November 18, 2021 – Travelling Expenses to and from Work

“The position of Ms. Carder is that child support should be based upon Mr. Morris’ line 150 income minus union dues.  Mr. Morris’ position is that child support should be based upon his line 260 income which incorporates a further deduction related to his expenses travelling to and from work.

Mr. Morris is employed by E.F. Fox, a corporation based in Niagara Falls.  Mr. Morris’ employment is governed by a union contract which compensates him for driving approximately 68 kilometers each way to and from his home to work on the premises of Bruce Power.

Schedule III to the Child Support Guidelines provides for an adjustment to income for Income Tax Act section 8(1)(h.1) travel expenses, which provides as follows:

     (h.1)      where the taxpayer, in the year,

(i)      was ordinarily required to carry on the duties of the office or employment away from the employer’s place of business or in different places, and

(ii)     was required under the contract of employment to pay motor vehicle expenses incurred in the performance of the duties of the office or employment,

amounts expended by the taxpayer in the year in respect of motor vehicle expenses incurred for travelling in the course of the office or employment, except where the taxpayer

(iii)    received an allowance for motor vehicle expenses that was, because of paragraph 6(1)(b), not included in computing the taxpayer’s income for the year, or

(iv)     claims a deduction for the year under paragraph 8(1)(f);

Mr. Morris agreed in cross-examination that throughout all the years in question he worked at one location being Bruce Power.  He drove to work every day and parked his truck.  He did not need to use it for work and only needed it to drive back home.  I fail to see how expenses to get to work, constitute “expenses incurred for travelling in the course of the office or employment” as referred to in section 8.(1)(h.1).

Further, if Mr. Morris is allowed to pay support based on line 260 income he would be treated better (and Tyler would be treated worse) than the vast majority of employee-payors who incur expense to get to work and then pay child support on line 150 income.

I, therefore, calculate Mr. Morris’ obligation based on his line 150 income.”

            Carder v. Morris, 2020 ONSC 6950 (CanLII) at 14-19