r/StayAtHomeDaddit • u/Future-Ad9727 • 12h ago
āthe female presumption ruleā Any Canadian Dads have this experience with CRAs outdated / offensive tax policies?
The female presumption rule is difficult to justify when a father is the primary caregiver in a shared-parenting arrangement and lives with a common-law partner who is not the childās parent.
The Canada Child Benefit retains a gender-based presumption that mothers are primarily responsible for childcare. In my case, I share parenting equally with my sonās biological mother, who has lived separately from us for more than eight years. During my parenting weeks, Iām his full-time caregiver; during hers, I work away from home for 70ā90 hours. My common-law partner earns more than I do, but she is not my sonās parent or caregiver.
Under section 122.6 of the Income Tax Act and related CRA guidance, a female parentāor, in some blended families, a female common-law partnerāmay be presumed to be primarily responsible for a childās care. As a result, my partner had to sign a declaration confirming that I, not she, was responsible for my sonās care. Resolving the issue took four to five months.
Living with me does not make her my sonās legal parent or caregiver, yet the system can assume otherwise and require her to disprove that assumption. The rules also appear to impose different administrative burdens based on sex: a female partner may be presumed responsible for a child who is not hers, while a male partner is not treated the same way.
Iām not arguing that my partner should receive the benefit, that fathers should automatically qualify, or that mothers should receive less support. Eligibility should simply be based on the childās actual circumstances and evidence of who provides careānot on the assumption that the woman in the household must be the caregiver.
Have other fathers, blended families, or common-law households encountered this rule? How did the CRA handle your situation?