Submissions
PDF
version
Disability Tax
Credit Program
CMA Submission to the
Sub-Committee
on the Status of Persons with Disabilities
(House of Commons)
January 29, 2002
HENRY HADDAD, MD, FRCPC
PRESIDENT
Leadership for Physicians…
Health for Canadians
Leadership pour les médecins… Santé pour les
Canadiens
The Canadian Medical
Association (CMA) is the national voice of Canadian physicians.
Founded in 1867, CMA’s mission is to serve and unite the physicians
of Canada and be the national advocate, in partnership with the
people of Canada, for the highest standards of health and health
care.
On behalf of its members
and the Canadian public, CMA performs a wide variety of functions,
such as advocating health promotion and disease/accident prevention
policies and strategies, advocating for access to quality health
care, facilitating change within the medical profession, and providing
leadership and guidance to physicians to help them influence, manage
and adapt to changes in health care delivery.
The CMA is a voluntary
professional organization representing the majority of Canada’s
physicians and comprising 12 provincial and territorial divisions
and 43 affiliated medical organizations.
DISABILITY TAX
CREDIT
Introduction
The Canadian Medical
Association (CMA) welcomes the opportunity to appear before the
Sub-Committee on the Status of Persons with Disabilities to discuss
issues related to the Disability Tax Credit (DTC). This tax measure,
which is recognition by the federal government that persons with
a severe disability may be affected by having reduced incomes, increased
expenses or both, compared to those who are not disabled [1],
helps to account for the intangible costs associated with a severe
and prolonged impairment. It also takes into account disability-related
expenses that are not listed in the medical expense deduction or
which are excluded by the 3% threshold in the Medical Expense Tax
Credit.
Physicians are a key point of contact for applicants of the DTC
and, given the way the program is structured, a vital participant
in its administration. It is for these reasons that we come before
you today to address specific concerns related to the program’s
performance. In addition, we would like to discuss the broader issue
of developing a coherent set of tax policies in support of health
and social policy.
The Integration
of Tax Policy with Health Policy and Social Policy
The federal government,
through a variety of policy levers such as taxation, spending, regulation
and information, has played a key role in the development of our
health care and social systems. To date however, discussion about
the federal role in these areas has centered largely on federal
transfers to the provinces and territories and the Canada Health
Act.
However, in looking
at how to renew Canada’s health and social programs, we should
not limit ourselves to these traditional instruments. Today we have
a health system that is facing a number of pressures that will challenge
its sustainability. These pressures range from an aging and more
demanding population in terms of the specialty care services and
technology they will seek; the cry for expanding the scope of medicare
coverage to include homecare and pharmacare; and a shortage of health
personnel. These are only some of the more immediate reasons alternative
avenues of funding health care, and thus ensuring the health and
well-being of our citizens, must be explored.
In our pre-budget consultation
document to the Standing Committee on Finance [2],
the CMA recommended that the federal government establish a blue
ribbon National Task Force to study the development of innovative
tax-based mechanisms to synchronize tax policy with health policy.
Such a review has not been undertaken in over 25 years since the
Royal Commission on Taxation in 1966 (Carter Commission).
The CMA is echoing its
call for a National Task Force to develop new and innovative ways
to synchronize tax policy with health policy and social policy.
A study of this nature would look at all aspects of the taxation
system, including the personal income tax system, in which the DTC
is a component.
The remainder of our
brief addresses issues specific to the DTC.
Physician Involvement
in the DTC Program
The CMA has in the past
provided input with respect to the DTC program. Our working relationship
on the DTC program with the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA)
has been issue-specific, time-limited and constructive.
Our first substantive
contact in regard to the DTC program was in 1993 when the CMA provided
Revenue Canada with a brief review of the program and the T2201form.
It is interesting to note what our observations were in 1993 with
regard to this program because many of them still hold true today.
Here are just some of
the issues raised by the CMA in 1993 during our initial review of
the program:
- The tax credit program
may not address the needs of the disabled, it is too hit and miss.
The DTC program should be evaluated in a comprehensive way to
measure its overall effectiveness in meeting the needs of persons
with disabilities.
- The program should
be called the “Severe Disability Tax Credit Program”
– or something equivalent to indicate that not everyone
with a disability is eligible.
- The program puts physicians
in a potential conflict with patients—the responsibility
of the physician to advocate for the patient vs. gate-keeper need
for Revenue Canada. The physician role should be to attest to
legitimate claims on the patients’ behalf.
- Revenue Canada should
clarify the multiplicity of programs. There are numerous different
federal programs and all appear to have varying processes and
forms. These overlapping efforts are difficult for patients and
professionals
- A major education
effort for potential claimants, tax advisers and physicians should
be introduced.
- A suitable evaluation
of claimant and medical components of the process should be undertaken.
The
CMA does not have a standardized consultative relationship with
the CCRA in regard to this program. An example of this spotty relationship
is the recent letter sent by the CCRA Minister asking current DTC
recipients to re-qualify for the credit. The CMA was not advised
or consulted about this letter. If we had been advised we would
have highlighted the financial and time implications of sending
75 to 100 thousand individuals to their family physician for re-certification.
We also would have worked with the CCRA on alternative options for
updating DTC records. Unfortunately, we cannot change what has happened,
but we can learn from it. This clearly speaks to the need to establish
open and ongoing dialogue between our two organizations.
Policy Measure: The CMA
would like established a senior level advisory group to continually
monitor and appraise the performance of the DTC program to ensure
it is meeting its stated purpose and objectives. Representation
on this advisory group would include, at a minimum, senior program
officials preferably at the ADM level; those professional groups
qualified to complete the T2201 Certificate; various disability
organizations; and patient’s advocacy groups.
We would now like to
draw the Sub-committee’s attention to three areas that, at
present, negatively impact on the medical profession participation
in the program, namely program integrity, program standardization
(e.g., consistency in terminology and out-of-pocket costs faced
by persons with disabilities) and tax advisor referrals to health
care providers.
Program Integrity
A primary concern and
irritation for physicians working with this program is that it puts
an undue strain on the patient-physician relationship. This strain
may also have another possible side effect, a failure in the integrity
of the DTC program process.
Under the current structure
of the DTC program, physicians evaluate the patient, provide this
evaluation back to the patient and then ask the patient for remuneration.
This process is problematic for two reasons. First, since the patient
will receive the form back immediately following the evaluation,
physicians might receive the blame for denying their patient the
tax credit—not the DTC program adjudicators. Second, physicians
do not feel comfortable asking for payment when he or she knows
the applicant will not qualify for the tax credit.
For the integrity of
the DTC program, physicians need to be free to reach independent
assessment of the patient’s condition. However, due to the
pressure placed by this program on the patient-physician relationship,
the physician’s moral and legal obligation to provide an objective
assessment may conflict with the physicians ethical duty to “Consider
first the well-being of the patient.
There is a solution to this problem it’s a model already in
use by government, the Canadian Pension Plan (CPP) Disability Program.
Under the CPP Disability Program, the evaluation from the physician
is not given to the patient but, it is sent to the government and
the cost to have the eligibility form completed by a physician is
subsumed under the program itself. Under this system, the integrity
of patient-physician relationship is maintained and the integrity
of the program is not compromised.
Policy Measure: The CMA
recommends that the CCRA take the necessary steps to separate the
evaluation process from the determination process. The CMA recommends
the CPP Disability Program model to achieve this result.
Fairness and
Equity
The federal government
has several programs for people with disabilities. Some deal with
income security (e.g., Canada Pension Plan Disability Benefits),
some with employment issues (e.g., Employability Assistance for
People with Disabilities), and some through tax measures (e.g.,
Disability Tax Credit). These government transfers and tax benefits
help to provide the means for persons with disabilities to become
active members in Canadian society.
However, these programs
are not consistent in terms of their terminology, eligibility criteria,
reimbursement protocols, benefits, etc. CMA recommends that standards
of fairness and equity be applied across federal disability benefit
programs, particularly in two areas: the definition of the concept
of “disability”, and standards for remuneration to the
physician. These are discussed in greater detail below.
1) Defining “disability”
One of the problems with
assessing disability is that the concept itself is difficult to
define. In most standard definitions the word “disability”
is defined in very general and subjective terms. One widely used
definition comes from the World Health Organization’s International
Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps (ICIDH)
which defines disability as “any restriction or inability
(resulting from an impairment) to perform an activity in the manner
or within the range considered normal for a human being.”
The DTC and other disability
program application forms do not use a standard definition of “disability”.
In addition to the inconsistency in terminology, the criteria for
qualification for these programs differ because they are targeted
to meet the different needs of those persons with disabilities.
To qualify for DTC, a disability must be “prolonged”
(over a period of at least 12 months) and “severe” i.e.
“markedly (restrict) any of the basic activities of daily
living” which are defined. Though CPP criteria use the same
words “severe” and “prolonged” they are
defined differently (i.e., “severe” means “prevents
applicant from working regularly at any job” and “prolonged”
means “long term or may result in death”). Other programs,
such as the Veterans Affairs Canada, have entirely different criteria.
This is confusing for
physicians, patients and others (e.g., tax preparers/advisors) involved
in the application process. This can lead to physicians spending
more time than is necessary completing the form because of the need
to verify terms. As a result if the terms, criteria and the information
about the programs are not as clear as possible this could result
in errors on the part of physicians when completing the forms. This
could then inadvertently disadvantage those who, in fact, qualify
for benefits.
Policy Measures: The
CMA would like to see some consistency in definitions across the
various government programs. This does not mean that eligibility
criteria must become uniform.
In addition, the CMA
would like to see the development of a comprehensive information
package for health care providers that provides a description of
each program, its eligibility criteria, the full range of benefits
available, copies of sample forms, physical assessment and form
completion payment information, etc.
2) Remuneration
The remuneration for
assessment and form completion is another area where standardization
among the various government programs would eliminate the difficulties
that some individuals with disabilities currently face. For example,
applicants who present the DTC Certificate Form T2201 to their physicians
must bear any costs associated with its completion out of their
own pockets. On the other hand, if an individual is applying to
the CPP Disability Program, the cost to have the eligibility form
completed by a physician is subsumed under the program itself.
Assessing a patient’s
disabilities is a complex and time-consuming endeavour on the part
of any health professional. Our members tell us that the DTC Certificate
Form T2201 can take as much time and effort to complete as the information
requested for CPP Disability Program forms depending, of course,
on the patient and the nature of the disability. In spite of this
fact, some programs acknowledge the time and expertise needed to
conduct a proper assessment while other programs do not.
Although physicians have
the option of approaching the applicant for remuneration for the
completion of the DTC form, they are reluctant to do so because
these individuals are usually of limited means and in very complex
cases, the cost for a physician’s time for completing the
DTC Form T2201 can reach as much as $150. In addition, physicians
do not feel comfortable asking for payment when he/she knows the
applicant will not qualify for the tax credit. Synchronizing funding
between all programs would be of substantial benefit to all persons
with disabilities, those professionals completing the forms and
the programs’ administrators.
Policy Measure: We strongly
urge the federal government to place disability tax credit programs
on the same footing when it comes to reimbursement of the examining
health care provider.
Tax Advisor Referrals
With the complexity of
the income tax system today, many individuals seek out the assistance
of professional tax advisors to ensure the forms are properly completed
and they have received all the benefits they are entitled to. Tax
advisors will very often refer individuals to health professionals
so that they can be assessed for potential eligibility for the DTC.
The intention of the tax advisors may be laudable, but often, inappropriate
referrals are made to health professionals. This not only wastes
the valuable time of health care professionals, already in short
supply, but may create unrealistic expectations on the part of the
patient seeking the tax credit.
The first principle of
the CMA’s Code of Ethics is “consider first the well-being
of the patient.” One of the key roles of the physician is
to act as a patient’s advocate and support within the health
care system. The DTC application form makes the physician a mediator
between the patient and a third party with whom the patient is applying
for financial support.
This “policing”
role can place a strain on the physician-patient relationship –
particularly if the patient is denied a disability tax credit as
a result a third-party adjudicator’s interpretation of the
physician’s recommendations contained within the medical report.
Physicians and other health professionals are not only left with
having to tell the patient that they are not eligible but in addition
advising the patient that there may be a personal financial cost
for the physician providing this assessment.
Policy Measure: Better
preparation of tax advisors would be a benefit to both patients
and their health care providers. The CMA would like CCRA to develop,
in co-operation with the community of health care providers, a detailed
guide for tax preparers and their clients outlining program eligibility
criteria and preliminary steps towards undertaking a personal assessment
of disability. This would provide some guidance as to whether it
is worth the time, effort and expense to see a health professional
for a professional assessment.
As raised in a previous
meeting with CCRA, the CMA is once again making available a physician
representative to accompany DTC representatives when they meet the
various tax preparation agencies, prior to each tax season, to review
the detailed guide on program eligibility criteria and initial assessment,
and to highlight the implications of inappropriate referral.
Conclusion
The DTC is a deserving
benefit to those Canadians living with a disability. However, there
needs to be some standardization among the various programs to ensure
that they are effective and meet their stated purpose. Namely, the
CMA would like to make the following suggestions:
1. The CMA would like
established a senior level advisory group to continually monitor
and appraise the performance of the DTC program to ensure it is
meeting its stated purpose and objectives. Representation on this
advisory group would include, at a minimum, senior program officials
preferably at the ADM level; those professional groups qualified
to complete the T2201 Certificate; various disability organizations;
and patient advocacy groups.
2. The CMA recommends that the CCRA take the necessary steps to
separate the evaluation process from the determination process.
The CMA recommends the CPP Disability Program model to achieve this
result.
3. That there be some consistency in definitions across the various
government programs. This does not circumvent differences in eligibility
criteria.
4. That a comprehensive information package be developed, for health
care providers, that provides a description of each program, its
eligibility criteria, the full range of benefits available, copies
of sample forms, physical assessment and form completion payment
information, etc.
5. That the federal government applies these social programs on
the same footing when it comes to their funding and administration.
6. That CCRA develop, in co-operation with the community of health
care providers, a detailed guide for tax advisors and their clients
outlining program eligibility criteria and preliminary steps towards
undertaking a personal assessment of disability.
7. That CCRA employ health care providers to accompany CCRA representatives
when they meet the various tax preparation agencies to review the
detailed guide on program eligibility criteria and personal assessment
of disability, and to highlight the implications of inappropriate
referral.
These recommendations
would certainly be helpful to all involved - the patient, health
care providers and the programs’ administrators, in the short
term. However what would be truly beneficial in the longer term
would be an overall review of the taxation system from a health
care perspective. This could provide tangible benefits not only
for persons with disabilities but for all Canadians as well as demonstrating
the federal government’s leadership towards ensuring the health
and well being of our population.
[1]
Health Canada, The Role for the Tax System in Advancing the Health
Agenda, Applied Research and Analysis Directorate, Analysis and
Connectivity Branch, September 21, 2001
[2]
Canadian Medical Association, Securing Our Future… Balancing
Urgent Health Care Needs of Today With The Important Challenges
of Tomorrow”, Presentation to the Standing Committee on Finance
Pre-Budget Consultations, November 1, 2001.
|