Symes v. Canada
The Supreme Court of Canada disallowed Ms. Symes, a self-employed woman, from claiming her childcare expenses as a business deduction for income tax purposes. The decision followed traditional tax analysis, which characterizes childcare expenses as personal expenses.
The Women’s Court takes a different view. Tax policy must take account of background social context. That context shows that women have suffered, and continue to suffer, social and economic inequities in their paid and unpaid work. The traditional tax treatment of childcare expenses is based on outdated cultural norms that privilege a conception of working life adapted to the needs of businessmen.
Summary
The Women’s Court of Canada reconsiders the 1993 case of Symes v. Canada, in which the Supreme Court of Canada disallowed Ms. Symes’s childcare expenses as business deductions. According to the Women’s Court, substantive equality is a fundamental constitutional principle that requires recognition of the inherent moral worth of each individual and acknowledgment that full realization of this worth cannot be achieved through a simple uniform application of rules. As a fundamental constitutional principle, this perspective must inform judicial review of discretionary governmental decisions and statutory interpretation. The Women’s Court finds that the government has a duty not only to refrain from discrimination but also to correct existing disadvantages through the formulation of appropriate law and policy. Courts, in turn, must ensure that governments are fulfilling their obligations by doing all that is ‘‘practically possible’’ to promote substantive equality. Judgments that account for substantive equality considerations must, by definition, take into account the full context surrounding the law or policy in question. In examining the context relevant to Ms. Symes’s claim, the Women’s Court finds that women have suffered, and continue to suffer, social and economic inequities in their paid and unpaid work. While traditional tax analysis characterized childcare expenses as personal expenses, viewing this interpretation in light of the underlying social context reveals that it is based on outdated cultural norms that privilege a conception of working life adapted to the needs of businessmen. The Women’s Court of Canada reverses the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada and holds that business people who legitimately incur childcare expenses for the purpose of gaining or producing income from business must not be deprived of the benefit of a business deduction for their expenses.