Background
Arthur Corbor received the Canada Emergency Response Benefit from March to September 2020 and the Canada Recovery Benefit from September 2020 to October 2021. Following a compliance review, the Canada Revenue Agency determined that he had not established the required minimum of $5,000 in qualifying employment or net self-employment income during the applicable period.
Corbor provided a statement showing $3,071.31 in acting income but did not produce supporting records for income allegedly earned through his recycling and sales-management activities. He also relied on investment income reported on a 2019 T5, although he had previously told the CRA that the dividends had not been released to him and had asked that the income be removed. During the second review, the CRA requested additional proof—including bank statements, pay stubs, corporate records, shareholder minutes, or cashed cheques—but received no further documents before issuing its April 12, 2024 decision.
Corbor sought judicial review, arguing that the CRA agent did not adequately explain why his tax assessment was insufficient and failed to address his inability to obtain statements from a closed bank account. He also sought to rely on evidence that had not been before the agent.
The Court’s Holding
The Federal Court dismissed the application without costs. It held that the second eligibility determination was procedurally fair because Corbor received adequate notice of the income requirement, was told what kinds of documents could substantiate his income, and had a fair opportunity to submit them. The Court accepted the agent’s contemporaneous internal notes as part of the decision-making record.
The Court also found the decision reasonable. Although the agent needed to explain why the 2019 tax information was insufficient, the agent did so by noting that Corbor had previously disputed receiving the reported dividends. The different treatment of the T5 income for taxation and benefit eligibility reflected different burdens of proof: Corbor bore the onus of establishing that he qualified for CERB and CRB.
The agent acknowledged that Corbor could not obtain statements from his closed account and offered alternative ways to prove the income. Because Corbor supplied none of the additional documents he said he could provide, the agent reasonably concluded that he had not established eligibility. The Court excluded fresh evidence addressing the merits and refused leave to file a supplemental affidavit concerning the initial review, which was not the decision under review.
Key Takeaways
- A tax assessment or information slip is not necessarily conclusive proof of income for CERB or CRB eligibility.
- The CRA may require corroborating records where an applicant previously disputed receiving the income later relied upon to establish eligibility.
- An applicant who cannot obtain a requested record must still provide reasonably available alternatives when the CRA identifies other acceptable forms of proof.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the evidentiary burden facing CERB and CRB recipients during compliance reviews. Even income accepted for tax purposes may require independent substantiation when eligibility for pandemic benefits is assessed, particularly where the recipient previously questioned whether that income was actually received.
It also reinforces that judicial review generally evaluates an administrative decision on the record before the decision maker. Documents obtained or created afterward ordinarily cannot be used to repair gaps in the evidence submitted during the CRA review.