6 Farming Tax Returns tax and accounting engagements in full — what the client came to us with, what we did, and what it was worth. Each one is specific to farming tax returns work, not a general example.
Case Study 1 · Planning that cut the bill
$41,000 Saved By Correcting What Prior Filings Had Missed — Game Studio Claiming Digital, Surrey
Client: A game studio claiming digital media credits · Where: Surrey, British Columbia · Engagement: 6 weeks, fixed fee
Saving identified$41,000
RecurringYes
Positions documentedAll
The situation
A game studio claiming digital media credits in Surrey, British Columbia asked for a second opinion on farming tax returns after three years of rising tax. The review found a claim filed at the 15% non-refundable rate when CCPC status supported 35% refundable.
What we did
We built the comparison first — current structure against two alternatives — and then confirmed CCPC status and refiled at the enhanced 35% refundable rate.
The result
First-year saving of $41,000, with the same benefit recurring. Every position taken is documented and supported in the file.
Case Study 2 · Objection and relief
Notice Of Objection Allowed In Full, $119,000 Reversed — Food Producer Reformulating Its, Barrie
Client: A food producer reformulating its product line · Where: Barrie, Ontario · Engagement: 8 weeks, fixed fee
Amount reversed$119,000
ObjectionAllowed in full
Account balanceNil
The situation
A food producer reformulating its product line in Barrie, Ontario had been reassessed for $119,000 and had 23 days left on the objection deadline. The reassessment rested on eligible development work never claimed because nobody thought it counted as research.
What we did
We filed the objection inside the deadline with a complete submission rather than a placeholder, and put contemporaneous tracking in place — project logs tied to time records — so the following year’s claim was defensible by construction.
The result
The appeals officer allowed the objection in full. $119,000 was reversed and the account returned to a nil balance.
Case Study 3 · Missed incentive claimed
Incentive Review Recovered $50,000 Across 5 Open Years — Materials Science Company, Halifax
Client: A materials science company · Where: Halifax, Nova Scotia · Engagement: 8 weeks, fixed fee
Recovered$50,000
Open years claimed5
Ongoing trackingIn place
The situation
An incentive review at a materials science company in Halifax, Nova Scotia started from a simple question: what has never been claimed? The answer ran to 5 years, driven by a claim filed at the 15% non-refundable rate when CCPC status supported 35% refundable.
What we did
We identified the eligible projects, documented the technological uncertainty and systematic investigation for each, and filed a claim that survived review without adjustment, documenting eligibility to the standard a reviewer would apply rather than the standard a claim form requires.
The result
The credits produced $50,000 across the open years, and the tracking now in place means the following year's claim is documented as the work happens rather than reconstructed afterwards.
Case Study 4 · Cash and remittance control
Instalments Rebased, $50,000 Of Cash Returned To The Business — Clean-Technology Startup, Kelowna
Client: A clean-technology startup · Where: Kelowna, British Columbia · Engagement: 7 weeks, fixed fee
Cash returned$50,000
Instalment basisCurrent year
ReviewedQuarterly
The situation
A clean-technology startup in Kelowna, British Columbia was paying instalments calculated on a prior year that no longer reflected the business. A SR&ED claim prepared eleven months after the fact with no contemporaneous records was tying up $50,000 of cash.
What we did
We rebased the instalments on the current-year estimate rather than the prior-year default, and layered the applicable provincial credit onto the federal claim in the same filing.
The result
$50,000 of cash stayed in the business, the penalty cycle ended, and the instalment position is reviewed each quarter against actual results.
Case Study 5 · Structure rebuilt
Reorganisation Completed Tax-Deferred, $57,000 Saved Each Year — Software Company Building a, Saskatoon
Client: A software company building a new platform · Where: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan · Engagement: 7 weeks, fixed fee
Annual saving$57,000
Tax on reorganisationDeferred
Elections filedOn time
The situation
A software company building a new platform in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan had outgrown the structure it started with. A filing deadline missed by three weeks, extinguishing the entire claim was the immediate problem; the longer-term one was that the structure blocked the next step.
What we did
We mapped the current structure, modelled the target, and confirmed CCPC status and refiled at the enhanced 35% refundable rate — with the tax-deferred elections filed on time and the supporting valuations documented.
The result
The reorganisation completed without triggering tax, and the new structure saves approximately $57,000 a year while removing the exposure the old one carried.
Case Study 6 · CRA review defended
$54,000 Proposed Adjustment Withdrawn In Full — Agri-Tech Company, Guelph
Client: An agri-tech company · Where: Guelph, Ontario · Engagement: 7 weeks, fixed fee
Adjustment withdrawn$54,000
File closed in7 weeks
Penalties assessedNone
The situation
An agri-tech company in Guelph, Ontario received a proposal letter opening a review of farming tax returns. The CRA had identified a claim filed at the 15% non-refundable rate when CCPC status supported 35% refundable and proposed an adjustment of $54,000, with 30 days to respond.
What we did
We treated the response as an evidence exercise rather than an argument. We put contemporaneous tracking in place — project logs tied to time records — so the following year’s claim was defensible by construction, then indexed every supporting document against the specific line the auditor had questioned.
The result
The proposed adjustment was withdrawn in full — all $54,000 of it. The file closed in 7 weeks with no change to the assessed amounts and no penalty.
Reviewed for the 2025 tax year by Udit Gupta, Certified Tax Accountant. Figures describe representative engagements of this type; outcomes depend on your own facts. Client names and identifying details are omitted for confidentiality.
