Re: REFUND
 

This is the law, from the Income Tax Act:

62. (1) There may be deducted in computing a taxpayer’s income for a taxation year amounts paid by the taxpayer as or on account of moving expenses incurred in respect of an eligible relocation,

248. (1)"eligible relocation" means a relocation of a taxpayer where

(a) the relocation occurs to enable the taxpayer

(i) to carry on a business or to be employed at a location in Canada (in section 62 and this subsection referred to as “the new work location”), or

(ii) to be a student in full-time attendance enrolled in a program at a post-secondary level at a location of a university, college or other educational institution (in section 62 and in this subsection referred to as “the new work location”),

(b) both the residence at which the taxpayer ordinarily resided before the relocation (in section 62 and this subsection referred to as “the old residence”) and the residence at which the taxpayer ordinarily resided after the relocation (in section 62 and this subsection referred to as “the new residence”) are in Canada, and

(c) the distance between the old residence and the new work location is not less than 40 kilometres greater than the distance between the new residence and the new work location

except that, in applying subsections 6(19) to (23) and section 62 in respect of a relocation of a taxpayer who is absent from but resident in Canada, this definition shall be read without reference to the words “in Canada” in subparagraph (a)(i), and without reference to paragraph (b);


And this is CRA's interpretation (IT-178)

¶ 19. After 1988, a taxpayer who is, throughout all or part of a taxation year, absent from Canada, but resident in Canada for tax purposes, is not subject to the "in Canada" requirements in ¶s 1 and 5 above (Section 64.1). Taxpayers absent from, but resident in Canada for tax purposes, would include both an individual deemed by section 250 to be a resident of Canada and an individual considered resident in Canada while abroad because of the retention of residential ties in Canada (see the current version of IT-221, Determination of an Individual's Residence Status).

Re: REFUND
 

That's too bad because the first link seems to indicate it is possible.

Perhaps some changes need to be made to the Government web site. Like that's going to happen real soon...I think not. :(

Re: REFUND
 

They could make it much clearer if they just said that you must be resident in Canada for tax purposes before and after the move. Then they wouldn't need to worry about in or out, or to and from. Unfortunately, tax law is written by lawyers.

Re: REFUND
 

We were able to claim for our move, our friends tried to claim this year and was told that there have been some recent changes to that policy and they have taken away the international allowance. Shame really as it's really helpful to get some money back.

Re: REFUND
 

The law is quite clear (lawyers, yes) , it's the web pages of CRA (public servants, no) that is confusing:thumbsup:

I tried to claim mine in last year's tax return even though I knew the law was against me - I got a nice round number 0 :thumbdown:

It's the resident issue that is the killer for PRs :p

Re: REFUND
 

Thanks to everyone who answered :)

Re: REFUND
 

You're welcome;)