6 worked Real Estate Tax Planning case studies — the position a client typically comes to us with, what we do, and what it is worth. Each is an illustrative example built on the rules that apply to real estate tax planning work, not a specific client's file.
Case Study 1 · Missed incentive claimed
$131,000 In Credits Claimed That Prior Filings Had Missed — Provincial Credit Claimant, Hamilton
Client: A corporation stacking a provincial credit on a federal claim · Where: Hamilton, Ontario · Engagement: 4 weeks, fixed fee
Credits claimed$131,000
Years adjusted3
Review outcomeNo adjustment
The situation — A corporation stacking a provincial credit on a federal claim, Hamilton, Ontario
A corporation stacking a provincial credit on a federal claim in Hamilton, Ontario had been filing for 3 years. In that time, the incentives its activity qualified for were never claimed. Behind that sat a SR&ED claim prepared eleven months after the fact with no contemporaneous records.
What we did for A corporation stacking a provincial credit on a federal claim, Hamilton, Ontario
We tested each activity against the eligibility criteria rather than the description on the invoice. Then we filed the complete project list on the original claim rather than holding projects back for an amendment that could not be made.
The result — A corporation stacking a provincial credit on a federal claim, Hamilton, Ontario
$131,000 in credits claimed, with the open prior years adjusted as well. The claim passed review without adjustment.
Client: An industrial automation integrator · Where: Moncton, New Brunswick · Engagement: 6 weeks, fixed fee
Annual saving$62,000
ReorganisationTax-neutral
StructureMatches operations
The situation — An industrial automation integrator, Moncton, New Brunswick
The structure at an industrial automation integrator in Moncton, New Brunswick needed fixing. The file was carrying a claim filed at the 15% non-refundable rate when CCPC status supported 35% refundable. Every option for fixing it ran through a reorganisation that had to be done without triggering tax.
What we did for An industrial automation integrator, Moncton, New Brunswick
We worked with the client's lawyer. Together, we netted the government assistance against the qualified expenditure pool, so the claim matched what would survive a review. We also prepared the elections, resolutions and valuations the structure needed to stand up.
The result — An industrial automation integrator, Moncton, New Brunswick
The structure now matches the business. Annual saving of $62,000, and the reorganisation itself was tax-neutral.
Case Study 3 · Records and systems rebuilt
31 Months Reconciled And $18,500 Of Input Tax Recovered — Medical Device Developer, Surrey
Client: A medical device developer · Where: Surrey, British Columbia · Engagement: 5 weeks, fixed fee
Months reconciled31
Input tax recovered$18,500
Close time5 days
The situation — A medical device developer, Surrey, British Columbia
Nothing reconciled at a medical device developer in Surrey, British Columbia. Every filing started with 31 months of cleanup. The file was carrying technical narratives written by the finance team with no input from the people who ran the experiments.
What we did for A medical device developer, Surrey, British Columbia
We rebuilt from source rather than correcting on top of the existing file. We layered the applicable provincial credit onto the federal claim in the same filing. Then we set the routine that keeps it clean.
The result — A medical device developer, Surrey, British Columbia
31 months reconciled to the bank. The close now takes 5 days, and $18,500 of previously unclaimable input tax was recovered in the process.
Case Study 4 · Scaling without breaking
Scaled To 89 Staff With $83,000 Of Working Capital Freed — Process-Developing Manufacturer, Barrie
Client: A manufacturer developing a production process · Where: Barrie, Ontario · Engagement: 8 weeks, fixed fee
Headcount reached89
Working capital freed$83,000
Missed deadlinesZero
The situation — A manufacturer developing a production process, Barrie, Ontario
A manufacturer developing a production process in Barrie, Ontario was growing fast, with headcount reaching 89 in eighteen months. The back office had not kept up. A filing deadline missed by three weeks, extinguishing the entire claim was the first thing to break.
What we did for A manufacturer developing a production process, Barrie, Ontario
We confirmed CCPC status and refiled at the enhanced 35% refundable rate. We built the compliance calendar for the size the business was becoming rather than the size it had been.
The result — A manufacturer developing a production process, Barrie, Ontario
The business reached 89 staff with no missed remittance and no late filing. $83,000 of working capital was freed in the process.
Case Study 5 · Sale and succession
Share Sale Restructured, $565,000 Less Tax On Closing — Equipment-Investing Manufacturer, Halifax
Client: A manufacturer investing in new production equipment · Where: Halifax, Nova Scotia · Engagement: 3 weeks, fixed fee
Tax saved on closing$565,000
PriceAs agreed
Post-closing adjustmentsNone
The situation — A manufacturer investing in new production equipment, Halifax, Nova Scotia
A manufacturer investing in new production equipment in Halifax, Nova Scotia was preparing to sell. Due diligence surfaced a shareholder loan balance that would have been picked up as income on closing. That would have reduced the price or killed the deal outright.
What we did for A manufacturer investing in new production equipment, Halifax, Nova Scotia
We cleaned up the historical file. We put contemporaneous tracking in place — project logs tied to time records — so the following year’s claim was defensible by construction. Then we prepared the due-diligence package the buyer's advisers actually asked for.
The result — A manufacturer investing in new production equipment, Halifax, Nova Scotia
The deal closed at the agreed price. $565,000 of tax was saved against the structure originally proposed, with no post-closing adjustment.
Case Study 6 · Objection and relief
Desk-Review Assessment Of $74,000 Vacated — Agri-Tech Company, Kelowna
Client: An agri-tech company · Where: Kelowna, British Columbia · Engagement: 4 weeks, fixed fee
Assessment vacated$74,000
Supporting recordsNow on file
AccountCleared
The situation — An agri-tech company, Kelowna, British Columbia
An agri-tech company in Kelowna, British Columbia was carrying $74,000 of penalties and interest. The charges arose from an amended claim adding two projects after the reporting deadline had already passed. Much of that amount accumulated during a period the CRA itself had delayed.
What we did for An agri-tech company, Kelowna, British Columbia
We identified the eligible projects, documented the technological uncertainty and systematic investigation for each, and filed a claim that survived review without adjustment. We framed the relief application on the specific grounds the CRA guidelines recognise rather than on general hardship.
The result — An agri-tech company, Kelowna, British Columbia
The assessment was vacated. $74,000 came off the account, and the documentation now on file makes the same position straightforward to defend next time.
Reviewed by Udit Gupta, Founder and Tax Accountant for the 2025 tax year. These case studies are illustrative worked examples composed from the CRA rules that apply to this type of work, not specific client files; figures are representative and outcomes depend on your own facts.
