Joint with right of survivorship | Page 2 | General financial discussion | Discussion forum

Being named on a document or not, or how tax slips are named, or any other documentation procedures is one thing. I knew a lady who still got bills and other correspondence in her deceased husband's name for over 15 years after his death, she left lots in his name. Fact is named documentation was irrelevant in those cases, the moment he died he owed or owned nothing any more, he did not exist even in a legal sense.

It's up to the executor to handle things properly, legally including for tax purposes, no matter who any documents name, any lag time in changing documentation, etc (note that it is the estate that is legally liable for even any debts incurred by the deceased, as the deceased no longer exists the estate is the only recourse for any creditors). For example if a T5 straddles the death date it's up to the executor to report the amounts that apply to the individual vs to the estate and it is the estate's job to pay taxes on both, no matter how the T5 is named.

Until death it's the individual's, then it becomes the estate's, or any named beneficiaries/successor holders/etc, or any remaining joint owners with right of survivorship. No matter what documentation after death might show. (I think also of the example where an estate sale of a house occurs, I'm guessing many houses still have owners name in the land registry system whereas legally it is the estate that is the seller in the transaction.)

Correct. My experience was T5 is issued in the name of the primary account holder, or remaining account holder, on the day the T5 is produced, e.g. following February. In my case that person was required to report none of the income, it all belonged partly to the deceased and partly the estate and it took a couple of years before CRA reversed everything and accepted the 3 returns (deceased, estate, person named on T5) as originally filed.

Yes, bank informed immediately.

You're right, maybe I handled it wrong. In this case as all the GICs were going to mature within 10 months I left them to mature before distribution to beneficiaries and counted those 10 months as T3 estate return income. The money to buy the GICs was 100% contributed by the deceased so I didn't consider at the time that the GICs might be considered to be property of the other joint holder (me).

My experience is nobody at the bank knows or cares too much about this stuff, they're extremely careful until the point they've assured themselves the executor is on the up and up (I quickly established a professional and cordial relationship with the bank employee overseeing this) then they didn't seem to pay much attention. And all CRA initially cares about in my experience is that the name and SIN on the slip matches who reports that income, whether it's correct allocation by their law or not. Others may have different experiences.

I had a number of things to deal with at the bank, GICs only one part, so when I initially went I brought the Will (showing I was executor) and death certificate before we even started.

Bill said
…
(I think also of the example where an estate sale of a house occurs, I'm guessing many houses still have owners name in the land registry system whereas legally it is the estate that is the seller in the transaction.)

Such houses are stranded. The deceased registered owner can no longer sign an agreement with a realtor to market the house. Realtor and lawyers will find out that the registered owner won't be able to sign the deed to transfer the ownership to a new owner.

Under land titles system, the land registry will refuse to accept the application from the executor to transfer the ownership to the executor until the executor provides the grant of probate (when there is a will) or the certificate of administration (no will) from probate court confirming the legal authority of the executor to act on behalf of the estate.

I see. But "to transfer the ownership to the executor"? I'd have thought ownership of deceased's house is not transferred to executor, that the owner/seller is the estate of deceased - ?

Nonetheless, real estate listings available through the realtor will typically list owner as "estate of..." This is correct, as the executor does not "own" the property, only manages it.

The owner as recorded, in the local land titles office, is what legally matters. It is a simple as that. The land title office parcel register for the property does specifically name the executor as the register owner and not "Executor of the Estate of …" or "Estate of …".

What any real estate listing says carries zero legal weight and can be disregarded.

Pretty sure I'm not the only who read many years ago that one can take an original death certificate to the land titles office and pay a modest $25 to $50 to transmit a jointly owned property to the survivor or to transmit a solely owned property to the deceased's estate. That is garbage.

Been involved multiple times with such survivor and estate situations now. Doesn't happen that way or that cheaply.

You may be right, Norman, but, as I know nothing of who you are or your qualifications, I remain unconvinced that the executor is the legal owner. It may be convenient for the land registry to say so, and of course it will be the executor who signs all docs related to sale, as this gives them a name to deal with. Estates are not persons and don't have signatures, so executors make decisions for them and sign on their behalf, but this doesn't make them owners. If there are taxes due, the land registry will provide the executor's name, but the exec will surely bill the estate as the legit owner.

A lot of times, people appoint their lawyers as executors. I doubt any lawyer would allow themselves to be put in the position of 'owning' such a property.