Roger and anita Johnston’s recent victory over the Canada Revenue Agency serves as a great reminder for those intimated by the prospect of taking on the mighty national tax authority that it is no futile task.

The Murray Harbour, P.E.I., couple sought redemption in the Tax Court of Canada, not in order to sidestep paying back-taxes, but to have their frustration with the CRA’s 1-800 hotline acknowledged — and the agency admonished. In the end, Canada’s national tax authority got its money, and the Johnstons got the satisfaction they sought.

The furor started simply enough. The Johnstons received a reassessment notice for their taxes in 2001 and 2002. Bottom line: they owed roughly $3,500, plus interest.

At the time the taxes were filed, the Johnstons owned a small engine repair business and were launching a second business. Anita Johnston had only recently taken over the responsibility of doing the business taxes. To find out where she had gone wrong, she called the CRA’s 1-800 hotline and was given information. When she called back to clarify a point, she was connected with another representative and given another answer.

By the end of the saga, the Johnstons had made 12 calls and received 12 different answers. “It was very frustrating and confusing,” says Roger Johnston.

Justice Ronald Bell agreed. In the short 144 words it took him to explain the reasons for his judgment, the Tax Court judge said his whole purpose in writing those reasons down was “to recommend highly, in the aggravating circumstances, that the Minister of National Revenue waive any interest that otherwise would be payable on the tax owing under the reassessment.”

Or, as Roger Johnston aptly summed up the decision: “The judge told the CRA it had better wake up.”

In this case, the CRA listened to the wake-up call. Shortly after Justice Bell handed down his ruling, the Johnstons received an official letter from Barb Crosby, the CRA’s assistant director of client services and revenue collections in Charlottetown. She gave them the good news: “I am pleased to inform you that the interest on your 2001 and 2002 tax years will be cancelled.”

It was cause for the Johnstons — and all those Canadians who had identified with their plight — to celebrate. Within hours of running a story about the tax court ruling and the 1-800 debacle, the Globe and Mail, which also devoted an editorial to the issue, received e-mails from 80 readers clamouring to tell their stories.

The din is not surprising, says Leslie Cheeseman, a communications advisor with the CRA in Dartmouth, N.S. She notes that 20 million calls a year are made to the tax agency. Of these, 14 million callers are directed to representatives. (A computer handles the other six million inquiries.)

The volume is daunting, and the inconsistency in answers is understandable, says Tim Cestnick, managing director of WaterStreet Group Inc. , a financial advisory firm based in Toronto. “You will get different answers to the same question. I hear that all the time. I’m not sure there is much the CRA can do about this. Not everyone can be a tax expert.”

The CRA is also quick to point out that most Canadians give the agency a thumbs up for its expertise and its helpfulness. A survey conducted by the CRA last year found that, of respondents who had spoken with a representative about a tax issue, 82% achieved their purpose and 62% were satisfied with the quality of that service. Eighty-six per cent stated the CRA staff was knowledgeable and competent. Of course, many of these people may have made only a single phone call to the agency’s 1-800 hotline.

One reason for the inconsistent answers the Johnstons received from CRA representatives may lie in the fact that those representatives do not have access to the same client files. Depending on what division or section a CRA employee works in (and what level of clearance he or she has), certain files may or may not be available to them.

It is not only that representatives do not have access to the same information, but they also do not have the same level of knowledge, notes Cestnick, author of Winning the Tax Game. “Depending on the CRA employee, they may not fully understand the law.”

@page_break@Although administrative questions — such as learning filing dates and determining what forms are needed — are easily answered, questions of law are much more difficult with which to grapple.

“In this case, it didn’t surprise me that this couple would have had a problem getting a straightforward answer to their question,” Cestnick says.

It didn’t seem to surprise many Canadians, either. IE