid y f or et out in Sch edu le A or the parent fee, the child's threshold. a d ding the income that eac h p erson i n the f a m ily
A P P E A L # I ( b ) s e l f e m p l o y m e n t i n c o m e ; ( c ) s p o u s a l o r c h i l d s u p p o r t p a i d t o a s p o u s e o r c h i l d i n t h e f a m i l y ; ( d ) e m p l o y m e n t i n s u r a n c e b e n e f i t s ; ( e ) w o r k e r s ' c o m p e n s a t i o n b e n e f i t s ; ( f ) t r a i n i n g a l l o w a n c e s ; ( g ) i n v e s t m e n t i n c o m e , i n c l u d i n g i n t e r e s t ; ( h ) t i p s a n d g r a t u i t i e s ; ( i ) m o n e y e a r n e d b y p r o v i d i n g r o o m a n d b o a r d , l e s s e s s e n t i a l o p e r a t i n g c o s t s ; 0 ) r e n t a l i n c o m e o f a n y k i n d , l e s s e s s e n t i a l o p e r a t i n g c o s t s ; ( k ) g r a n t s , b u r s a r i e s o r s c h o l a r s h i p s , e x c e p t ( i ) t h e a m o u n t f o r t u i t i o n o r b o o k s , a n d ( i i ) w i t h r e s p e c t t o g r a n t s p r o v i d e d u n d e r t h e B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a S t u d e n t A s s i s t a n c e P r o g r a m , $ 5 0 f o r e a c h w e e k c o v e r e d b y t h e g r a n t . . . . ( 3 ) I f t h e m o n t h l y n e t i n c o m e o f t h e f a m i l y v a r i e s d u r i n g a c a l e n d a r y e a r , t h e m i n i s t e r m a y c a l c u l a t e t h e i r m o n t h l y n e t i n c o m e b y ( a ) e s t i m a t i n g t h e a n n u a l n e t i n c o m e t h a t e v e r y o n e i n t h e f a m i l y , o t h e r t h a n a d e p e n d e n t c h i l d , w i l l r e c e i v e i n t h e c a l e n d a r y e a r , a n d ( b ) d i v i d i n g t h e e s t i m a t e d a n n u a l n e t i n c o m e b y 1 2 . S e c t i o n 1 ( 1 ) o f t h e C C S R p r o v i d e s : D e f i n i t i o n s 1 ( 1 ) I n t h i s r e g u l a t i o n : " s e l f e m p l o y m e n t i n c o m e " m e a n s a n y i n c o m e e a r n e d f r o m s e l f e m p l o y m e n t b u t d o e s n o t i n c l u d e a n y a m o u n t d e d u c t e d f o r p e r m i t t e d o p e r a t i n g e x p e n s e s ; " p e r m i t t e d o p e r a t i n g e x p e n s e s " m e a n s c o s t s , c h a r g e s a n d e x p e n s e s i n c u r r e d b y a p e r s o n i n s e l f  e m p l o y m e n t f o r t h e f o l l o w i n g : ( a ) p u r c h a s e o f s u p p l i e s a n d p r o d u c t s ; ( b ) a c c o u n t i n g a n d l e g a l s e r v i c e s ; ( c ) a d v e r t i s i n g ; ( d ) t a x e s , f e e s , l i c e n c e s a n d d u e s i n c u r r e d i n s e l f e m p l o y m e n t ; ( e ) b u s i n e s s i n s u r a n c e ; ( f ) c h a r g e s i m p o s e d b y a s a v i n g s i n s t i t u t i o n o n a n a c c o u n t a n d i n t e r e s t ; ( g ) m a i n t e n a n c e a n d r e p a i r s t o e q u i p m e n t ; ( h ) g r o s s w a g e s p a i d t o e m p l o y e e s o f a p e r s o n w h o i s s e l f e m p l o y e d , o t h e r t h a n w a g e s p a i d b y t h a t p e r s o n t o h i s o r h e r f a m i l y ; ( i ) m o t o r v e h i c l e e x p e n s e s ; ( j ) e m p l o y e r c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o a n e m p l o y e e b e n e f i t p r o g r a m ; ( k ) r e n t a n d u t i l i t i e s ; ( I ) o f f i c e e x p e n s e s ; M i n i s t ry ' s P o s i t i o n T h e m i n i s t r y ' s p o s i t i o n i s t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s n o t e n t i t l e d t o a p o r t i o n o f t h e c h i l d c a r e s u b s i d i e s r e c e i v e d o v e r t h e p e r i o d J u l y 1 , 2 0 1 1 t h r o u g h D e c e m b e r 3 1 , 2 0 1 2 , p u r s u a n t t o S e c t i o n s 7 a n d 9 o f t h e C C S R , b e c a u s e t h e f a m i l y ' s m o n t h l y n e t i n c o m e e x c e e d e d t h e c h i l d ' s t h r e s h o l d w h e n a d j u s t e d t o t h e a m o u n t r e p o r t e d t o t h e C R A f o r 2 0 1 1 a n d 2 0 1 2 . T h e m i n i s t r y a r g u e d t h a t t h e n e w m o n t h l y n e t i n c o m e f o r t h e f a m i l y , a s a n a v e r a g e o f t h e i n c o m e f i g u r e s r e p o r t e d t o t h e C R A , i s $ 4 , 2 3 8 . 0 8 p e r m o n t h i n 2 0 1 1 a n d $ 4 , 7 9 7 . 0 7 f o r 2 0 1 2 . T h e m i n i s t r y a r g u e d t h a t t h e n e w m o n t h l y n e t i n c o m e i s u s e d t o c a l c u l a t e s u b s i d y e l i g i b i l i t y a n d , w h e n c o m p a r e d t o t h e a m o u n t s o f s u b s i d y t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t r e c e i v e d d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d , r e s u l t e d i n a t o t a l o v e r p a y m e n t t o t h e a p p e l l a n t o f $ 7 , 8 1 4 . 0 5 . T h e m i n i s t r y a r g u e d t h a t t h e r e i s n o d i s c r e t i o n g i v e n t o t h e m i n i s t r y t o g r a n t a s u b s i d y i f t h e f a m i l y ' s m o n t h l y n e t i n c o m e i s h i a h e r t h a n t h e t h r e s h o l d a m o u n t s s e t i n t h e R e a u l a t i o n .
A pp e ll ant's po s iti o n Th e app ella nt's p o si tion is th at she believe s sh e is be accura tely a n d th at was ap prov ed by the mi nistry at the t tha t s he did everythi ng that w as ask e d o f her in term help fro m an advoc acy agency an d relied on their advice. infor me d by b oth the mini stry and the advoc acy ag enc lowest ear n in g period. The ap pell a n t argue d tha t her not be i ng tak en int o consi d eration s i nc e he has to p appellant a rgued th at i t is not fair tha t an a djus tme nt ap proved to re c eive the chil d c are su b sidy. Pane l de c i sion Section 7(1) of t he CC SA stipul ate s that if a c hi ld ca enti tled to i t, tha t person i s li a bl e to repay t o the government entit led. T h e is sue t o be c onsidered by the panel o dete r mined t h at t he app ell a nt recei v e d chil d care s ub th r ough Dece mber 31, 2012 f o r which she was no t the a dvic e of a n advocacy a ge nc y and she t r ied to com Em p lo yment f o rm forms a s accurat e ly as possible, the emplo yment i n co me, an e stimat e is made of yearly income that of actu al fi gur e s as filed w i th CRA once thos e ar e made the subse quent adjus tm ent made. The p a ne l find s cla imed by the appel lant and h e r husb and in the perso in dicating the total income ac tuall y received by t hem tot a l amounts claimed for various ex pens es a nd any sales . Whil e those fi gures were re lie d on by the mi ni re as on a b ly d ete rm in e d t hat s o m e ex pens e s allo w abl of the CC SR a s "pe rmit ted oper a tin g expen ses", su ch as C fro m self-em ploy men t income f o r chi ld c ar e subsidy The min istr y statement of Mo n thly C hild Car e Subsi J ul y 20 1 1 thr ough De cember 2 0 1 2 sho wed total su b su b si dy eligibility of $125.39 over that s ame period, with a total overpayment of $7,814.05 finds that the ministry reasonably concluded that the app am ounts p aid to her in the months t h at the family's monthly net income exceeded the child's threshold, pursuant to S ec tions 7(1) o f the C CSR and 7 amount reported to the CRA for 2011 and 2012, and that there is no discretion given to the ministry to waive the requirement to repay. Conclusion The panel finds that the ministry's decision, which found that the appellan liable to repay, child care subsid ies rece ived be cause child's threshold, pursuant to Sections 7 and 9 of the CCSR, was a reasonable application of the applicable enactment in the appellant's circumstances. reconsideration decisi on. APPE AL# I in g penaliz e d for somethi n g that s he com pleted ime of her appli cati on. T h e ap pell a n t argued s o f c hange s to the forms and she r equested T he appell a n t argued t hat s he was y to apply for the c hild c a re su bsid y in he r husban d 's earning i ncluded H ST/GST wh ich i s ay it bac k a n d doe s not get to ke ep it. T h e i s be in g ma de 3 years af ter s he ha d b e en re subsidy i s p aid to or fo r a p ers on who is not the amoun t to w hich the pe r son was not n t h i s ap peal is whethe r the minis t ry r e a sonab ly sidies at an y time o ver the per iod July 1, 2 0 11 e ntitle d. Whil e the appe llan t arg ued th a t s h e had pl ete the Chil d Car e Subsidy Sel f min istry poin ted ou t tha t with variabl e s el f t en does n ot cor respon d with th e avail able , and ther e is no puniti v e elemen t to t hat the mini s try reas on a b ly reli ed o n the a mounts nal income t ax r et u rns fi led with CRA as for the 2 0 11 an d 2 0 1 2 ta x yea rs, as well as t h e adju stment for G S T/HS T includ ed i n gro ss st r y, the panel f inds that t h e m i nistry also e for ta x purposes a re no t in clu d ed in Se ction 1 CA, and, therefore, cann o t be ded u c ted p u rposes. dy P a yme nt T o tal s ve rsus Elig ibi lity Amo un t fro m s i dy paid to the app el la nt of $7,939.44 and total . The pa n el ellant is liable t o repay child care su bsidy ( 1) of t he C CSA, w hen adjusted to the t was not entitled to, and is the f amily's m onthl y ne t income exceeded the The panel therefore confirms the ministry's
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.