National Payroll Institute Payroll Fundamentals 1Exam PF1 Question # 10 Topic 2 Discussion
PF1 Exam Topic 2 Question 10 Discussion:
Question #: 10
Topic #: 2
Helen is reimbursed for the cost of the protective clothing that is legally required for her job. The clothing she bought isnot supported by receiptsand is a reasonable reimbursement amount. This is considered:
Even though the question uses the word “reimbursed,” the key fact isno receipts. In CRA terms, when an employee is paid a set amount or is not required to substantiate the expense, the payment functions like anallowance, not an accountable reimbursement. CRA’s guidance on uniforms/special or protective clothing states these amounts aregenerally taxable, and only in specific circumstances under CRA administrative policy would they be non-taxable.
CRA interpretations also reinforce that where employeesdo not have to provide receipts, a clothing allowance is generally ataxable employment benefit; non-taxable treatment is linked to substantiation and meeting strict conditions (for example, safety footwear with receipts).
So, because Helen’s payment isnot supported by receipts, it is best classified as ataxable allowance(option A). Payroll should include the amount in taxable income, apply required withholdings as applicable, and ensure policy/records support whatever treatment is used.
Contribute your Thoughts:
Chosen Answer:
This is a voting comment (?). You can switch to a simple comment. It is better to Upvote an existing comment if you don't have anything to add.
Submit