I APPEAL# PART C Decision under Appeal The decision under appeal is the Minist1y of Social Development (the ministry) reconsideration decision dated September 13, 2012 w,1ich found that the appellant is not eligible for assistance under Section 9 of the Employment and Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Regulation (EAPWDR) for the month of September 2012 as the net monthly income of her family unit exceeded the amount of assistance payable due to a tax refund received in July 20-i2. PART D Relevant Legislation Employment and Assistance for Persons With Disabilities r~egulation (EAPWDR), Sections 1 and 9 and Schedules A and B ·--····-----------________________ _,
I APPEAL# i PART E Summary of Facts ________________________~ The evidence before the ministry at the time of the reconsiderntion decision consisted of: 1) Notice of Assessment from the Canada Revenue Agency for the appellant dated July 6, 2012 and indicating a refund of $2,145.54: 2) Monthly report dated July 27. 201lfor the appellant declaring total income of $2,'145.54 for an income tax refund; 3) Letter dated August 13. 2012 from the ministry to the appel!ant stating in part that the Notice of Assessment is required to avoid a delay in her assistance; 4) Request for Reconsideration-Reasons. In her Notice of Appeal. the appellant stated that she was not informed that income tax refunds would be considered as income and it would result in no assistance for two months. The appellant stated that she should have been given notice verbally or by mail when she submitted her tax return statement that she would not be eligible for disability assistance for September and October. In her Request for Reconsideration, t:1e appGllant stated that when she completed her stub on July 27, 2012, the ministry asked her for a copy of thG return but she was not informed that her tax refund of $2,145.54 would count as income. The appellant stated that she returned to the ministry office on July 31, 2012 with the paperwork which the ministry copied. Again the ministry did not tell her that the tax refund would be considered as income and that she would not receive a cheque for September 2012. The appellant stated that she received the letter dated August 13. 2012 even though she had already provided the requested documentation to the ministry. The appellant stated that she called the ministry and v1as told that the flag on her file would be removed and she could expect payment on August 29, 2012. The appellant stated that she was misinformed and was not given notice or a warning that she would not be receiving an assistance cheque for September 2012. The appellant stated that if sl1e had known, she would not have paid off bills, repaired and insured her car, purchased a bicycle. or made payments on her student loan in July 2012. She would have saved money and applie(.'. for a fee reduction on her student loan payments. The appellant stated that she found out when she went to the ministry office on August 30, 2012 that her tax refund was considered income and she was not getting a cheque. Until that time, she did not have any written or verbal communication that she would not get a cheque in September 2012. This has put her in a stressful situation and her disability has gotten worse as a result of the stress. At the hearing, the appellant stated that she had no idea that the lax refund would count as income since the ministry did not tell her and she was completely unprepared when she did not get a cheque. The appellant stated that she called the ministry when she received the f\ugust 13, 2012 letter and she was told to expect payment on August 29, 2012, and she assumed that the cheque was coming. In response to a question, the appellant clarified that ,,he thought that she was not gettin9 assistance for October 20·12 as well and she realizes now that the ministry's position is that she is not eii9ibie for assistance only for t11e month of September 2012. The ministry relied on its recons,deration decision. At the hearing, the ministry clarified that the ministry's usual practice is to provide notice that asr:istance wil: be impacted by income received by the client and apologized that it does not appear to have occurred in the appellant's case. L------------------·-·-. ·-------------
[APf'EAl_.-_# __ PART F Reasons for P ---anel Decision ---------------~---~ ----------------~ The issue on appeal is whether the ministry reasonably concluded that the appellant is not eligible for assistance under Secticn 9 of the Ernployment and Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Regulation (EAPWDR) for the month of SepteJ77ber 201 :2 as the net monthly income of her family unit exceeded the amount of assistance payable due to a tax refund received in ..Ju:y 2012. Section 9 of the Employment and AssistancEi for Persons With Disabi 1 ities Regulation (EAPWDR) provides: Limits on income 9 (1) For the purposes of the Act a,1d ti,is regulation, "income", in relation to a family unit, inc'udes an amount garnished, attached, seized, deducted or set off from the income of an applicant, a recipient or a dependant. (2) A family unit is not eli·Jib!e for dis3bility ,iss,stance ,f the net income of the family unit determined under Schedule B equals or exceeds the amrnnt of rJisebility Bssistance deten11ined under Schedule A foe a family unit matching that family unit. Schedule A of the EAPWDR sets o:Jt the tot;,I amount of disab1liiy assistance payable as the sum of the monthly suppo;i allowance for a family unit matching the family unit of the applicE,nt or recipient plus tile applicable shelter allowance. in calculating tile net income Jf a family unit under Schedule B, various exemptions from income ar·e p,-ov1cied for but, otherwise, all earned and unearned income must be included. Section 1 of the EAPWDR defines "earned income" to mean ( a) any money or value rec1:;ived in ex·ch::mge for work or the provision ot a service, (b) tax refunds, (c) pension plan contributions that are rs funded because of insufficient contributions to cr2at1, a pension, (d) money or value received from providing room and board at a person's piace of residence, or (e) money or value receiv,ed from renting rooms lhat are common to and part of a person's place of residence; Schedule B of the EAR lists eli'Jib!e exemptions from 1°et incor"e including: -a tax credit under section 8 [refundable sales tax credit], 8:1 [low income climate action tax credit}, or 8.2 [BC harmonized sales tax credil] c,f the hcorne Tax Act (8r:1ish Columbia) [Section 1 (a)(vii)] -working income tax benefit provided ur·d,3r the /ncoms Tax Act (Cancida) [Section 1( a)(xxxv)] -the climate action dividend under section ·13.02 of the c'ncome Tax Act [Section 1 (a)(xxxvii] -a tax refund received because of a tax li21biiity incurred participat'ng in the Forest Worker Transition Program [Section 1( a)(xvi)] Section 3(2)(a) of Schedule B sets out an exc,rnpt amount for a famil, 1 unit that is composed of one recipient who is designated as a person with disabiiiti,os of the lesser of S500 and the family unit's total earned income in the calendar month of tne calc:.:!ation The ministry's position is that the appeliant is not eligible for di,ability assistance for September 2012 since her net income determined unde, Schedule !3 ex,;eeds the am,:u-,t of di,,atdlity assis'cance determined under Schedule A for a family uniI :riitcr.ing !1e,. family unit, or $906.42 per rnonth. The ministry argues that in determining net income under 1,chedu!e B, 2dl earned income must be included, which has been defined in Section 1 of the EAP\NDR to include tax refunds. The ministry acknov✓ledges that an exemption from earned income is set out in Section 3(2)(a) of Schedule B cf tf1,., EAP\NDl'l. for $500 and this amount, therefore, was deducted from the calculation of the eppellant's i1come. The mi:iistry also acknowledges that exemptions from income are set out in Section 1 of Scr,edule B of the [~f\PWDR for specific items that :nay be included in a tax refund but ar ues that tre_apoellE,n(~J_ax refund does rQl_rne~t_any_ _ o_f_til_e tax refu_17d_exemption criteria. The
-···-----··--·-~--------, ; APPE/\L # L ------------. ----------------------~----------------··----------------------~ ministry argues that the total net amcunt of the appellant's income calculated uncler Schedule B is $1,645.54, which exceeds the amount of r-,e :;ppelie.nt's support and shelter a!lov;ance determined under Schedule A, which is $906.42 and. therefore. the app,cllant is not eiigibl,3 for assi,;.tance for S2ptemt,er 2012. The appellant acknowledges that slle was in receipt of an income tax refund in July 2012and she does not deny that a tax ' refund is specifically indudecl in. the definition of "earr,ed income" in Section 1 of the EAPWDR as it was prior to October 1, 2Crl 2. Howel/er, the appEdlant argues that the ministry did not provide either verbal or written notice that her tax refund would be included in her incorne and that she would not be eligible for assistance for SeptembE,r 2012 The appellant argues thar she used 1r.e tax refund to pay some of her expenses and, if she had known s!1e would not receive assistance for September 2012, she could have saved some of these funds. The appellant ariJues that this lack of ccn1rnunication by the ministry put her in a stressful situation and that this had a negative imp1ct on lier disability. The appellant admits that, in July 20'!2 she was in receipt of,,, tax refund in the total sum of $2,145.54. Under Section 1 (c) of Schedule 8 of the EAPWDR, all earned income must be included in the calculation of net income unless it is specifically exempted and, according to Section 1 of the EAPWDR, "earned income" is defined to mean tax refunds. The p,me! finds that tile ministry rear,onably determined that the amount of the appellant's tax refund is to be ,nclucled in the calcul.;tion o-f i1er income. The panel al;;o finds that the ministry reasonably concluded that the arncurt of $5'.J0 is to be deducted from her income, as .a11 applicable exemption from earned income as set out in Scheduie B of the EAPWDR The c1ppe!lant d,d not dispute that the exemptions from income set out in Section 1 of Schedule El of tile El1PV\/DR for specific ,terns that may be included in tax refunds are not ,,policable to her tax refund Tile panel finds that the rninistry reasonably determined that the net amount of lho f',ppellant's income, or $1,645.54, exceeds the amount of assistance determined under Schedule A for the appellc111t's family unit, 1,vhich is $906.42 per month and that, therefore, the appellant is not eligible for a%istance for the rr.onth of September 2012, pursuar.t to Section 9 of the EAPWDR. The Panel finds that ti1e ministry decision was a reasonable application of the applicable enactment in the circumstances of the appellant anc, coniim-,s the decision.
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.