Canadian HR Reporter

CANADIAN HR REPORTER OCTOBER 2018 44 NEWS Employee implications If the Canadian employee does not meet the treaty exemptions, and is subject to U.S. tax, the Canadian employee is required to file a U.S. non-resident in- come tax return (Form 1040NR) by April 15 following the end of the tax year to report the com- pensation and compute the tax. e employee may be subject to double withholding on the same compensation. e employee should apply for a tax waiver (Form T1213) with CRA to request a reduction of her Canadian withholding taxes in anticipation of foreign tax credit claims. If the Canadian employee is treaty exempt from U.S. tax, she can file U.S. non-resident income tax treaty-based return (Form 1040NR) by April 15 following the end of the tax year to have her U.S. source deductions refunded, if any. Employer Identification Number (EIN) Canadian employers that are required to report employment taxes or give tax statements to employees or annuitants will AN require EIN. e EIN is a nine- digit number issued by the IRS and is used to identify the tax accounts of employers to the IRS and the SSA. An EIN can be applied for by faxing or mailing Form SS-4, Ap- plication for Employer Identifica- tion Number to the IRS. Employ- ers outside of the United States may also apply for an EIN by con- tacting the IRS directly by phone. U.S. tax number for employees A non-resident employee is re- quired to have a U.S. tax identifi- cation number for the W-2. • Non-U.S. citizen employees who have a U.S. tax obligation are not eligible to receive a So- cial Security number. Instead, the employee can apply for an Individual Taxpayer Identifica- tion Number (ITIN) by submit- ting Form W-7 to the IRS with the required documentation to verify the employee's identity. • A Social Security Number (SSN) can be obtained by filing Form SS-5 "Application for a Social Se- curity Number". In this case, the employee must provide at least two documents to prove age, identity, and U.S. citizenship or current lawful, work-authorized immigration status. Marni Halpern and Jennifer Santos work for KPMG LLP in the Global Mobility Services practice, specializ- ing in cross-border payroll compliance and advisory. ey can be reached at (416) 777-8500 (main) or by email at mhalpern@kpmg.ca or jennifer- santos@kpmg.ca. EIN requirements U.S. TAX < pg. 16 Anger, insubordination enough to turf truck driver BY JEFFREY R. SMITH A SASKATCHEWAN worker who was fired after getting into a verbal altercation with his man- ager and refusing to follow in- structions has had his unjust dis- missal complaint dismissed by an adjudicator. In 2014, Earl Boyd was hired by Epp's Trucking, a company based in Saskatoon, Sask. On a cold Dec. 23, 2017, Boyd had an assignment in which he delivered goods in company truck #169. Post-delivery, he was on his way back to the terminal when he received a message instructing him to switch over to truck #140. When Boyd arrived, however, truck #140 wasn't plugged in and failed to start. He asked some me- chanics to charge the battery. Boyd texted the after-hours dispatch number to advise that he wouldn't be able to take truck #140 after all because it wasn't charged and the sleeping area was dirty. He indicated that his as- signed loads should be transferred to truck #169, the one he had al- ready been using that day. The owner and manager of Epp's, Steven Balzer, went to the terminal to clarify what was go- ing on. When he arrived, he told Boyd to wait until truck #140 was charged. Boyd complained that #140 wasn't clean, but Balzer thought #169 wasn't any cleaner. Eventually, the two men began shouting at each other, and then Boyd gave his manager the finger and directed an obscenity at him. Boyd then closed the terminal doors, leaving Balzer outside. Balzer went to a smaller door to enter, but as he went in, Boyd was coming out at the same time, resulting in a collision. Balzer told Boyd: "You are done working here and you are not go- ing to work for me." He asked Boyd to leave the premises and gave the keys to truck #169 to an- other employee with the instruc- tions that Boyd could remove his personal items from it when he was ready to leave. Soon after, Boyd went home. Boyd filed a complaint for un- just dismissal under the Canada Labour Code, arguing that he couldn't follow the instructions to use truck #140 because it wouldn't start and most of the arguing was because of the lack of cleanliness. Epp's responded that it had just cause for dismissal as Boyd had refused to follow lawful instruc- tions and verbally abused the owner of the company. Right to assign work In Boyd and Epp's Trucking Inc., the adjudicator found that Boyd had the right to discuss the deci- sion. However, the company had the right to assign work to its driv- ers in whichever truck it deemed necessary for the task. The adjudicator also found that Boyd became unnecessarily angry and abusive in the alterca- tion. And the truck's cleanliness didn't warrant a refusal to switch trucks and disobey an order from a superior. e verbally abusive behaviour Boyd displayed was a reason for concern for the manager, and it was clear that Boyd's termination was for both his verbal abuse and refusal to follow instructions, said the adjudicator. "Boyd may not have agreed with the manager's decision to reassign him from truck #169 to truck #140 and may have felt that the truck was not properly cleaned, but nei- ther of these warranted his refusal to follow the instructions or to be- come verbally abusive." In the end, the adjudicator de- termined Epp's Trucking had just cause to terminate Boyd's em- ployment, and dismissed Boyd's complaint.

• Cover