Is Interest Income Considered when Calculating an Income Replacement Benefit?

There are a number of ways that someone might earn interest income, be it on an investment, or as a result of late payment from a client. As with any income, interest must be reported for taxes. But, whether interest is included in the calculation of an income replacement benefit (IRB), is entirely dependent on whether the income was earned as a result of employment activities.

For the difference between employed and self-employed, please see our blog post on employment status.


Subsection 4 (1) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS), defines gross employment income as “salary, wages, and other remuneration from employment.” We note, of significance, is the connection between the income and employment.

For employed individuals, excluding self-employed, there are limited situations in which interest income is received as a result of their employment.  Continue reading

Employment Expenses Must be Considered when Calculating an Income Replacement Benefit

There are many factors that can affect income for an insured. Employment expenses are one piece of this puzzle.

If an employee, in the course of employment, is required to pay certain expenses as a means to earn income, they could have employment expenses. These expenses may be reported on a person’s income tax return, although the allowable amount of expenses will vary depending on how the individual earns income.

These employment expenses are different from business expenses which would be claimed by someone who is self-employed.

For more information on employment status, head over to our blog on that very topic. To learn more about the difference between employed and self-employed, we’ve handily covered that topic in another blog post.

What bearing do these expenses have on an Income Replacement Benefit (IRB)?

Expenses an employee incurs in performing their job, and which are deductible for tax purposes pursuant to the Income Tax Act, would also be deducted in the calculation of an insured’s income for IRBs.

Continue reading

Is Your Claimant Employed, Self-Employed or Unemployed? It isn’t as easy as you think.

Defining a claimant’s employment status is integral in the calculation and determination of an Income Replacement Benefit (“IRB”).

Whether an individual is employed, self-employed, or unemployed at the time of the motor vehicle accident is used to determine the period upon which the insured’s income is calculated as well as the actual income – both key in calculating the IRB.

So where does your insured fit in?

Are they employed?

Let’s start by looking at employed individuals. The Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (“SABS”) for accidents prior to September 2010 considered an individual to be employed

“if, for salary, wages, other remuneration or profit, the person is engaged in employment, including self-employment, or is the holder of an office, and “employment” has a corresponding meaning” (O. Reg. 403/96, s. 2 (5))

The current SABS has removed the definition for employed, and instead defines how to calculate gross employment income (O.Reg.34/10, s.4(1)). There is no readily apparent reason for this change. However, the exclusion of the employed definition is important, as there does not appear to be a replacement in the new legislation for the term “engaged”. There is now, also a definition for a self-employed person, which did not previously exist.

It should be noted that we have come across several matters where adjusters mistakenly determined the insured was employed, when in fact they were self-employed. This can be a misunderstanding on the part of the insured, with no ill intent, if the adjuster doesn’t fully understand the questions to ask. The result can be significantly miscalculated IRBs.

An example of an insured who would claim to be employed, but is actually self-employed, would be an insured who owns a corporation. For tax purposes, they would personally report as an employee of that corporation, and as such, may indicate to be employed for IRB purposes. Decisions such as Carr and Lombard (FSCO A00–000441) and Rocca and GAN (FSCO Appeal P99-00039) support the fact the insured should be considered self-employed as the owner of the business. But as with all things SABS, it isn’t that cut and dry.

The Piper and Zurich (FSCO 002585) decision, which relates to the Old SABS (prior to September 2010), determined the insured was the owner of the business, but had treated himself as a separate entity from the business for such an extended period of time that for SABS purposes he could be considered employed. This decision is further proof there is no black and white when it comes to these decisions, although the new SABS has definitely added clarity with the new self-employed definition.

One last thing to be mindful of: While an individual might have multiple employers at the same time, if they are shopping their wares to various parties, it might be a sign of self-employment. A good example is a groundskeeper. If the groundskeeper works for multiple residential locations, and is responsible for all equipment and supplies, they are likely self-employed. However, if the groundskeeper works at two golf courses as part of the lawn maintenance crew, where all equipment is provided, and he earns regular wages, it’s likely he is employed. Just a further example of why a thorough understanding of the relationship is required.

Are they self-employed?

Now let’s consider whether an insured is self-employed. Under the Old SABS, an insured’s employment status was often a matter of looking at the substance of the relationship between the insured and the business. However, as mentioned above, the current SABS introduces a definition of a self-employed individual which likely adds some clarity to whether an insured can be considered employed if they are a business owner.

Subsection 3(1) of the SABS states that a self-employed person:

(a) engages in a trade, occupation, profession or other type of business as a sole proprietor or as a partner, other than a limited partner, of a partnership, or

(b) is a controlling mind of a business carried on through one or more private corporations some or all of whose shares are owned by the person; (O. Reg. 34/10, s. 3 (1))

It is often easiest to determine into which category the insured falls, simply by reviewing their personal, and if appropriate their corporate tax returns. It is important to note that while an individual who owns a corporation would report themselves to be an employee of that corporation for tax purposes, as outlined above, if they are both a shareholder and controlling mind of the corporation, they would be considered self-employed for the purposes of calculating an IRB.

Further complexity exists for individuals who are treated as self-employed individuals, often subcontractors by other firms, and report to CRA as such, but in reality should be considered employed. For a detailed discussion on assessing whether an individual such as this is employed or self-employed, we recommend you read this blog.

Are they unemployed?

What is really left to write? If a claimant does not fall into the employed or self-employed category, then they are considered unemployed for the purposes of an IRB calculation.

So, why is employment status essential?

It is the very basis upon which the insured’s eligibility for an IRB is determined (s.5), and subsequently, the basis upon which the pre-accident period is determined (s.4). Consequently, determining the insured’s employment status is the starting point for calculating an insured’s pre-accident income. For more information on pre-accident periods, head over here to read our blog post on that topic.

What this means for you:

Never take an OCF-1 or OCF-2 as gospel, without other supporting information. The forms are completed by individuals without the requisite knowledge of this industry.

Be sure to ask the appropriate questions about the relationship between the insured and the business for which they work, the customers of the business, and how the insured is paid. These three questions can provide a lot of insight.

Once you have determined the employment status, and selected the pre-accident period, it is time to calculate the IRB. For additional help with the methodology, feel free to review some of the additional ADS blogs.

To help you identify the likelihood that an insured is either employed or self-employed, ADS has created a form, which you can request here.

As always, please contact one of our accountants here at ADS Forensics if you have any questions.

When Are Payments for Loss of Income Deductible?

Summary: The New SABS (O. Reg. 34/10) have introduced changes which will require continued efforts on the part of an adjuster to confirm what benefits may be considered payments for loss of income, and subsequently, what will be deductible as other income replacement assistance.

Payments for loss of income which are deductible from an IRB are outlined in paragraph 3(7)(d) of the New SABS.  This paragraph is a change from the Old SABS subsection 2(9), apparently codifying previous FSCO arbitrations decisions, such as Sharma-Singh and Co-operators General (A07-000588).

For details on other income replacement assistance, we refer you to our ADS Blog.

So what changes did the New SABS bring?

Insurance Contract – The first change deals with contracts under which periodic payments of insurance are deemed to be payments for loss of income.  Specifically, payments are now deemed to be payments for loss of income “irrespective of whether the contract for the insurance provides”:

Continue reading

The key factors which indicate if benefits are deductible from an Income Replacement Benefit

Summary: It appears the driving consideration on whether an amount is deductible is whether or not the payment is for loss of income, specifically an indemnity payment, and not how regularly payments are received by the insured, whether or not they cover the entire period of disability, or the length of the waiting period.

These decisions relate to the SABS-1996 (O. Reg. 403/96). However, other than what is explained in our Other Income Replacement Benefit post, it appears the findings in the decisions discussed below will stand.


In considering whether payments are for loss of income, Arbitrator Rogers in Bhola and Personal (FSCO A06 001473) outlined the following factors:

Continue reading

Non-Indemnity Payments — Not payments for loss of income, and not deductible from Income Replacement Benefits

Summary: The Insured received collateral benefits which were deemed to be of a non-indemnity nature, and as such, not payments for loss of income under an income continuation benefit plan. On this basis, they are not deductible from an Income Replacement Benefit (IRB).

This decision relates to accidents which occurred from November 1996 to September 2010.=

Roana Codling-Mokoena and CAA Insurance Company, FSCO A04 B000017, October 17, 2006 – Arbitrator Leitch

Date of MVA – September 20, 2000.

The insurer disputed payment of IRBs, arguing the IRBs should be reduced by the insured’s receipt of benefits under a disability insurance policy she purchased prior to the accident from Crown Life.

Continue reading

An Introduction to Other Income Replacement Assistance (OIRA)

Summary: A new term for what was previously called collateral payments for loss of income under the prior legislation, OIRA appears to bring together s.7(1) and (2) of the Old SABS. The only significant change appears to be the addition of “gross”…but does that have an impact?

An Introduction:

The New SABS (O. Reg. 34/10) introduces us to “Other Income Replacement Assistance” (s 4(1)). Commonly referred to as collateral benefits, the new definition highlights that OIRA:

  • Relates to the current accident
  • Is the amount of any gross weekly payment for loss of income that is being received, or that may be available to the person but is not being received as an application has not been made.
  • The following are excluded benefits: the Employment Insurance Act (Canada), payments under a sick leave plan that is available to the person but is not being received, and certain payments under a workers’ compensation law or plan that is not being received by the person

The content of this definition, appears to bring together subsection 7(1) and (2) of the Old SABS.  As a result, the only significant portion of this change appears to be that “net weekly payments for loss of income” has become “gross weekly payment for loss of income”.

Continue reading

Dividends — are they income for IRBs and what do they say about employment status?

Summary: Unfortunately, this one isn’t so clear cut. Under the majority of cases, dividends are not income for IRB purposes. However, they may be a sign of other income sources.

So, why do we care about dividends when calculating Income Replacement Benefits (IRB)? Let’s look first at when an individual might receive dividends.

When would an individual receive dividends?

If a corporation earns a profit, they have the choice of either reinvesting in the company — retained earnings — or sharing that profit with its shareholders — dividends. Dividends are distributed from after tax income, and as such the business does not report it as an expense on the business income statement. This is different from employment income paid to an insured from the same business. Wages are a pre-tax distribution and reported as an expense on the income statement.

Continue reading

How do Canada Pension Plan Disability Benefits impact the IRB?


If received, CPP disability benefits are deductible as other income replacement assistance in calculating the IRB payable. But it is important to understand the interplay with other benefits, and other components of CPP disability benefits that shouldn’t be considered.


This discussion must start with qualifying for the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) disability benefits. An insured may qualify to receive CPP disability benefits if they:

  • are under 65 years of age;
  • meet the CPP contribution requirements; and,
  • have a severe and prolonged disability.

That said, the insured must be approved by a Service Canada medical adjudicator, which takes approximately four months, and the decision is based on a number of requirements. This just means there is no certainty when or if benefits will be received.

Continue reading

Are Canada Pension Plan child benefits deductible from an IRB?

Summary: Unlike CPP disability benefits, CPP child benefits are not deductible as payments for loss of income from the IRB.

What is the CPP Child Benefit, and when is it paid?

Let’s first look at what a qualifying child is:

  • The natural child of the CPP contributor
  • A child “adopted legally” or “in fact” by the CPP contributor while under the age of 21
  • A child “legally” or “in fact” in the custody and control of the CPP contributor while under the age of 21

Further, the dependent child must be either:

  • under the age of 18, or,
  • if between the ages of 18 and 25, they must be a full time student.

In regard to the benefit itself, there are two different types available:

  • For a child who is in the care of an individual receiving the CPP disability benefit; and,
  • For a child who was in the care of an individual at the time of the individual’s death.

In both instances, the individual must have made enough contributions to CPP to qualify. To determine whether an insured might qualify for CPP disability benefits, see our blog on that very topic.

The CPP child benefit is paid monthly and fluctuates annually with the Consumer Price Index. The payment is received as a single lump sum amount, combined with the CPP disability benefit. It is for this reason, you must be able to assess if CPP child benefits are being received.

Continue reading