GST REBATE on New Housing -

My question is: Canadian-specific
QUESTION: Hi David
We are currently building a new house in Manitoba and was
wondering about a GST rebate.  We heard that we can apply for a
GST rebate when building a new house.  Have you ever heard of
this before?  If not, any ideas of whom we could forward our
question.  Thanks so much.  The Zilli's
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----------
david ingram replies:
There sure is a GST New Housing Rebate.
Read the following which i clipped off the CRA site
athttp://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/gi/notice179/notice179-e.html
In fact you can read it better at the site.
-----------------------------------
What's new Media room Electronic mailing lists Electronic
services Forms and publications
Home Site map
Forms and publications > GST/HST Notices >
Forms and publications GST/HST NoticesNOTICE179 - Substantial
Renovations and the GST/HST New Housing RebateOther formats
GST/HST Notice 179FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY
Substantial Renovations and the GST/HST New Housing Rebate
The purpose of this publication is to clarify the meaning of the
expressions "substantial renovation" and "major addition" for
purposes of the GST/HST new housing rebate. It is being released
by the CCRA in draft form for comments. Comments should be sent
by March 15, 2004 to:
Director
Financial Institutions and Real Property Division
Excise and GST/HST Rulings Directorate
14th Floor, Place de Ville, Tower A
Canada Customs and Revenue Agency
320 Queen Street
Ottawa ON K1A 0L5
Telephone: (613) 952-9248
Fax: (613) 990-3602
E-mail: ivan.bastasic at ccra-adrc.gc.ca
DRAFT
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY
Substantial Renovations and the GST/HST New Housing Rebate
Table of Contents
Introduction
1. Substantial renovation
1.1 General
1.2 Determining whether the building has been substantially
renovated
1.3 Examples
2. Multiple Unit and Mixed-Use Buildings
2.1 Multiple Unit Buildings
2.2 Mixed-Use Buildings
2.3 Examples
3. Condominium Units
4. Guest and Granny Suites
4.1 Examples
5. Conversions
5.1 Examples
6. Major Additions
6.1 Examples
7. Time Frames and Extended Renovation Projects
7.1 Example
Introduction
This publication focuses on the meaning of "substantial
renovation" and "major addition" as these terms relate to the
eligibility of homeowners for the GST/HST new housing rebate.
Even though the rebate is called the "new" housing rebate,
individuals who substantially renovate their existing homes may
be eligible for this rebate, in addition to individuals who
construct new homes or purchase them from builders.
The new housing rebate applies to the purchase, construction or
substantial renovation of a residential complex. A "residential
complex" is a building or part of a building that includes one or
more residential units. Examples include a detached or
semi-detached house, a multi-unit apartment building, or a
residential condominium unit. A residential complex does not
include a hotel or motel room, a boarding house, an inn or any
similar premises if all or substantially all (90% or more) of the
rentals are for fewer than sixty days.
A residential complex that has been substantially renovated is
generally afforded the same treatment for GST/HST purposes as a
newly constructed residential complex, including eligibility for
the new housing rebate. Accordingly, extensive modifications must
be made to a house in order to meet the definition of substantial
renovation.
Where substantial renovations are concerned, it is the individual
(the homeowner) that is eligible to claim the new housing rebate,
whether that individual carries out the renovations him/herself,
or hires someone else, such as a renovation contractor, to do the
work. For further information on who qualifies for the new
housing rebate, how to calculate the rebate amount, and how to
apply for it, please refer to CCRA guide, GST/HST New Housing
Rebate (RC4028).
While this publication deals with homeowners who substantially
renovate or add a major addition to their home, or convert a
non-residential property into a personal residence, the meaning
of the terms "substantial renovation" or "major addition" is also
significant to others who are involved in house construction and
renovation, such as builders and landlords. For further
information concerning builders and landlords, please refer to
Memorandum 19.2: Residential Real Property, 19.3: Real Property
Rebates and the Guide GST/HST New Residential Rental Property
Rebate (RC 4231).
In this publication, we will first deal with the meaning of
substantial renovation and how it relates to the new housing
rebate. We will then examine how this concept applies to various
types of residential complexes, how we view a building that is
converted to a residential complex, and how to treat a major
addition to a residential complex. The publication concludes with
a discussion of the time limitations for new housing rebate
claims.
1. Substantial renovation
1.1 General
"Substantial renovation" is defined in subsection 123(1) of the
Excise Tax Act as follows:
"substantial renovation" of a residential complex means the
renovation or alteration of a building to such an extent that all
or substantially all of the building that existed immediately
before the renovation or alteration was begun, other than the
foundation, external walls, interior supporting walls, floors,
roof and staircases, has been removed or replaced where, after
completion of the renovation or alteration, the building is, or
forms part of, a residential complex.
In summary, a substantial renovation is generally considered to
have taken place where all or substantially all of the interior
of a building, with the exception of certain structural
components (the foundation, external walls, interior supporting
walls, roof, floors and staircases), has been removed or
replaced.
Only certain renovations are taken into account in determining
whether a building has been substantially renovated. However,
once this determination is made, certain other costs may be
included in the rebate claim. In order to qualify for the rebate,
such expenditures:
(a) must relate to the renovation project that resulted in the
substantial renovation of the building; and
(b) must relate to an improvement to the building. An
"improvement" to a residential complex is generally anything that
is affixed to the land or the building. An improvement would
include, for example, a door, shelving or an attached deck, but
would not include furniture, freestanding appliances or throw
rugs.
1.2 Determining whether the building has been substantially
renovated
The definition of substantial renovation sets out the following
requirements to be met before a residential complex will be
considered substantially renovated:
(i) all or substantially all
(ii) of the existing building
(iii) must be removed or replaced.
The definition also enumerates certain structural elements
(foundation, external walls etc), which are not required to be
removed or replaced. These are discussed under heading (iv)
"excluded elements" below.
While the requirements and methods discussed below apply to a
typical house, we recognize that there may be structures that do
not fit the mould of a typical house, so that some of the
following guidelines may not apply. In such cases, we would
accept any reasonable method of determining "all or substantially
all" or of determining what must be removed or replaced in order
to meet the definition of substantial renovation.
(i) "all or substantially all"
This requirement addresses how much of the building has to be
renovated. The definition describes this as "all or substantially
all of the building that existed immediately before the
renovation or alteration was begun."
Generally, "all or substantially all" is interpreted as meaning
90% or more. Accordingly, in order to meet this requirement, at
least 90% of the building that existed before the renovations
began must be renovated to some minimum degree. This
determination applies to the interior area of the building.
Any fair and reasonable method is acceptable for determining
whether all or substantially all of the building has been
renovated. The following are typical methods that may be used for
this purpose:
Square footage of floor space of the areas renovated compared to
the total floor space of the building
Suppose a house has 2000 square feet of floor space, and
renovations took place in all areas except for one 200 square
foot room. Since the renovated area of 1800 square feet is 90% of
the total area, the "all or substantially all" requirement has
been met.
Square footage of floor and wall space of the areas renovated
compared to the total floor and wall space of the building
Suppose a house has 2000 square feet of floor space and 5000
square feet of interior wall space, for a total of 7000 square
feet. Renovations took place throughout the building except for
one room that has 300 square feet of floor space and 800 square
feet of wall space for a total of 1100 square feet. Therefore,
5900 square feet (7000 - 1100), or 84% of the 7000 square foot
house, was renovated. This does not meet the "all or
substantially all" (90%) requirement.
Number of rooms renovated compared to the total number of rooms
in the building
Suppose a house has 10 rooms, and nine of them are renovated.
Since nine of the 10 rooms, or 90%, were renovated, the "all or
substantially all" requirement has been met.
The method used must be fair and reasonable in the circumstances.
For example, if one room represented half the area of the
building and it was not renovated, it would not be fair and
reasonable to use number of rooms as a method. This does not mean
that the rooms have to be the same size, but the size of any one
room should not distort the result.
Please note that neither the cost of the renovations nor the fair
market value of the improvements made is an acceptable basis for
determining whether the "all or substantially all" requirement is
met. This requirement is based on the actual physical renovations
to the building rather than the cost or value of such
renovations.
(ii) "of the existing building"
As the definition stipulates, it is the "building that existed
before the renovation or alteration was begun" that must be
substantially renovated. This means that additions to the
existing building are not taken into account in determining
whether there is substantial renovation.
Suppose that a 2000 square foot bungalow is being renovated, and
part of the project is to add an attached 300 square foot
bedroom. In determining whether all or substantially all of the
building has been renovated, the addition is ignored. The test is
whether 90% of the existing 2000 square foot bungalow has been
renovated. However, if it is determined that the existing
building has been substantially renovated, any tax related to the
costs of the addition is eligible for the new housing rebate,
assuming that the other requirements for the rebate are met.
Only habitable areas of the building should be taken into account
in determining whether the building has been substantially
renovated. In addition to the main floor(s) living areas,
habitable areas include finished basements and finished attics. A
guest bedroom over a detached garage, as an appurtenance Footnote
1 to the residence, would also be an example of a habitable area
of the building.
Habitable areas do not include garages, parking areas, crawl
spaces, and any areas set aside for the placement of equipment
for the heating of, or the supply of water, gas, or electricity
to the complex. Again, such areas are ignored in determining
whether the minimal requirements of the definition of substantial
renovation are met.
We would not consider a partially completed basement that has,
for example, roughed-in plumbing and partially completed walls,
to be habitable. While it may be used for some purposes, we would
consider such an area as inhabitable so that it would not be
included in determining whether the building has been
substantially renovated.
While a basement would not necessarily require the same standard
of comfort and amenities as the main floor of a house, to be
considered habitable it should at least have finished walls, a
ceiling, flooring and electrical wiring. Similarly, to be
considered habitable, an attic should have a permanent means of
access, such as a staircase or ramp, as well as finished walls, a
ceiling, flooring, and electrical wiring.
Work done in the above-noted areas so that they are partially
complete (but not yet habitable) should be ignored in determining
whether the minimum requirements of the definition of substantial
renovation are met. For example, suppose that the main floor of a
house is 1000 square feet, and 90% of that space was sufficiently
renovated, and the house also has a 1000 square foot partially
finished basement. We would accept, in this situation, that all
or substantially all of the building has been renovated. The 1000
square foot basement may be ignored since it is not yet
habitable.
If, as part of a renovation project, a section of an unfinished
basement were enclosed with finished walls and used, for example,
as a family room, that area could be treated as a habitable area
and taken into account in determining whether a sufficient area
of the house has been substantially renovated.
Example
The area of the main floor of a house is 1000 square feet, as is
its unfinished basement. In a renovation project, 850 square feet
of the main floor is completely replaced. As well, 700 square
feet of the basement is completely renovated (finished walls,
ceiling, flooring, electrical outlets) for use as a family room.
In this situation, the finished part of the basement may be used
in determining whether all or substantially all of the house has
been renovated, i.e.,
Area renovated : 850 + 700 = 1550 sq. ft
Total area considered : 1000 + 700 = 1700 sq. ft
Percentage renovated : 1550/1700 = 91%
The example illustrates that, whereas only 85% of the main floor
was renovated, substantially all of the house has been renovated
by taking the finished area of the basement into account.
(iii) must be "removed or replaced"
This requirement addresses the type or nature of renovations
required in order to satisfy the definition of substantial
renovation. Under the definition, at least 90% of the existing
building must be removed or replaced with the exception of the
foundation, external walls, interior supporting walls, floors,
roof and staircases (referred to below as the "excluded
elements").
Although the excluded elements may be ignored in determining
whether there is a substantial renovation, under some
circumstances removing or replacing excluded elements may be used
to support a finding that substantial renovation has taken place.
For example, it is not necessary to replace the floors, since the
floors are an excluded element. However, if the floors are
replaced, this may be taken into account in finding that the
building has been substantially renovated.
A major renovation project would result in the interior of the
building being essentially gutted. In this type of renovation,
the interior walls (other than supporting walls) would be
completely removed and the ceilings and floors would be replaced.
The heating, electrical and plumbing systems would be replaced,
including the ductwork, wiring and plumbing connections. All
fixtures, including plumbing and lighting fixtures and fixed
appliances, would be replaced, as would kitchen counters and
cabinets.
There is no doubt that the project described above would
constitute a substantial renovation. The following addresses
what, at a minimum, must be removed or replaced in order to meet
the requirements of the definition of substantial renovation.
Generally, all interior walls (e.g. drywall) throughout the
subject area (at least 90% of the building) would have to be
removed or replaced. In other words, the walls would have to be
stripped to the studs and refinished. Furthermore, it would not
be sufficient to remove or replace only the walls. However,
removal or replacement of the walls together with removal or
replacement of either the ceiling or floors throughout the
subject area would be sufficient in order to meet the minimal
requirement.
It would not be necessary to replace the entire heating,
electrical or plumbing systems, in order to meet the requirements
for a substantial renovation.
"Removing or replacing" does not include repairing. For instance,
patching drywall, painting surface areas, or sanding a hardwood
floor would not qualify as removing or replacing for purposes of
the definition of substantial renovation. Repairs are not taken
into consideration in determining whether a substantial
renovation has taken place and may not be included in a new
housing rebate claim.
The renovations required to meet the minimum requirements may
vary according to the type of room being renovated. As noted
above, removing or replacing the walls together with either the
ceilings or floors would qualify, regardless of the room being
considered. For particular rooms, however, other possibilities
may lead to a finding that the room has been substantially
renovated, for example:
In a typical kitchen, a large part of the wall area may be
covered by cupboards and cabinets (i.e. "cabinetry"). If so,
removal or replacement of the cabinetry (without removing the
walls behind it) as well as the ceiling or floor and remaining
wall area would generally be sufficient.
In a typical bathroom, removing or replacing the walls and the
fixtures (toilet, tub, vanity) would be sufficient. Since the
requirement is to remove or replace it may be sufficient to
remove and then reinstall the same fixtures in the bathroom, in
addition to removing or replacing the walls.
In a typical bedroom or hallway, removing or replacing the
drywall and either the floor or the ceiling would usually be
sufficient.
In determining whether substantially all of the building has been
removed or replaced, much may depend on the method used in making
the "all or substantially all" determination described above.
Example
A house has 10 rooms. Eight of the rooms are completely gutted
and rebuilt. Of the remaining two rooms, the only renovation to
Bedroom A is to replace the flooring, and the only renovation to
Bedroom B is to replace the flooring and one wall. Including
these two bedrooms, over 90% of the total wall and floor space in
the house is removed or replaced.
If the method used in determining "all or substantially all" is
based on the number of rooms renovated, neither bedroom would
have met the "removed or replaced" requirement. That is, only
eight of 10 rooms would have met this requirement, short of the
90% requirement.
However, if the method used were based on the percentage of the
total floor and wall area of the house that is removed or
replaced, the renovations to the floors in both bedrooms, and the
one wall in Bedroom B, would be included in the area that is
removed or replaced. Taking these areas into account, over 90% of
the total wall plus floor space in the house is removed and
replaced, so that it is reasonable to find that the house has
been substantially renovated.
If the amount of work done in a particular area is less than the
minimal requirement described above, then that particular area
may be treated as falling outside of the "all or substantially
all" subject area described above. Again, a building may be
substantially renovated even though up to 10% of the building may
incur very little renovation, or indeed, none at all.
Example
A 5000 square foot house is undergoing renovations. In one room
of 250 square feet, there are no renovations, and in another room
of 200 square feet, the renovations carried out do not meet the
"removed or replaced" test. The remaining 4550 square feet of the
house meet this test. The house in this example is substantially
renovated since at least 90% of the house (i.e., at least 4500
square feet) is removed or replaced. This illustrates that little
or no renovation is required in the two rooms described above
since they make up 10% or less of the area of the house.
(iv) excluded elements
Substantial renovation is defined to mean the renovation of a
building to such an extent that all or substantially all of the
building is removed or replaced "other than the foundation,
external walls, interior supporting walls, floors, roof and
staircases". We refer to these parts of the building as the
"excluded elements".
The excluded elements include the basic structural elements of
the building. Since they are excluded from the definition, it is
possible to substantially renovate a building without modifying
these elements. That is, the parts or areas of the building that
must be removed or replaced do not include these elements.
Although the excluded elements may be ignored when determining
whether there is substantial renovation, the removal or
replacement of these excluded elements may sometimes support a
finding that substantial renovation has taken place. For
instance, although the floors are an excluded element, replacing
the floors may be taken into account in finding that the building
has been substantially renovated. For example, if the walls and
floors of a room are removed or replaced, this would be
sufficient to consider that area to have met the minimum
requirement. Similarly, removal or replacement of supporting
walls and interior staircase areas may be taken into account.
1.3 Examples
Gordon T.
Mr. T.'s bungalow has a 2000 square foot main floor together with
a 2000 square foot unfinished basement. Recently Mr. T carried
out the following renovations. He completely gutted and replaced
three of the five rooms on the main floor, as well as the
hallways. The hallways are about the area of an average room.
This area totals 1400 square feet. The main floor had total wall
space of 5500 square feet of which 3600 square feet was replaced.
He also constructed a 900 square foot finished addition to the
main floor, which included a 400 square foot dining room, and a
500 square foot attached garage.
In the basement, he installed studs and drywall along the
exterior walls, and added wiring and roughed-in plumbing. He
framed in one 600 square foot room that had 800 square feet of
wall area, and in it he finished the walls and ceiling and added
carpet, so that it could be used as a family room. The rest of
the basement is unfinished.
Is the work done by Gordon T. a substantial renovation of his
home? Gordon T. may use any fair and reasonable method in
determining whether all or substantially all of the building that
existed at the time the renovations began was removed or
replaced. Generally, it would not be necessary to use more than
one method. However, for illustrative purposes, we will
demonstrate the determination using the three following methods.
1. Square footage of floor space of the areas renovated compared
to the total floor space of the building
Area renovated:
   Main floor + basement: 1400 sq. ft. + 600 sq. ft. = 2000 sq.
ft
Total floor space:
   Main floor + basement: 2000 sq. ft. + 600 sq. ft = 2600 sq.
ft.
% of the building removed or replaced : 2000/2600, which equals
77 %
2. Square footage of floor and wall space of the areas renovated
compared to the total floor and wall space of the building
Area renovated:
Main floor:
floor area 1400 sq. ft
wall area 3600
Basement:
floor area   600
wall area   800
Total  6400 sq. ft
Total floor + wall area:
Main floor:
floor area 2000 sq. ft.
wall area 5500
Basement:
floor area   600
wall area   800
Total:  8900 sq. ft
% of the building removed or replaced: 6400/8900, which equals 72
%
3. Number of rooms renovated compared to the total number of
rooms in the building
Rooms renovated:
Main floor  3
Hallways  1
Basement  1
Total   5
Total rooms:
Main floor  5
Hallways  1
Basement  1
Total   7
% of building removed or replaced: 5/7 = 71%
It should be noted that, in each of the methods, the 900 square
foot addition is ignored for purposes of the determination. Also,
where the basement is concerned, it is only the finished family
room that is taken into account.
An individual may use any fair and reasonable method in making
this determination. However, all of the methods described above
indicate that all or substantially all of the building has not
been removed or replaced. On this basis, the work done by Gordon
T. does not meet the definition of substantial renovation.
Shirley K.
Shirley K. has a six-room bungalow consisting of a kitchen/dining
room, living room, two bedrooms, a den and a bathroom. The den
makes up about 10% of the floor area. The basement remains
unfinished. She hires a renovator who carries out the following
renovations:
Bedrooms and living room: replaces the drywall and flooring.
Kitchen/dining room: replaces the cupboards and cabinets, exposed
drywall, and flooring.
Bathroom: removes plumbing fixtures, upgrades the plumbing
connections (and removes drywall in the process), replaces the
drywall, installs new fixtures.
Den: patches cracks in the drywall and replaces the flooring.
Is the work done by Shirley K a substantial renovation of her
house?
All of the building has been renovated to some extent (the
unfinished basement may be ignored) so that the "all or
substantially all" requirement has been met. All areas of the
building, except the den, have been sufficiently removed or
replaced. The walls in the den have been repaired, but the
repairs are not sufficient to be considered as removal or
replacement. However, since the den is only 10% of the building's
area, it may be treated as falling outside the 90% area that
requires removing or replacing. That is, at least 90% of the
building was removed or replaced, resulting in a substantial
renovation.
Ira G.
Ira G. acquires an old Victorian mansion. She intends to carry
out significant renovations in 2002 and 2003. The ground floor
consists of a large kitchen, a living room, library and bathroom.
There are four bedrooms and a bathroom on the second floor (which
has the same area as the ground floor).
In 2002, she employs a renovator to undertake the following:
A new furnace is installed and changes are made to the ductwork
throughout the house. New plumbing and fixtures are added to the
kitchen and bathrooms.
In the kitchen, new cupboards are added, along with new counters.
The walls and ceiling are repainted and new linoleum is added to
replace the existing floor.
A bathroom off the kitchen is removed and a new bathroom is
constructed in one of the upstairs bedrooms. No other changes
were made to the upstairs other than adding new ductwork for the
heating system and new plumbing and fixtures in the new bathroom.
The wall between the kitchen and the old bathroom is removed and
a dining area is created.
A new entrance and window is added to the back of the house.
The floorboards, joists and beams in all of the ground floor
rooms are replaced.
90% of the ceiling on the ground floor is replaced.
Is the work done by Ira G. a "substantial renovation" of her
home?
Although the renovation work done in 2002 is significant, we
would not consider that it constitutes a substantial renovation,
since less than all or substantially all of the building has been
removed or replaced. The upstairs has the same area as the ground
floor, and while some renovations were carried out in the
upstairs, they would not, except for the bathroom, be considered
removal or replacement of that area. At this point, the work done
by Ira G. would not be considered to be a substantial renovation.
In 2003 Ira G. continues the renovation project as follows:
She creates a larger living room by removing a wall between the
existing room and the library.
She modernizes all of the upstairs bedrooms by replacing the
existing plaster on the walls and ceilings with drywall,
repainting, replacing old carpets with parquet flooring, and
installing new shelving in all closets. She also has skylights
installed in three of the bedrooms.
She also has the existing roof replaced with one that is of
higher quality, and has a new interlocking brick sidewalk laid.
Is the work completed in 2003 a substantial renovation of her
home?
The work done in 2003 combined with the work carried out the
previous year would be considered to be a substantial renovation
since all or substantially all of the interior of the house has
been removed or replaced.
While the roof and sidewalk are not taken into account in
determining whether there has been substantial renovation, the
tax paid on these projects would also be eligible for the new
housing rebate on the basis that they are improvements to the
residential complex. The same is true of other improvements such
as the new furnace, and the plumbing fixtures.
Bob S.
Bob S. lives in a three-bedroom bungalow. There is also a
kitchen, bathroom, living room and family room. In 2001, he
embarks on a renovation project, and accomplishes the following:
He patches some wall area in two of the bedrooms with drywall
compound.
He repaints the whole house, inside and out.
He completely renovates the kitchen, replacing the counters,
cupboards, floors and appliances.
He replaces the roof and the exterior siding of the house.
Is the work done by Bob S. a substantial renovation?
The work done by Bob S. is not a substantial renovation, since
the interior of the house has not been sufficiently removed or
replaced. It is true that some work has been done to all or
substantially all of the building. However, the nature of the
work done to the areas other than the kitchen cannot be said to
be removal or replacement of that part of the building.
Douglas J.
Douglas J.'s house consists of a living room, kitchen, family
room, four bedrooms and an unfinished basement.
Mr. J. replaces the drywall throughout the house, installs
laminate flooring in the kitchen and bathroom, lays new carpet
over the old tile flooring in the other rooms, and replaces the
kitchen counters and cabinets.
Is the work done by Douglas J. a substantial renovation of his
home?
Since the entire habitable area of the house has been renovated
to some extent, Douglas J. has met the "all or substantially" all
test. Furthermore, since he has replaced all of the interior
walls, including the kitchen counters and cabinets, and replaced
the old flooring with carpets and laminate, he has met the
requirement that all or substantially all of the building has
been removed or replaced.
It is not necessary to replace the floors, since they are among
the elements excluded in determining whether there has been a
substantial renovation. However, if they are removed or replaced,
as in this situation, such work may be taken into account in
determining that the building has been sufficiently renovated.
In this example, Douglas J. has substantially renovated his home.
2. Multiple Unit and Mixed-Use Buildings
2.1 Multiple Unit Buildings
This chapter addresses rebate eligibility for the renovation of a
single residential unit that is located in a multiple unit
building.
A multiple unit building is a building that contains two or more
residential units. Common examples are apartment buildings and
condominium complexes.
A "single unit residential complex", for purposes of the rebate,
is defined as a residential complex containing no more than two
residential units under a single title. It includes a detached
house or a duplex held under a single title, but does not include
a triplex held under a single title.
The new housing rebate applies only to the purchase, construction
or substantial renovation of a single unit residential complex
(including a duplex held under one title) or a residential
condominium unit.
As well, substantial renovation of a residential complex requires
that all or substantially all of the building be removed or
replaced (other than the excluded elements). Therefore, where a
single unit residential complex consists of two units under a
single title, it is the building containing the two units that
must be substantially renovated in order to qualify for the
rebate. There would be no new housing rebate eligibility if just
one of the units were renovated (unless that one unit was 90% or
more of the building).
The substantial renovation of a building containing more than two
residential units would not qualify for the rebate (since such a
building would not be a single unit residential complex).
However, the substantial renovation of a particular unit in such
a building would qualify for the rebate if that unit is owned
under its own separate title. That is, where each residential
unit in a multiple unit building is owned under separate title,
there may be rebate eligibility for a particular unit that is
substantially renovated. It would not be necessary for the entire
building to be substantially renovated. Rebate eligibility is
determined on a unit-by-unit basis, depending on whether the
particular unit being held under separate title is substantially
renovated.
2.2 Mixed-Use Buildings
A mixed-use building is a building that is used for both
residential and non-residential (commercial, for example)
purposes.
Where a mixed-use building contains a number of residential
units, the provisions described above for multiple unit buildings
apply. That is, if a particular residential unit is owned under
its own separate title, there may be rebate eligibility with
respect to that unit if that unit is substantially renovated. If
the building contains more than two residential units and the
units are all held under one single title, the new housing rebate
is not available since the building would not be a single unit
residential complex.
In a mixed-use building, it would be necessary to substantially
renovate only that part of the building containing the
residential unit(s) in order to qualify for the rebate; it would
not be necessary to substantially renovate the whole building
(the non-residential part). However, the new housing rebate would
be available only in respect of the residential portion of the
building.
2.3 Examples
Robert V.
Robert V. lives with his family in a large heritage house that he
owns. The top level of the house has a separate entrance and is
used by his daughter as a self-contained apartment. This
apartment takes up about 30% of the area of the house. In 2001,
Robert completely renovates the apartment. He also makes some
renovations to the rest of the house, but these are minor.
Is Robert V. entitled to the new housing rebate for the tax paid
on renovating the apartment and the rest of the house?
In this example, it is not sufficient that all or substantially
all of the apartment was renovated. Since the entire building is
one residential complex, it is the entire building that must be
substantially renovated. Accordingly, Robert V. will not be
entitled to the new housing rebate.
William R. and Walter K.
William R. and Walter K. live in a building that consists of two
residential units, and each of them owns one unit. Each unit is
held under separate legal title. In a renovation project, Walter
replaces substantially all of the interior of his unit (other
than the excluded elements). William does not renovate his unit.
Is Walter K. entitled to the new housing rebate for the tax paid
on renovating his residential unit?
Since the units are each owned under separate title, each unit is
a residential complex. Accordingly, it is possible to
substantially renovate one unit and qualify for the new housing
rebate without substantially renovating the all of the units in
building. Walter K. may qualify for the rebate on the basis that
he has substantially renovated his residential unit.
Doctor Sandra T.
Doctor Sandra T. has a dental practice that she operates out of
her house. The area of the dental office is about 60% of the area
of the house, and her residence about 40%. Doctor T. carries out
substantial renovations to the residential portion: the interior
of the residential portion is completely gutted and replaced. She
also makes minor improvements to the dental office portion.
Is Doctor Sandra T. entitled to the new housing rebate for the
tax paid on renovating her residence and her dental office?
The requirement for the rebate is that all or substantially all
of the interior of the building, or that part of the building
that forms part of a residential complex be removed or replaced.
Only part of the building in this situation is a residential
complex, and so it is just that part that must be substantially
renovated.
Therefore, assuming that the other requirements for the new
housing rebate are met, Doctor Sandra T. will be entitled to the
rebate with respect to costs incurred in substantially renovating
the residential portion of the building.
She will not be entitled to a rebate with respect to the
renovations to the office portion.
This would be the case even if the changes made to that portion
were substantial renovations. The reason for this is that only
tax that is paid on improvements to a residential complex, or
that part of a building that is a residential complex qualifies
for the rebate.
3. Condominium Units
A "residential condominium unit" is, in summary, a residential
complex that is a bounded space described as a separate unit on a
provincially registered condominium or strata lot plan, including
any interest in land pertaining to the ownership of the unit.
Where a residential unit is owned Footnote 2 under separate title
from the rest of the units in a complex, it is itself viewed as a
separate residential complex as referred to in the definition of
"substantial renovation." As such, it is capable of being
substantially renovated. That is, if the interior (i.e., the
"bounded space" referred to above) of a residential condominium
unit is substantially renovated, the tax paid on the costs of
doing so is eligible for the new housing rebate, assuming the
other requirements for the rebate are met.
The determination of whether a residential condominium unit has
been substantially renovated (i.e., whether the 90% threshold has
been met) does not have to take into account the areas (hallways,
reception area, etc.) that are owned in common by all of the
residents.
4. Guest and Granny Suites
Sometimes homeowners modify the interior of their homes, or
construct an addition, in order to create a self-contained suite
to serve as accommodation for their friends or relatives.
Examples include a guest suite over a garage or in the basement,
or an ensuite or detached suite for a relative (e.g., a "granny
suite").
The modification on an existing area of a house in order to
construct a self-contained suite (e.g., part of the house is
partitioned off as a suite) will not be viewed as substantial
renovation of the house or the suite, unless all or substantially
all of the interior of the house, other than the excluded
elements, is removed or replaced.
There is an exception if the suite is, or is intended to be,
owned under separate title from the rest of the house. In this
situation, the suite itself would be considered to be a
residential complex and, if all or substantially all of the area
of the suite were removed or replaced, the suite would be viewed
as being substantially renovated.
In some situations, the guest or granny suite is constructed as
an addition to the existing residence. Since substantial
renovation requires removal or replacement of all or
substantially all of the existing building, an addition to the
existing building will not qualify as substantial renovation.
However, the construction of a guest or granny suite may lead to
eligibility for the new housing rebate in the following
circumstances:
where the suite is constructed as an addition to the existing
building and the existing building is substantially renovated;
where the suite is constructed as an addition to the existing
building and the addition is or is intended to be owned under
separate title; or
where a self-contained suite is detached from the house, so that
it is its own building. In this situation, the rebate would be
based on the fact that there is a newly constructed residential
complex, rather than a substantial renovation of an existing one.
4.1 Examples
Bill M.
Bill M. decides to construct a building that will be a
self-contained granny suite for his mother. He is also
constructing a five-foot enclosed walkway between the suite and
his house. The suite will be used as her primary place of
residence, but will not be held under separate title. The walkway
provides access from one structure to the other - it is not
utilized for any other purpose.
Will Bill M. be entitled to a new housing rebate for the tax paid
on the costs of the suite?
Bill M. has essentially constructed a new residential complex,
i.e., he has constructed a single unit residential complex, since
it is in a separate building. Since it is intended to be the
primary place of residence for a relation (his mother), he will
qualify for the new housing rebate, assuming the remaining
eligibility requirements are met.
Wanda B.
Wanda B.'s residence has a detached garage. In 2002, Wanda has a
second level added to the garage. The addition is used as a guest
suite for visits by friends and relatives. It consists of a
bedroom and a bathroom but is not a self-contained suite since it
does not have any kitchen facilities.
Will Wanda be entitled to a new housing rebate for the tax paid
on the costs of the suite?
Wanda will not be entitled to the new housing rebate since she
has not constructed a separate residential complex. The
definition of "residential complex" states that a residential
complex includes "common areas and other appurtenances" that are
"reasonably necessary for the use and enjoyment of the building
as a place of residence.". In this situation, the guest suite
would be viewed as an "appurtenance" to Wanda's residential
complex as opposed to being a residential complex in and of
itself.
5. Conversions
Where a building is converted from non-residential to residential
use, the residential complex is deemed Footnote 3 to have been
substantially renovated, regardless of how much work, if any, is
actually done.
Therefore, if an individual converts a building that was used for
a purpose other than as a residential complex into a residential
complex (i.e., it is intended to be used as a place of
residence), the individual will qualify for the new housing
rebate, assuming that the other requirements for the rebate are
met.
This deeming provision applies where an individual begins to use
real property as a residential complex and immediately before
that time it was not held or used as a residential complex. For
example, it may have been used, or held for use, as capital
property in a business or commercial activity of the individual
and then been converted to residential use.
The deeming provision may also apply where a building that was
used by another person for non-residential purposes is sold to an
individual for use as a personal residence. In this situation, we
would view the individual as purchasing a non-residential
property and converting it to residential use. The purchaser
would then be deemed to have substantially renovated the
building, and would be entitled to the new housing rebate with
respect to any tax paid on the acquisition, assuming that the
various requirements for rebate eligibility are met.
5.1 Examples
John and Melissa H.
After their children had grown and left home, John and Melissa H.
decide to convert their large house from a single home to two
side-by-side residential units. That is, they had the house
partitioned, after receiving the appropriate right of subdivision
from the local authority. They remained in one half and they sold
the other half, including the subjacent and contiguous land, to a
young couple. Some modifications were made, but there was no
actual substantial renovation of the premises.
Was the work done by John and Melissa H. a conversion resulting
in a deemed substantial renovation, thus entitling them to a new
housing rebate with respect to the unit they occupy?
This is not a conversion resulting in a deemed substantial
renovation, since there was no non-residential use of the
property. John and Melissa would not be entitled to a new housing
rebate in respect of the tax paid on their renovations.
Doctor Rex X.
Doctor Rex X. operates his dental practice on the ground level of
a two-storey building that he owns. That level makes up 60% of
the building's area. He uses the second level, consisting of 40%
of the building, as his personal residence. In 2003, Dr. X.
retires. He carries out some modifications (but not substantial)
to the ground level, converting the entire building into his
personal residence.
Was the work done by Doctor X. a conversion resulting in a deemed
substantial renovation, thus entitling him to a new housing
rebate?
Since the building was used as a residential complex both before
and after the modifications, there was no conversion of the
building from non-residential to residential use. Accordingly,
there is no deemed substantial renovation. Since there is no
deemed or actual substantial renovation, there is no eligibility
for the new housing rebate.
Zeona Z.
In July 2001, the owners of Mary Doe Florists went out of
business, and on October 1 they sold the building that housed
their flower shop to Zeona Z. The building stood vacant between
July and October. Zeona purchased the building with the intent of
using it as her personal residence. Zeona hired a contractor to
renovate the building during the months of October and November
so that it would be suitable as a personal residence.
She moved in on December 1, 2001. The work done is not enough to
qualify as substantial renovation unless it is deemed to be such
as a result of the conversion. Is this a conversion resulting in
a deemed substantial renovation?
On the basis that Zeona began to use the building in question as
a residential complex and immediately prior to that it was not
used as a residential complex, Zeona is deemed to have
substantially renovated the complex. Accordingly, assuming the
other eligibility requirements are met, she will be eligible for
the new housing rebate in respect of the tax paid on the
acquisition and renovations.
Nora L.
Nora L. owns a duplex and rents both units. Last year, after both
tenants moved out, she decided to convert the duplex into a
single unit residential complex for her own use as a residence.
She had to make some renovations, but they were not substantial.
Was the work done by Nora a conversion resulting in a deemed
substantial renovation, thus entitling her to a new housing
rebate?
In this situation, the property remains a residential complex
before and after the renovation. Therefore, this is not a
conversion to which the deeming provision applies. Since the
renovations made were not substantial renovations, and are not
deemed to be substantial renovations, there is no entitlement to
the new housing rebate.
6. Major Additions
There are circumstances under which an addition to an existing
residential complex together with renovation of that complex will
result in eligibility for a new housing rebate.
An addition will not qualify for the rebate on the basis that it
is, or is part of, the substantial renovation of a residential
complex. This is because the definition of substantial renovation
stipulates that it is the existing structure that must be
substantially renovated. If the existing structure is
substantially renovated, then the new housing rebate is available
for any additions made to it. However, since the focus is
entirely on the existing structure, additions to an existing
residence are generally not taken into account in determining
whether the residential complex has been substantially renovated.
However, a new housing rebate is available for a newly
constructed residential complex, provided that the other
eligibility conditions have been met. Accordingly, there may be
rebate eligibility if it is determined that the renovations and
addition to an existing residence are so significant that the
resulting structure may be viewed as a newly constructed
residential complex.
This is a test of more than just size. That is, even if the
addition is as large or larger than the existing residence, it
would not be viewed as creating a newly constructed residential
complex if the existing residence remains largely intact. Rather,
the existing residence must become a minor part of, and be
incorporated into, the newly constructed residential complex.
The following are guidelines that may be used to determine
whether a major addition to an existing residential complex
results in a newly constructed residential complex:
1. The addition should at least double the size (in square feet
of floor space, for example) of the habitable areas of the
existing residence in order to be considered a newly constructed
residential complex. However, the relative size of the addition
alone is not sufficient to make this determination.
2. The existing residence must cease to exist both physically and
in the manner in which it had functioned as a residential unit,
and must become integrated, along with the addition, into what is
essentially a new residential complex. This will require, at a
minimum, the following physical and functional changes to the
existing residence:
(a) Physical Changes Required
Where a particular room or area is concerned, the physical
changes required would include adding and/or removing the
interior wall(s) of the existing structure and the removal of at
least some of the adjoining wall(s), where applicable Footnote 4,
between the existing residence and the addition. In kitchen and
bathroom areas, removing or replacing plumbing fixtures,
cabinetry, or kitchen counters would suffice. Physical changes of
this nature would be required in at least 50% of the area (or a
majority of the rooms) of the existing residence.
On the basis of the above, it is evident that merely adding or
rearranging the furniture in a room or area, or making minor
renovations, would not be viewed as a sufficient physical change.
(b) Functional Changes Required
Functional changes refer to changes in how the rooms of the
existing residence are used as a result of constructing the major
addition. In order to view the existing residence as ceasing to
exist as a residential complex, there must be a fundamental
change in how the majority of the rooms or floor space in the
existing residence is used.
Furthermore, the fundamental changes in how the existing
residence is used must be a result of its integration with the
addition in forming a new residential complex. Accordingly, it
would not be sufficient just to reconfigure the interior of the
existing residence if it could continue to be used by its
residents as a self-contained residential unit. There must be
interdependency between the existing residence and the addition
in order to view the resulting structure as functioning as a new
residential complex.
While functional changes are distinct from physical changes, a
fundamental change in how a room or area is used would require
material physical changes. That is, it would be necessary to do
more than change how an area of the pre-existing residence is
used without making physical changes to it and, as described
under (a) above, the physical changes must be significant.
These requirements do not necessarily mean that a room such as a
kitchen, for example, must cease to be used as a kitchen.
However, to meet these requirements, there would have to be
material modifications to the existing kitchen in its integration
into the new complex.
As in the case of substantial renovation, the cost or fair market
value of addition is not to be used in determining whether a new
residential complex has been constructed.
6.1 Examples
Lynn M.
Lynn M. hires a contractor to renovate her 2000 square foot home,
which contains a kitchen, living room, two bedrooms and a
bathroom. The contractor also adds a 2100 square foot addition
that contains two extra bedrooms, a bathroom and a large
recreation room. About 70% of the interior of the existing home
is completely gutted and redone. The exterior wall between the
existing home and the new addition is removed with the result
that the area of the two existing bedrooms is significantly
expanded. While significant modifications are made to the other
rooms in the existing 2000 square foot space, their function
remains unchanged (i.e., there is still a kitchen, living room,
two bedrooms and a bathroom).
Is Lynn M. entitled to the new housing rebate?
Since only 70% of the existing area is removed or replaced, this
falls short of the all or substantially all requirement in the
definition of substantial renovation. Accordingly, since the
existing residential complex has not been substantially
renovated, Lynn M. is not entitled to the rebate on that basis.
The question then arises as to whether the addition to the
existing residence is so significant that the integration of the
addition with the existing residence would be viewed as a new
residential complex. While the addition in this example is
significant in size, and while it is apparent that significant
physical changes have been made to the interior of the existing
residence, it cannot be said that the existing residence has
ceased to function as a residential unit.
It is apparent that there is not a fundamental change in how the
majority of the rooms or floor space in the existing residence
are used. Furthermore, there is insufficient integration or
interdependency between the existing residence and the addition.
The original residential unit continues to have all of its
pre-existing components and the addition only enhances that unit.
The original premises have remained largely intact and continue
to form a significant part of the post-construction premises.
Accordingly, Lynn M. is not entitled to a new housing rebate
since she has neither substantially renovated the existing
residence nor constructed a new residential complex.
Mary K.
Mary K. owns a 1500 square foot house consisting of a kitchen,
living room, bathroom and two bedrooms. Recently, she constructed
a 1600 square foot addition to the house. The following generally
describes the modifications made:
The addition was made to the rear of the house and the rear wall
of the original house was removed.
A new kitchen area was created and more than doubled the size of
the original one. Most of the expanded area is in the new
addition. The original kitchen area was maintained and is
incorporated into the new kitchen. The old cupboards and counters
were replaced in the expanded kitchen.
An "L" shaped family and dining room was created in the addition
and it incorporates much of the original living room. As well, a
partition was constructed in the original living room, creating a
"breakfast nook" annexed to the new kitchen.
One of the two bedrooms and the bathroom in the original
structure were maintained. The other bedroom was converted to an
office/library with built-in shelves. Two bedrooms were
constructed in the addition. An additional bathroom was also
added.
Would the work done by Mary K. qualify as construction of a new
residential complex, resulting in entitlement to the new housing
rebate?
In order to be considered a new residential complex, the addition
must at least equal the size of the existing premises. This
condition has been met.
It is also necessary to determine whether, in terms of design and
function, the original premises have ceased to exist and are
incorporated into a newly constructed residence.
The addition and the modifications made in this example meet the
above test. It could be said that most of the rooms in the old
residence have been significantly modified in terms of their
function and design, and are now incorporated into a new
residence.
While the work done by Mary K. may not qualify as substantial
renovation of the pre-existing premises, the construction of the
addition and the changes made to the original premises have
changed the function and design of the existing premises to such
a fundamental extent that the resulting structure is essentially
a new residential complex. On this basis, Mary K. would be
entitled to the new housing rebate, assuming that the remaining
requirements for the rebate are met.
Eric L.
Eric L. owns a 1000 square foot bungalow consisting of a kitchen,
living room, bathroom and two bedrooms. Recently, he constructed
an attached 350 square foot garage and another 900 square foot
addition containing two bedrooms and a recreational room. In
other words, the premises more than doubled in size. The
following modifications were made to the pre-existing structure:
The original front door, steps and porch were removed and because
of this change the entry from the dining room to the living room
was enlarged to accommodate the change in traffic flow.
About 10% of the pre-existing floor space was recarpeted.
The former back bedroom was integrated into the kitchen by
removing a wall and doorway. Thus the kitchen was extended and
new cupboards and cabinetry added. The kitchen fan ducting was
re-routed.
Concerning the side of the house where the addition was added,
the stucco, buffalo board and insulation was removed, new drywall
was installed, a double doorway was added, and access holes were
drilled into the foundation to provide for electrical, plumbing,
heating and other systems.
A new gas heating system was installed, along with a gas line and
chimney. Some new wiring was added to the old house as well as a
new sub-panel and wiring leading to the addition. A new central
vacuum was installed.
Landscaping changes were made to accommodate the new entrance.
Exterior roofing modifications were made.
New siding was installed on the front of the original house.
Other than the above, no other changes were made to the rooms of
the existing premises.
Can the work done by Mr. L. be viewed as construction of a new
residential complex, resulting in entitlement to the new housing
rebate?
In order to be considered the construction of a new residential
complex, the addition(s) must at least double the size of the
habitable area of the existing residence. The new garage is not
considered as habitable area. Accordingly, this requirement has
not been met (the existing premises are 1000 sq. ft. and the
additional habitable area is 900 sq. ft).
Furthermore, the physical changes to the existing residence, and
the level of integration with the addition, are insufficient for
a conclusion that a new residential complex is created. Most of
the former rooms have not been materially altered, and even with
those that have been, there is little integration with the
addition. For example, while the kitchen has been significantly
renovated, it has not been integrated with the addition. Rather
than the existing residence being incorporated into a new
residential complex, the additions made by Mr L. are incorporated
as an "add on" to the pre-existing residence.
The work done by Mr. L. is neither substantial renovation of the
existing home nor the construction of a new home. Thus there is
no entitlement to the new housing rebate.
Marty B.
Marty B. owns a 1200 square foot bungalow consisting of a
kitchen, living room, three bedrooms and a bathroom. Recently, he
began work on adding a second storey to the bungalow. The
addition will also be 1200 square feet. He will carry out the
following renovations:
He will remove the wall between the present living room and two
of the bedrooms, creating one large room, which will be used as a
"family room." This will involve some other renovations (removing
soffits, adding new windows).
The living room will now be in the second storey addition.
There will be only one bedroom left on the main floor. However,
three bedrooms will be included in the second storey addition.
The present bathroom will be partitioned to create a half-bath
(sink and toilet) off the remaining bedroom and a linen closet.
The main bathroom will be in the second storey addition.
The kitchen will remain unchanged.
The renovations to the existing house do not constitute a
"substantial renovation." The areas affected by renovations (the
present living room, two bedrooms and bathroom) constitute about
60% of the present floor space.
Will Marty B. have constructed a new residential complex?
Marty B. will be viewed as constructing a new residential
complex. The addition will double the size of the present
residence, which will cease to exist as a result of its
integration with the new addition.
The physical changes to the existing building involve removal of
the living room wall and adding a wall in the bathroom, removal
of the bathroom tub/shower, and other renovations required to set
up the family room (removing soffits, adding windows). These
changes affect at least 50% of the existing area.
The present structure will no longer function in the same manner
as it had. There will be a change in how a majority of the
existing rooms or floor space are used, e.g., there will be only
one bedroom on the first level instead of three, the living room
will be moved to the second level, and the bathroom will become a
"half bath".
Accordingly, Marty B. will have constructed a new residential
complex.
7. Time Frames and Extended Renovation Projects
This chapter will briefly explain the time frames allowed in
applying for the new housing rebate. Further information
concerning time frames is set out in the guide GST/HST New
Housing Rebate (RC4028E).
If a homeowner begins a substantial renovation of his/her house
while living in the house, the homeowner will have two years from
the date the renovations are begun to substantially complete the
renovations and another two years after that date to claim the
rebate.
If the homeowner does not occupy the house when the renovations
are begun, but then begins to occupy it before the renovations
are substantially completed, he or she will have two years after
the date of occupancy to substantially complete the renovations,
and another two years after that date to claim the rebate for the
tax paid on these renovations. If the house is not substantially
renovated within two years after occupancy, the time limit for
filing a rebate application is still a maximum of four years from
the date of occupation, but only tax that has been paid and which
became payable up to two years after the date of occupancy may be
included in the rebate application.
If the homeowner does not live in the house until after the
renovations are completed, the rebate claim must be made within
two years after the substantial renovation is completed.
7.1 Example
Cathy G.
Cathy G. has lived in her home for over thirty years. In February
1999 she hired a contractor to renovate the house. The contractor
began work on March 1, 1999 and continued off and on over the
next two years. The work constituted substantial renovation and
was completed on July 1, 2001. Cathy moved back into the house on
August 1, 2001.
What is her deadline for filing a new housing rebate claim, and
what purchases may be included on the claim?
Cathy can file a claim for rebate once the house has been
substantially renovated. She has two years after the earliest of
the following dates to file the claim:
the day that is two years after she occupies the house; that is,
two years after August 1, 2001, and
the day substantial renovation is s

Comments (0)


CEN-TA Cross Border Services - Tax, Visas, Immigration
http://www.centa.com/article.php/UsCaWeekofMon20060320002612.html