5-year: 3.15% (non-registered & RRIF), 3¼% (TFSA & RRSP) | Page 2 | Manulife Bank | Discussion forum

Thanks, Norman1 and Loonie. TFSA GICs are what I’m looking at, so 3.25%. I like the idea of four deposits over the course of the year. I’ve contacted Manulife for more information.

That's a new one on me, not being allowed to buy a five year GIC because of age! I didn't know age discrimination was OK in the financial industry. Perhaps it's different for these GIAs, although I don't see why it should be.

When one dies, at any age, a five year GIC could be a pain as some FIs won't let you cash out on death with interest to date. But some will.

My mother will soon be 101 and is in decent health for her age. I won't be buying her five year GICs (as her POA), but that's my choice. No one has told me I can't. I'm curious who your MIL's FA works for and what his qualifications are.

You've got me thinking. I've been wondering why my mother didn't receive an annual statement this year from CIBC about her TFSA, which is a small savings account that is essentially useless. Maybe, once you turn 100, you sort of drop off their books somehow. I would phone and ask them but they have refused to honour her lawyer-written POA which I hold, claiming it doesn't explicitly cover "investments" - as if a savings account TFSA that pays zilch is any kind of "investment" anyway. It's a good racket if you're the bank. When I get around to it, she will sign a transfer-out form, and I'll see how far that gets us. As this is a small amount and she is very old, it's not the end of the world if I have to wait until she dies, but the gall of CIBC (and I have fared even worse at RBC) is something to behold. Fortunately, she opened a CU account recently; they are much easier to work with. Neither CIBC nor RBC will ever see another penny of her money, which has now all been redirected or is being spent down on her living expenses - except for that pesky little TFSA which I, stupidly, suggested she buy in 2009. It made sense at the time, for reasons I won't get into.

I couldn’t reach an advisor so phoned Manulife Bank directly. They directed me to their website and this is what I saw in red, at the top of the page:

“Alert: Fraudulent product offer

A fraudulent product offer is being circulated. It includes Manulife, Manulife Investment Management’s logo and branding and promotes inaccurate GIC rates. Please do not share any personal information and contact the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre etc. etc.”

I saw that in their browser was a B+ in a black circle before the address. The web page I was directed to before had only a B in a black circle. It’s frightening how good these scammers are.

JenE said
A fraudulent product offer is being circulated. It includes Manulife, Manulife Investment Management’s logo and branding and promotes inaccurate GIC rates. Please do not share any personal information and contact the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre etc. etc.”

I saw that in their browser was a B+ in a black circle before the address. The web page I was directed to before had only a B in a black circle. It’s frightening how good these scammers are.  

Never click on any link until you are 100% sure!
I recently got a $5 offer purportedly from PayPal. I called the real PayPal and was told that the offer is bogus. And then I got the same "offer" again a few days later.

Dean, as I said CRA won't do anything if the T5 slip name and SIN re a joint investment match that person's reporting amount, they just accept it as that person's income in total.

If you do that they'll never ask. But if you split things up and thus there's not a match with the T5 info, then I suppose they could ask you to support your allocation. It wouldn't happen until a year or more later, after they run their T5 matching program for that tax year and notice one person reported less than the T5 slip bearing their name and SIN indicated (their program doesn't seem to mind if someone else reported more that the T5 slip shows, no reassessment there, in my experience). In that case they'll likely just send that person a reassessment saying they didn't report enough income and then you'll have to go through the process of explaining things to them.

I'm guessing amounts have to be above a certain threshold for them to care. Long ago I did allocate, i.e. reporting did not match T5s, and nothing ever happened. But recently I was reassessed for 2020 for close to $10K in additional income due to an unmatched slip, that amount they caught.

Bill said
Dean, as I said CRA won't do anything if the T5 slip name and SIN re a joint investment match that person's reporting amount, they just accept it as that person's income in total.

Dont have any joint acct yet but will do soon. Are you saying as long as the T5 shows both my name and my spouse, then CRA assumes its even splitting to begin with without evidence/proof ?

No, smso, I didn't mean that. T5 for joint account has only ever shown the name and SIN of primary person, in my experience, so that's where CRA's computer expects to see the income being reported. Anything else and CRA might be asking why they're not seeing what they expect to see and it'll be up to you to satisfy their questions.

Though I also wouldn't be surprised if their computer looked to the spouse's return in the case of an anomoly, maybe if they see the totals for spouses tie in to the T5 they're good with it.

All our joint accounts are reported to CRA as 50:50 split, no matter who is the primary accont holder, and have been for many years. I actually do make sure that contributions are equal, so this is an honest reporting. I do have a paper trail that could trace the money back through several moves if necessary, but it would be time-consuming to do so.
I have never been asked to prove this split.

I imagine a great many people don't even know they are supposed to report it this way, i.e. according to contributions. And I know there are people out there who don't even know there is such a thing as a joint account with right of survivorship that avoids probate on the first death.

Loonie's experience, i.e. never being questioned by CRA about using 50/50 split no matter what names are on T5s, is surprising to me. I do the opposite, report it based on whoever's name is on the T slip, and also never been questioned. Maybe CRA doesn't care about allocation between spouses which, if true, suggests it might be an idea to always have the spouse in the lower tax bracket (if it's always the same spouse) be the primary on joint accounts.