Although the federal budget on Monday included $ 7.1 million over a three-year period for advancing the LGBTQ2 action plan “to ensure Canada’s recovery promotes a more just and equitable society for LGBTQ2 people to join as full members Canadian society can participate, “this fairness does not include some parental benefits.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau accused the Minister of Diversity and Inclusion, Bardish Chagger, of developing the action plan after apologizing three years ago to those who “have been harmed by federal laws, policies and practices aimed at suppressing and discriminating against.” LGBTQ2 people in Canada performed “.
Ken McNeilly, a gay father of two who lives in Toronto, welcomes Trudeau’s support for the LGBTQ2 community, but says it is time his government changed discriminatory laws that Canadians trying to raise hinder.
Six years ago, McNeilly paid for in vitro fertilization (IVF), which included sperm analysis and storage, egg collection, embryo testing, and storage. The procedure and medication for the surrogate mother totaled more than $ 30,000. His son was born in Nepal. McNeilly, a Canadian, claimed these costs when filing his income taxes in 2016. The Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) denied his medical expense tax credit claim because the replacement did not depend on his spouse, common law partner, or partner.
After that rejection, he filed his first appeal in 2017, McNeilly told iPolitics. He has spent the past four years walking back and forth with CRA attorneys and says he was “shocked (at) how much outrage I was exposed (during the trial)”.
“I thought there were many paths that have been taken for members of the LGBTQ2 community. I did not expect these barriers. “
The tax credit McNeilly sought to claim applies only to married partners, either married or under common law.
McNeilly hired a lawyer and appealed to the Canadian Finance Court on April 14th for what he called an injustice in the government system towards the LGBQT2 community. This challenge goes beyond potential LGBQT2 parents. it would also include anyone who cannot receive and would seek a replacement. The outcome of this challenge will determine whether the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act are constitutional. McNeilly expects the case to be heard in the summer of 2022.
He raised his case with his former Liberal MP, Julie Dabrusin. (He has since moved out of her riding). He said she was helpful and understanding, but when the case entered the appeal process, she was unable to help.
If the government was serious about removing all barriers to the LGBQT2 community, it would act and find a solution, says McNeilly.
“This has shaken my confidence in the structure of Canadian society, which I found progressive and fair. I can have a colleague who is honest and can economically take advantage of this tax break, and I can’t. That disappointed me.
“A lot of people talk about fairness, but they don’t walk next to me.”
McNeilly hopes enough politicians will support a change to the income tax law, but stands ready to go to court next year if necessary.