Opinion
Budget 2019 – Poor wording requires 2 ex-spouses within 5 years for Home Buyers Plan
This is one of those rare times I hope I am wrong in my interpretation, and look forward to being proven wrong by my professional colleagues.
On March 19, 2019 the federal government tabled its election-year budget. One of the newest and strangest provisions is the ability for people going through a separation or divorce to potentially have access to their RRSP under the Home Buyers Plan.
Now in my article and podcast entitled: “Escape Room – The NEW Small Business Tax Game – Family Edition” with respect to the Tax On Split Income (TOSI) rules, I made a tongue in cheek argument that people will be better off if they split, because then the TOSI rules won’t apply.
In keeping with the divorce theme, beginning in the year of hindsight, 2020, the federal government is giving you an incentive to split up and get your own place.
However, there are a few hoops:
On page 402 of the budget, under new paragraph 146.01(2.1)(a), at the time of your RRSP withdrawal under the Home Buyers Plan, you must make sure that:
- – the home you are buying is not the current home you are living in and you are disposing of the interest in the current home within two years; or
- – you are buying out your former spouse in your current home; and
you need to:
- be living separate and apart from your spouse or common-law partner;
- have been living separate and apart for a period of at least 90 days (markdown October 3, 2019 on the calendar),
- began living separate and apart from your spouse or common-law partner, this year, or any time in the previous 4 years (ok, you don’t have to wait for October); and…
…here is where the tabled proposed legislation gets messy.
Proposed subparagraph 146.01(2.1)(a)(ii) refers to where the individual
- wouldn’t be entitled to the home buyers plan because of living with a previous spouse in the past 4 years that isn’t the current spouse they are separating from
“(ii) in the absence of this subsection, the individual would not have a regular eligible amount because of the application of paragraph (f) of that definition in respect of a spouse or common-law partner other than the spouse referred to in clauses (i)(A) to (C), and…”
The problem with the wording of this provision, is that it is written in the affirmative by the legislators using the word “and”. This means, you must be able to answer “true” to all the tests for the entire paragraph to apply.
The way I read this, the only way to answer “true” to this subparagraph is if you have a second spouse (ie: spouse other than the spouse referred to) that you shared a home with and you split from in the past four years.
If you have a second spouse that you shared a home with in the past four years, then “paragraph (f)” in the definition of “regular eligible amount” would apply and the answer would be “true”.
If the answer is “true” you can then get access to your RRSP Home Buyers Plan.
If you don’t have a second spouse then, even though “paragraph (f)” might be met, the phrase “spouse other than the spouse referred to” would not be met, and therefore the answer would be “false”.
This would, in turn, cause the entire logic test of the provision to be “false” and so you would not be able to take out a “regular eligible amount” from your RRSP for the Home Buyers plan because you do not meet the provisions.
If my interpretation is correct then I would really be curious as to what part of the economy they are trying to stimulate.
In my opinion the legislation could be fixed with a simple edit:
“(ii) in the absence of this subsection, the individual would not have a regular eligible amount because of the application of paragraph (f) of that definition in respect of:
(A) a spouse or common-law partner; or
(B) a spouse or common-law partner other than the spouse referred to in clauses (i)(A) to (C); and…”
—
Cory G. Litzenberger, CPA, CMA, CFP, C.Mgr is the President & Founder of CGL Strategic Business & Tax Advisors; you can find out more about Cory’s biography at http://www.CGLtax.ca/Litzenberger-Cory.html
Daily Caller
Trump Gives Zelenskyy Until Thanksgiving To Agree On Peace Deal, With U.S. Weapons And Intel On The Line
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
President Donald Trump is turning up the heat on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to accept a peace deal to end his war with Russia, and has set a deadline with potential consequences.
The U.S. is warning that certain weapons shipments and intelligence sharing could be at risk if Zelenskyy does not play ball with Trump’s peace proposal, Reuters reported on Friday. The president set a Thanksgiving deadline for Zelenskyy to sign off on the details. Speaking with Brian Kilmeade on Fox News Radio, Trump confirmed that date, saying that while deadlines can be extended, “Thursday is it.”
Speaking with Brian Kilmeade on Fox News Radio, Trump confirmed that, though deadlines can be extended, “Thursday is it.”
Zelenskyy signaled his willingness to discuss concessions outlined in the proposed peace deal despite objections from other European leaders over the terms, and said in a post on X that his whole government is at work on the individual points. However, the Ukrainian leader also said in a Friday video statement that the U.S. has put Ukraine in a position of “either losing its dignity or the risk of losing a key partner.”
Russian President Vladimir Putin, on the other hand, said Friday Trump’s plan could “form the basis” for a final peace agreement.
A U.S. official told the Daily Caller News Foundation they “will not comment on sensitive peace discussions that may or may not have happened.”
“President Trump is working with both sides to end the war as quickly as possible, which has gone on for far too long, with too many senseless deaths,” the official said. “This would have never happened if he was President.”
Zelenskyy most recently has been embroiled in a corruption scandal, as the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine launched a probe into Zelenskyy’s business partner, who allegedly laundered $100 million from Ukraine’s nuclear energy company.
“It was strongly implied to the Ukrainians that the United States expects them to agree to a peace deal,” another U.S. official told the DCNF. “Any changes will be decided upon by the President himself.”
The Ukrainian leader has been working to shore up support in Europe as well, most recently signing a deal with France to obtain 100 Rafale jets for its air force. The deal also included anti-air equipment, drones and other munitions.
The Trump administration has worked to offload direct military support for Ukraine to partners in Europe, with NATO agreeing to purchase U.S. weapons to then ship to Ukraine, instead of the American government delivering directly.
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
Republican Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene announced Friday that she will step down from Congress.
Greene took to social media to announce her final day in office. Greene released the lengthy statement on X telling supporters, “I will be resigning from office with my last day being January 5, 2026.”
My message to Georgia’s 14th district and America.
Thank you. pic.twitter.com/tSoHCeAjn1— Marjorie Taylor Greene 🇺🇸 (@mtgreenee) November 22, 2025
Greene released a statement outlining her frustrations with both parties, portraying her decision as the culmination of years of disillusionment with Washington’s political culture. Greene said she has always tried to speak for “the common American man and woman,” arguing that her outsider posture made her an unwelcome presence in the capital.
“Americans are used by the Political Industrial Complex of both Political Parties, election cycle after election cycle, in order to elect whichever side can convince Americans to hate the other side more. And the results are always the same. No matter which way the political pendulum swings, Republican or Democrat, nothing ever gets better for the common American man or woman,” Greene wrote.
In her statement, Greene framed her five years in Congress as a fight to advance the “America First” agenda she embraced in 2020.
“I ran for Congress in 2020 and have fought every single day believing that Make America Great Again meant America First. I have one of the most conservative voting records in Congress defending the 1st amendment, 2nd amendment, unborn babies because I believe God creates life 1 at conception, strong safe borders, I’ve fought against Covid tyrannical insanity and mandated mass vaccinations, and I’ve never voted to fund foreign wars,” Greene added.
President Donald Trump cut support for Greene and called her a “traitor” after she criticized his foreign policy decisions and refused to withdraw her name from a petition demanding the release of the Jeffrey Epstein files. Greene fired back, calling herself a “patriot” for siding with Epstein’s victims and defending the America First agenda.
Alberta Offers Enormous Advantages for AI Data Centres
National Crisis Approaching Due To The Carney Government’s Centrally Planned Green Economy
Calgary mayor should retain ‘blanket rezoning’ for sake of Calgarian families
Edmonton and Red Deer to Host 2027 IIHF World Junior Hockey Championship
-
Health2 days agoCDC’s Autism Reversal: Inside the Collapse of a 25‑Year Public Health Narrative
-
Crime2 days agoCocaine, Manhunts, and Murder: Canadian Cartel Kingpin Prosecuted In US
-
Health2 days agoBREAKING: CDC quietly rewrites its vaccine–autism guidance
-
National2 days agoPsyop-Style Campaign That Delivered Mark Carney’s Win May Extend Into Floor-Crossing Gambits and Shape China–Canada–US–Mexico Relations
-
Energy2 days agoHere’s what they don’t tell you about BC’s tanker ban
-
Daily Caller2 days agoBREAKING: Globalist Climate Conference Bursts Into Flames
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days agoBurying Poilievre Is Job One In Carney’s Ottawa
-
Great Reset1 day agoEXCLUSIVE: A Provincial RCMP Veterans’ Association IS TARGETING VETERANS with Euthanasia