Pay: Statements, Backpay, Benefits, Deductions (Taxes, T4), Deployed ect... [MERGED]

[Pusser]

Do I have to let CRA know when I am being deployed or does CAF notify them for me?

There's a line on the tax form where you can declare that you were deployed and since all deployments grant tax-free salary now (unless you are a colonel or above), it all becomes quite obvious.  Like I said before, unless you end up owing money, which is likely not the case (unless you have significant income from other sources), then this really isn't an issue.

 

[Infant_Tree]

OK thanks, just wanted to make sure.

 

[PuckChaser]

I get a couple thousand back every year, but I maximize deductions for things the CAF wouldn't be able/allowed to use to calculate how much tax to take off. Not a big deal, I get the money back at the end of the year anyways.

 

[dapaterson]

Look at the form T1213; there are items you can document (child care, etc) to have lower deductions at source.  Prior to the entry of Reservists into pension plans, I'd submit one annually and max out my RRSPs, but not have to wait for my tax refund - which meant more money available to pay down my mortgage.

It's worth spending the time to understand taxes to figure out how to optimize your own situation.

 

[CountDC]

There is always the option to contact CRA and ask them to authorize no deductions at source if you have the problem of getting refunds every year.  Basically you are making arrangements to pay them directly instead of us taking the taxes out. Last one I did the member was paying them quarterly an agreed upon amount that both sides estimated to cover his taxes for the year.  if they agree they will send you a nice package and letter that you take into the pay office as proof.

 

[PuckChaser]

An update on the proposed Tax Relief for deployed operations. It's not just as easy as saying "make it so", and it appears the government made an announcement without having any of the actual details completed. Don't expect backpay anytime soon.

http://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2017/07/26/defence-officials-struggling-with-details-of-liberal-tax-break-promise/#.WXk17YjyuUl

Defence officials struggling with details of Liberal tax-break promise
By Lee Berthiaume, The Canadian Press — Jul 26 2017
OTTAWA — National Defence has been struggling to make good on one of the Trudeau government's recent promises: giving tax breaks to military personnel and police officers deployed on certain overseas operations.

Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan announced the measure during a major speech at the Royal Military College in Kingston, Ont., in May as part of the Liberals' new defence policy.

While Sajjan billed the move as an attempt to recognize the sacrifices that are often made by military personnel and their families, it also addressed what had been a prickly issue for the minister.

Some service members based in Kuwait had become increasingly vocal in the weeks leading up the announcement about a policy change that threatened to strip their tax-exempt status.

Yet the devil has proven to be in the details, with officials now scratching their heads over what types of operations and deployments should and should not be eligible for tax relief.

The debate is particularly relevant for the navy's sailors, many of whom on close reading of the defence policy would not be eligible for tax relief despite spending up to six months at sea at any given time.

Sources tell The Canadian Press that the military's senior leadership is now seized with the issue, and that defence chief Gen. Jonathan Vance has told officials he wants the issue resolved by mid-August.

Alan Okros, an expert on the management of military personnel at the Canadian Forces College, said officials are now caught trying to make good on the Liberals' promise without making matters worse.

"They're trying to find a solution here that will achieve what the government intended," Okros said.

"But they don't want to start creating precedents that would generate lawsuits or people making claims of 'Well, if that applied there, it applies here.'"

 

[mrswoodca]

I will apologize if this has been asked before.

As a private, when do you go up from the first pay grade to the second?

I have received my offer, but haven't accepted yet, this is one of the questions that my husband has.

once again, if this has been asked before, I am sorry for asking again. I've been trolling the page trying to find the answer, and the deadline is coming up.

 

[Ayrsayle]

I know if you're in the reserves and you're doing BMQ and you already have your degree, you should be a 2LT while doing basic training, getting paid as a 2LT, and have your 1 big bar on your epaulette/slip on.

You will be an OCdt if you're working on your degree, but don't have it yet.

Side Tangent - This actually came up fairly recently in my Unit and is also incorrect.  The CO (for a Reserve DEO) is able to promote directly to 2Lt, but is by no means obligated to do so.  Most do for a variety of reasons (retention, etc), but it is not obligatory.

 

[CountDC]

I will apologize if this has been asked before.

As a private, when do you go up from the first pay grade to the second?

I have received my offer, but haven't accepted yet, this is one of the questions that my husband has.

once again, if this has been asked before, I am sorry for asking again. I've been trolling the page trying to find the answer, and the deadline is coming up.

yearly until you have maxed.

Ayrsayle - thought there was something out recently on this stating the members were not to be promoted until after completion of basic.  The effective date was still the enrolment date.

 

[mrswoodca]

yearly until you have maxed.

Ayrsayle - thought there was something out recently on this stating the members were not to be promoted until after completion of basic.  The effective date was still the enrolment date.

Thanks,  I'm guessing that i wasn't using the right words when trying to search it.

 

[Ayrsayle]

Ayrsayle - thought there was something out recently on this stating the members were not to be promoted until after completion of basic.  The effective date was still the enrolment date.

That is the case (to my understanding) for Reg F members (and was for me, a number of years ago).  Take a look at CFAO 49-10 regarding Rank following Enrollment (For the PRes), Appendix 3, Annex A (Specifically regarding the 2Lt Rank - promotion requirement).

They specifically outline: An officer applicant shall be enrolled in the Primary Reserve in the rank of officer cadet and may be promoted on the same day to a higher rank in accordance with Appendix 3.  So a CO can certainly request it, etc.

 

[FlyLikeAnEagle]

So after how many years will i be a millionaire?  [

 

[Bbmoveup]

If this is in the wrong place please move.

I know they updated and made an agreement on retro pay for the past years. My questions did that new retro pay and agreement include anything for the next number of years for any pay increases?

Thanks!

 

[dapaterson]

CANFORGEN 101/17 announced the pay increases.  Had there been pre-approval of future year increases, they would have been announced in that message.

I do not expect to see any further announcements of increases until the public service unions begin bargaining in earnest; as their focus right now is mitigating the disaster that is the Phoenix pay system, those efforts are on a back burner right now.

 

[RABBIDxBEAVER]

Hi guys, hopefully this is right spot for this but I have a question regarding g my pay increment.

So I'm doing my BMOQ as a DEO Naval Combat Systems Engineer with B.Eng in Industrial engineering and no prior military experience. Upon arriving here I assumed everyone was on the same pay scale as I am (pay increment basic = $4083)  but after getting to know the people here, most are DEO with zero prior military experience as well, it turns out a lot are getting payed pay increment 1 ($4428).

So I'm curious as to why someone I know for example who is AEC with just a BA in history is at higher pay scale as myself who has a technical trade in a in-demand/competitive trade that hires up to only 14 positions a year and also requires an engineering degree which is generally more expensive to obtain than a BA.

Im just curious who all this works and what determined that I would get paid less than other people.

 

[Blackadder1916]

. . .

So I'm curious as to why someone I know for example who is AEC with just a BA in history is at higher pay scale as myself who has a technical trade in a in-demand/competitive trade that hires up to only 14 positions a year and also requires an engineering degree which is generally more expensive to obtain than a BA.

Im just curious who all this works and what determined that I would get paid less than other people.

How much you paid for your degree or the competitiveness for your occupation has nothing to do with the amount that Her Majesty has determined you will be paid.  You are a "General Service Officer" (GSO) just the same as the AEC whom you seem to think is not worth as much as you.  You may find  "http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/caf-community-pay/pay-overview.page" useful as an overview of military pay.

General Service Officers are all officers below the rank of colonel in all occupation groups except for pilots and specialist officers (legal, medical and dental officers). General service officers pay rates are also determined through TC analysis and they receive pay increment increases just like non-commissioned members. One significant difference is that there are often more pay increments for officer ranks than there are for non-commissioned member ranks, on the basis that it takes longer for officers to gather all the experience, skill and knowledge required for their rank. Hence, they must wait longer than non-commissioned members to receive the job rate (maximum) for their rank.

As to why someone may have been given a higher pay increment on enrolment, maybe you don't know the life and academic history of those you think are being paid greater than you.  Or maybe they were just better negotiators in getting a higher incentive on enrolment.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-benefits/ch-204-pay-policy-officers-ncms.page#sec-204-015

204.015 - Pay Increments

204.015(1) (Purpose) Pay increments as set out in the tables to the CBIs in this chapter serve two purposes:

a.  to determine the rate of pay on enrolment, transfer or change in class of Reserve Service based on pay credits that, in accordance with orders or instructions issued by the Chief of Defence Staff, reflect the amount of qualifying service, academic or other special qualifications possessed by an applicant that are determined to be of military value; and

b.  to provide a means of progression through the pay range for each rank.

204.015(2) (Qualifying service) Subject to paragraph (4) and other conditions as may be prescribed in orders or instructions issued by the Chief of the Defence Staff, qualifying service includes:

a.  subject to paragraph (3) of this instruction, all previous service of an officer or non-commissioned member in the member's present rank, equivalent rank or any higher rank, including paid acting rank in: i.the Regular Force and all other permanent armed forces of Her Majesty,
ii.  any component of the Canadian Forces and of all other armed forces of Her Majesty, when on active service,
iii.  the Reserve Force on Class B or Class C Reserve Service;

b.  one-quarter of all previous service in the Reserve Force, other than Class B or C Reserve Service, in the officer's or non-commissioned member's present rank, equivalent rank or any higher rank, including paid acting rank, in the Primary Reserve, the Cadet Instructors Cadre or the Canadian Rangers; and

c.  for an officer or non-commissioned member on enrolment in the Canadian Forces, a period as established in orders or instructions issued by the Chief of the Defence Staff, for academic or other special qualifications considered by the Chief of the Defence Staff to be of military value.

 

[8mv6]

Hi,

Recently noticed that on DHs paystub that it still said his previous posting. Turns out that when we moved from ON to NS in Feb2017, he thought he had cleared in, but on clearance card, only has a stamp from pay&rcds once where it indicates first/HRMS IN/OUT. No stamp on backside where it indicated last/PAY IN/OUT. He is however receiving the appropriate PLD. Does anyone know when he goes in to fix it, will we be taxed the difference for the year, or would the pay be set up for appropriate base?

 

[Soiled]

Hi,

Recently noticed that on DHs paystub that it still said his previous posting. Turns out that when we moved from ON to NS in Feb2017, he thought he had cleared in, but on clearance card, only has a stamp from pay&rcds once where it indicates first/HRMS IN/OUT. No stamp on backside where it indicated last/PAY IN/OUT. He is however receiving the appropriate PLD. Does anyone know when he goes in to fix it, will we be taxed the difference for the year, or would the pay be set up for appropriate base?

Sounds like the HRA he saw missed a screen in CCPS (pay system), when processing his in routine. It's a quick fix, however when it is made, the system defaults the effective date to the first day of the next month. So after it's corrected, his pay will be deducted for the NS tax rates, but up until that point he will have only paid the rates for Ontario. The difference will be made up when he files his taxes.

 

[TCM621]

I had a weird question the other day and I couldn't find the answer so I figured I would ask here. Upon promotion everyone's seniority is set to Jan 1 of the calendar year In which they are promoted, correct? The CM doesn't start at No 1 and work his way down the promotion list but cuts promotion messages based on a number of factors such as availability of positions in the new rank at a unit, postings etc. However, as far as I can tell, the effective date has nothing to do with who ranks wear.

So what I wondered was could there be a situation where the No 1 person gets promoted 4 or 5 months after some who ranked 40 or even higher? This would lead to  a person being paid more,  for a number of months, than the person that should be the first person promoted. This seems wrong to me.

On the other hand, I am sure I would have seen or heard of a grievance or something over this. Maybe I am just missing a key piece of information that would make this all make sense to me. What am I missing?

 

[PuckChaser]

There's a whole lot of variables. If you're promoted/posted, you're not allowed to be promoted until 10 or 14 days (there's a CANFORGEN on this) prior to the COS date. If you're just promoted, and staying at the same unit, then you could be promoted early (prior to APS) if there's a position number available. There's also the folks that need to posted into a new position prior to the APS, and will be in their new rank. 1 to 40 just means you're being promoted, not the order in which it has to happen.

I don't think you'll ever see a grievance because ultimately it's "needs of the service" on when/where you get promoted.