30 June 1995 External T.I. 9507885 - MEANING OF "ONE FULL TIME ATTENDANT"

Please note that the following document, although believed to be correct at the time of issue, may not represent the current position of the CRA.
Prenez note que ce document, bien qu'exact au moment émis, peut ne pas représenter la position actuelle de l'ARC.

Please note that the following document, although believed to be correct at the time of issue, may not represent the current position of the Department.

Prenez note que ce document, bien qu'exact au moment émis, peut ne pas représenter la position actuelle du ministère.

Principal Issues: medical expense for 2 attendants to provide care for a duration in excess of a normal workday

Position TAKEN:a claim under either 118.2(2)(b) or (c) could be made for both attendants provided that the period of care did not overlap

Reasons FOR POSITION TAKEN:one full time attendant means one at a time

A. Humenuk
XXXXXXXXXX 950788

Attention: XXXXXXXXXX

June 30, 1995

Dear Sirs:

Re: Medical Expense Tax Credit

We are replying to your letter of March 22, 1995 in which you ask whether an individual can claim the cost of two full-time attendants as a medical expense for the purpose of the medical expense tax credit under section 118.2 of the Income Tax Act (the Act) where more than one attendant is needed in order to provide the necessary care for the patient who is dependant on others for personal needs.

The phrase "one full-time attendant" as found in paragraphs 118.2(2)(b) and (c) of the Act has been judicially considered by the former Tax Appeal Board in the case of Wakelyn v M.N.R. (71 DTC 35) dealing with subparagraph 27(1)(c)(iv) of the pre-1972 Income Tax Act. The Tax Appeal Board held that the phrase "one full-time attendant" should not be interpreted to mean one attendant only looking after the patient on a continuous basis without respite but rather that several attendants could be utilized over a specified period so long as the claim for tax purposes included only one attendant for any given portion of that period.

In our view, the reference in paragraph 118.2(2)(b) and (c) of the Act to a "full-time attendant" does not impose a requirement on the minimum time to be spent in attending to the cared-for person by a particular attendant but rather limits amounts claimed as a medical expense under either provision to an amount paid in respect of an individual who requires constant care and attendance by reason of that individual's injury, illness or affliction. It is fully understood that an individual who requires continuous care and attendance throughout the day and night will not normally be able to obtain such care through a single attendant. Such care can be satisfied in whole or in part by a person(s) employed for that purpose in combination with other individuals (such as a spouse, parent or other related person) who may be in attendance during hours that their other commitments permit.

Accordingly, in a situation such as that described in your letter where an individual requires 16 hours or more of paid care per day, the cost of providing a single attendant for any given period of time during which an attendant is required can be claimed as a medical expense under either paragraph 118.2(2)(b) or (c) of the Act provided that the conditions set out in the relevant paragraph are met. This could include more than one attendant provided that the period of care provided by each attendant did not overlap.

Given our understanding of your client's situation and our position as stated above, we have not addressed the issue you raised concerning a claim for an attendant under both paragraph 118.2(2)(b) and (c) of the Act.

We trust our comments will be of assistance to you.

Yours truly,

P.D. Fuoco
for Director
Business and General Division
Income Tax Rulings and
Interpretations Directorate
Policy and Legislation Branch