Opinion
Budget 2019 – Poor wording requires 2 ex-spouses within 5 years for Home Buyers Plan

This is one of those rare times I hope I am wrong in my interpretation, and look forward to being proven wrong by my professional colleagues.
On March 19, 2019 the federal government tabled its election-year budget. One of the newest and strangest provisions is the ability for people going through a separation or divorce to potentially have access to their RRSP under the Home Buyers Plan.
Now in my article and podcast entitled: “Escape Room – The NEW Small Business Tax Game – Family Edition” with respect to the Tax On Split Income (TOSI) rules, I made a tongue in cheek argument that people will be better off if they split, because then the TOSI rules wonāt apply.
In keeping with the divorce theme, beginning in the year of hindsight, 2020, the federal government is giving you an incentive to split up and get your own place.
However, there are a few hoops:
On page 402 of the budget, under new paragraph 146.01(2.1)(a), at the time of your RRSP withdrawal under the Home Buyers Plan, you must make sure that:
- – the home you are buying is not the current home you are living in and you are disposing of the interest in the current home within two years; or
- – you are buying out your former spouse in your current home; and
you need to:
- be living separate and apart from your spouse or common-law partner;
- have been living separate and apart for a period of at least 90 days (markdown October 3, 2019 on the calendar),
- began living separate and apart from your spouse or common-law partner, this year, or any time in the previous 4 years (ok, you donāt have to wait for October); and…
…here is where the tabled proposed legislation gets messy.
Proposed subparagraph 146.01(2.1)(a)(ii) refers to where the individual
- wouldnāt be entitled to the home buyers plan because of living with a previous spouse in the past 4 years that isnāt the current spouse they are separating from
“(ii) in the absence of this subsection, the individual would not have a regular eligible amount because of the application of paragraph (f) of that definition in respect of a spouse or common-law partner other than the spouse referred to in clauses (i)(A) to (C), andā¦”
The problem with the wording of this provision, is that it is written in the affirmative by the legislators using the word āandā. This means, you must be able to answer ātrueā to all the tests for the entire paragraph to apply.
The way I read this, the only way to answer ātrueā to this subparagraph is if you have a second spouse (ie: spouse other than the spouse referred to) that you shared a home with and you split from in the past four years.
If you have a second spouse that you shared a home with in the past four years, then āparagraph (f)ā in the definition of āregular eligible amountā would apply and the answer would be ātrueā.
If the answer is “true” you can then get access to your RRSP Home Buyers Plan.
If you donāt have a second spouse then, even though “paragraph (f)” might be met, the phrase āspouse other than the spouse referred toā would not be met, and therefore the answer would be āfalseā.
This would, in turn, cause the entire logic test of the provision to be āfalseā and so you would not be able to take out a āregular eligible amountā from your RRSP for the Home Buyers plan because you do not meet the provisions.
If my interpretation is correct then I would really be curious as to what part of the economy they are trying to stimulate.
In my opinion the legislation could be fixed with a simple edit:
“(ii) in the absence of this subsection, the individual would not have a regular eligible amount because of the application of paragraph (f) of that definition in respect of:
(A) a spouse or common-law partner; or
(B) a spouse or common-law partner other than the spouse referred to in clauses (i)(A) to (C); and…”
—
Cory G. Litzenberger, CPA, CMA, CFP, C.Mgr is the President & Founder of CGL Strategic Business & Tax Advisors; you can find out more about Coryās biography at http://www.CGLtax.ca/Litzenberger-Cory.html
conflict
“HELL WILL RAIN DOWN”: Trump unleashes U.S. military on Yemeni Houthis

MxM News
Quick Hit:
President Trump ordered a massive military assault on Iranian-backed Houthi forces in Yemen on Saturday, vowing to unleash āoverwhelming lethal forceā after months of attacks on American and allied vessels in the Red Sea.
Key Details:
-
Trump announced the strikes in a Truth Social post, stating, āToday, I have ordered the United States Military to launch decisive and powerful Military action against the Houthi terrorists in Yemen.ā
-
He criticized former President Joe Biden for failing to contain the Houthis, saying his response was āpathetically weakā and emboldened the groupās ongoing attacks on commercial and military vessels.
-
The U.S. Navyās USS Harry S. Truman carrier strike group, along with three destroyers and a cruiser, launched the assault, targeting radars, air defenses, and missile systems used to disrupt shipping lanes.
CENTCOM Forces Launch Large Scale Operation Against Iran-Backed Houthis in Yemen
On March 15, U.S. Central Command initiated a series of operations consisting of precision strikes against Iran-backed Houthi targets across Yemen to defend American interests, deter enemies, andā¦ pic.twitter.com/u5yx8WneoG
— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) March 15, 2025
Diving Deeper:
President Trump escalated U.S. military action against Iran-backed Houthi rebels on Saturday, ordering airstrikes on targets in Yemen in response to the groupās repeated attacks on Red Sea shipping. Trump, in a Truth SocialĀ post, declared that the U.S. military would not tolerate continued aggression and vowed an overwhelming response.
āThe Houthi attack on American vessels will not be tolerated,ā Trump wrote. āWe will use overwhelming lethal force until we have achieved our objective.ā He directly warned the Houthis, stating, āYOUR TIME IS UP, AND YOUR ATTACKS MUST STOP, STARTING TODAY. IF THEY DONāT, HELL WILL RAIN DOWN UPON YOU LIKE NOTHING YOU HAVE EVER SEEN BEFORE!ā
The strikes, carried out by U.S. Central Command,Ā targetedĀ missile sites, drone launch facilities, and command centers used by the Houthis to strike commercial and military vessels in the Red Sea. U.S. warships and carrier-based fighter jets participated in the mission, marking a significant escalation in efforts to protect international shipping routes.
Trump also issued a direct warning to Iran, demanding that its support for the Houthis āmust end immediately.ā Addressing Tehran, Trump wrote, āDo NOT threaten the American People, their Presidentā¦or Worldwide shipping lanes. If you do, BEWARE, because America will hold you fully accountable and we wonāt be nice about it!ā
The strikes come after more than a year of escalating attacks by the Houthis, who have targeted over 100 merchant vessels, sunk at least two, and killed multiple sailors since the Israel-Hamas war began. Trump pointed to Bidenās failures in handling the crisis, noting that āit has been over a year since a U.S.-flagged commercial ship safely sailed through the Suez Canal, the Red Sea, or the Gulf of Aden.ā
With Trumpās order, the U.S. is making clear that hostile actions in the Red Sea will not go unanswered. As military operations continue, all eyes will be on whether the Houthis and their Iranian backers heed the warningāor face even greater firepower from the U.S. military.
Duane Rolheiser
Team Canada is driving us right into the arms of The Donald

Some day in the near future those of us who fondly remember the Canada that stretched from sea to sea, will look back to see how the best country in the world (at least for a while) fell apart.Ā In the end our love for national sporting endeavors and our multicultural charm couldn’t hold us together anymore.Ā Sure we may not have been able to define what a Canadian was, but for the longest time at least we could all agree we weren’t American.
At some point the country of Canada simply couldn’t support a decent living for the average citizen anymore.Ā Fiscally, it became inevitable that Canada would splinter and fall apart as desperate citizens made desperate political moves to do what immigrants have always done, uproot their lives in search of safety and financial security.
A number of serious academics will point to the first NAFTA agreement as the starting point for all this turmoil.Ā They might indicate NAFTA was Canada’s first Great Mistake. Tough to avoid even in hindsight.Ā Free Trade Agreements swept the planet and it would have been expensive and maybe even impossible to avoid that route.Ā Problem is, we were a small country surrounded by oceans and the biggest market in the world.Ā At first it looked like we were in the most enviable position of any country. Eventually we came to depend entirely on Big Brother next door and we didn’t aggressively pursue development and trade relationships with other countries and regions with the gusto that we could have and surely would have with better hindsight / foresight / intelligence.
It only took a few decades for our country to become entirely dependent.Ā One day Canadians woke up and realized we completely relied upon not just the US market, but the good graces of successive US governments who were perfectly happy to throw us a bone periodically to ensure at least limited success… until they weren’t.
The day we woke up and realized the water was rising all around us was very early on in the Trump 47 Presidency.Ā That’s when US voters decided their economy was off the rails. Their tax burdens were unsustainable. They were buying manufactured goods, including necessities like food, energy, microchips, and medicines from everywhere except the US. They were supporting economies actively engaged in the military / financial destruction of the US.Ā They spent far too much on their military and their bureaucracy, and funding for necessities at home were at risk.Ā In the end their reasons weren’t as important as their actions.Ā Their actions compelled Canada to do something and quick.
We didn’t. Instead of fighting like mad to build pipelines and move energy, to swiftly develop minerals the world needed stat, to immediately erase interprovincial trade and employment barriers, Canada fought the US.Ā Too many politicians and too many voters reacted the way most people do when they’re punched.Ā They punched back without stopping to think.
In retrospect it would have been a great time for someone with a wider view, someone that could have seen the world in 20 or 30 years time. Instead our politicians were focused on the oncoming political campaign.Ā Just like we could have used someone with foresight when we entered into NAFTA, it would have been incredibly helpful for the sea to sea version of Canada if politicians would have been leaders instead of vote collectors.Ā They might say this was Canada’s second Great Mistake.Ā We entered into a fight against a much larger and more powerful opponent. It was a fight we had no chance in winning. But our leaders weren’t interested in “saving” Canada so much as in “fighting for” Canada.Ā Turned out there was a big difference between “saving” Canada and “fighting for” Canada.Ā Who knew?Ā Retrospect.
As a side note, there were a couple of political leaders pushing for the longer view. Alberta’s Danielle Smith had some momentum, at least at first, in taking the fork toward resource development and even dealing with interprovincial trade barriers.Ā Saskatchewan’s Scott Moe was on side, but they were drowned out by Team Canada and were unable to form the political coalitions they needed to sway the fighting camp into the saving camp.Ā Federally there was one leader who took this route as well.Ā Max Bernier made the right calls, but unfortunately for his People’s Party only a couple of voters picked up the phone when he called. He was more less completely ignored.Ā It’s his own fault.Ā He called for immigration limits about 10 years too early and he was written off as a racist lunatic.Ā Remember those days? That’s what we did to just about everyone who stuck their necks up.
The problem for the “saving” Canada crew was that the “fighting for” Canada crew had all the major national political parties, all the corporate media (remember them?) and almost all the academics (or at least the ones the corporate media talked to).Ā Team Canada was at war and they acted like it. Even Canada’s greatest sporting hero of all time, Wayne Gretzky, fell to their blades.Ā When The Great One was sentenced to a lifetime of golfing in sunny Arizona / California / Florida and banished from visiting his national non-profit head office in wintery Ontario, well that was Canada’s third Great Mistake.Ā Those who saw the influence of Team Canada knew if they can cancel The Great One, they won’t think twice about your silly arguments for saving their nation.
So, Canadians voted to fight The Donald.Ā Early losses suffered by Ontario’s newly elected (to fight the tariffs with greater tariffs) Premier Doug Ford were not analyzed the way an intelligent individual might who was looking toward the future. Not a surprise as this forward looking type could not be found since the dawn of that NAFTA Agreement.Ā Canadian voters voted to follow the politicians who hated The Donald as much as they did.Ā Ironic because a lot of those voters ended up trying to continue that fight by joining the Democrat party a couple of years later.
In the end it wasn’t the tariff war that sunk the sea to sea Canada.Ā Canadians eventually got around to lowering trade barriers and even signed some significant deals with other nations that hated The Donald as much as they did. In the end though, the nations we wanted to deal with the most had no interest in what Canada has most to offer.
Do I need to say it?Ā Oil and Gas?Ā Cheap, reliable energy. It still hurts to talk about it.Ā Sure the Canadians who held on to the name of that formerly great country held a big party when they decided they were the world’s first Net Zero Nation.Ā They used paper cups and paper straws and paper plates and wooden forks to eat their organic cake.Ā All the public news services covered it.Ā People in the US might have even noticed if the remaining Canadians hadn’t decided to hold their event on July 4 so they could go head to head with.. oh forget it.
No it wasn’t the tariffs in the end. The tariffs were one of the battles in the war. The war ended for all intents and purposes when the people running sea to see Canada decided to take their longer vision of the future and apply it to the entire earth instead of the country they loved.Ā After all there would be no Canada at all if the world was too hot for life to continue.Ā So they continued to use reams of the dwindling supply of taxpayer dollars to subsidize what they were sure would be a world wide move to renewable energy sources. Problem is, they’re still looking for affordable battery technology.Ā Some say the greedy Americans actually discovered the science behind it but the oil and gas people bought it and buried it.Ā They’re going to be sorry when their coastal properties sink some day soon.Ā Rich pricks.
At least the remaining Canadians can feel good about saving the planet.
PS. Of course most of this can be avoided.Ā Canadians can still decide they love their country even more than they hate The Donald.Ā We could still direct ALL of our efforts into becoming as economically viable as possible.Ā But that would mean ending years of climate change crisis planning.Ā It would mean cutting the size and the scope of our bureaucracy to counter the wild advantages investors and businesses are building in the US. It would mean we’d come to the understanding that Saving Canada and Fighting For Canada have become 2 separate ideas.Ā It would mean taking this blow from the US on the cheek and turning that cheek to accept more blows while we focus ALL our attention on building a stronger nation as quickly as possible.Ā Not bloody likely, eh?
-
Business2 days ago
Brookfieldās Deep Ties to Chinese Land, Loans, and Green DealsāAnd a Real Estate Tycoon With CCP LinksāRaise Questions as Carney Takes Over from Trudeau
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta power outages and higher costs on the way with new federal electricity regulations, AESO says
-
Alberta1 day ago
Highway twinning from Sylvan Lake to Rocky Mountain House among dozens of infrastructure projects beginning in Alberta
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day ago
They knew it was a lab leak all along
-
Canadian Energy Centre2 days ago
Experts urge caution with Canadian energy in response to Trump tariffs
-
Alberta1 day ago
Premier Danielle Smith calls for federal election
-
Energy1 day ago
Trump asserts energy dominance, set to meet oil titans amid trade war
-
National1 day ago
Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre reacts to new PM and Federal Cabinet