Skip to Content

Amendments to come for more flexibility to correct contribution errors in defined contribution plans

Level Chan and Rachel Abi Daoud

On February 4, 2022 the federal government released a set of draft legislative proposals (“Draft Legislation”) amending the Income Tax Act (“Act“) and Income Tax Regulations (“Regulations“). The draft amendments would implement certain personal income tax measures previously announced in the 2021 Federal Budget, which included more flexibility for defined contribution pension plan (“DCPP”) administrators to correct for both under-contributions and over-contributions. With completion of the consultation period on March 7, 2022, we hope to see these measures implemented this year.

The Act does not currently address issues arising out of historical over-contributions and under-contributions, nor does it propose any remedies. If an under-contribution is discovered in a subsequent year, the Act does not allow plan administrators to accept contributions to correct the error. The only option is to amend the plan to allow for catch-up contributions or make payments outside of the plan. In addition, while the rules allow some over-contribution errors to be corrected by refunding the excess to the contributor, the procedural requirements are onerous and often impractical.

The Draft Legislation proposes the following changes to the Act to address these issues.

Correcting under-contribution errors in DCPPs

The amendments permit certain errors to be corrected by allowing plan administrators to make additional contributions (i.e. – “permitted corrective contributions”) to a member’s money purchase account, in order to compensate the member for an under-contribution error in any of the preceding five years of the additional contribution, subject to a dollar limit.

The Draft Legislation would accomplish this through a new subsection 147.1(2) to the Act, which permits a correction by an individual or an employer under a money purchase provision of an individual’s registered pension plan if:

  1. it is a permitted corrective contribution; and
  2. the money purchase provision was a designated money purchase provision in each of the five immediately preceding years.

Permitted corrective contribution

In a calendar year, this is a contribution that would have been made to a money purchase provision of a registered pension plan in any of the five immediately preceding years in accordance with the plan terms, but for a failure to enroll the individual in the plan or a failure to contribute as required by the terms of the plan.

Designated money purchase provision

A money purchase provision is considered a “designated money purchase provision” in a calendar year if it meets one of the following conditions:

  1. the pension plan has ten or more members throughout the year; or
  2. not more than 50% of the contributions made to the provision in the year are with respect to “connected persons” and employees whose remuneration for the year exceeds 2.5 times the year’s maximum pensionable earnings (under the Canada Pension Plan).

Correcting over-contribution errors in DCPPs

The draft amendments would also enable plan administrators to correct for pension over-contribution errors through an employer or member refund. Similar to under-contributions, the relief would be available only to over-contributions made in the five years preceding the year of the refund. Refunds of over-contributions would restore an employee’s contribution room for the taxation year in which the refund is made.

Simplifying reporting requirements

Under the Act in its current form, a return of an over-contribution does not automatically restore the affected member’s Registered Retirement Savings Plan (“RRSP”) contribution room. Retroactive amendments to a member’s historical T4 slip(s) are required in order to do this, which is a cumbersome process.

In addition to permitting corrections for over-contribution errors, the proposed amendments would also implement an easier process for reporting pension adjustment corrections related to over-contributions and under-contributions. Rather than filing amended T4 slips, a plan administrator would simply have to file an information return in prescribed form with the Canada Revenue Agency, with respect to each affected plan member.

Adding a reasonable rate of interest to a return of contributions

A registered pension plan becomes a revocable plan when it is not administered in accordance with the terms of the plan as registered, for example where an over-contribution has been made.

Under the current Regulations, the distribution rules permit the return of all or a portion of contributions made when the payment is done to avoid the revocation of the registration of the plan. The draft amendments, if enacted, will allow plan administrators to add a reasonable rate of interest to a return of contributions, in order to avoid the revocation of plan registration. A “reasonable rate” is not defined and more guidance may be provided at a later date.

General

The Department of Finance is receiving comments on the Draft Legislation up to March 7, 2022. Comments may be sent to Consultation-Legislation@fin.gc.ca.

If successfully implemented, the amendments will come into force retroactively – as of January 1, 2021. While the Draft Legislation will make changes to the Act and the Regulations, correction of under- and over-contributions for registered pension plans will still need to comply with applicable pension benefits standards legislation.


This client update is provided for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. If you have any questions about the above, please contact a member of our Pensions and Benefits group.

 

Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.

Archive

Confirming the coverage analysis: Emond v Trillium Mutual Insurance Co.

By Tipper McEwan, Shelley Wood, K.C., and Jennifer Taylor In an important case for property insurers and their counsel, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) recently reviewed the principles of…

Read More

Changes and restrictions to New Brunswick’s Atlantic Immigration Program

BY Chiara Nannucci

By Chiara Nannucci New Brunswick has introduced several updates and restrictions to applications under the Atlantic Immigration Program (“AIP”), effective February 3, 2026. These changes affect employers’ participation, applicants’ eligibility,…

Read More

Canada’s new Defence Industrial Strategy

BY Erin Best (she/her) & Robert Bradley

By Erin Best & Robert Bradley On February 17, 2026, the Government of Canada released its Defence Industrial Strategy (the “Strategy”). This follows a series of announcements highlighting the Government’s…

Read More

Timing is not everything – Alberta Human Rights Tribunal finds that termination during medical leave did not amount to discrimination

BY Jacob Zelman

By Jacob Zelman An employer has succeeded before Alberta’s Human Rights Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) in a case arising from the termination of an employee shortly after he requested medical leave,…

Read More

Outlook for 2026 proxy season

By Andrew V. Burke, Colleen P. Keyes, David F. Slipp and Logan G. Walters With proxy season on the horizon, many public companies are once again preparing their annual disclosure documents and shareholder materials for…

Read More

Key trends to watch in workplace investigations in 2026

BY Sheila Mecking & John Morse

By Sheila Mecking and John Morse Upcoming Webinar: Evolving Practices in Workplace Investigations: Key Insights for 2026Join us on February 19, 2026 at 10:00 AM AST for a forward-looking discussion…

Read More

Lawrence Estate (Part II): How does a mistake affect a contract between heirs?

BY Tipper McEwan

By Tipper McEwan Four children made an agreement shortly after their mother’s death to divide any jointly held asset equally.  What none of them knew at the time was that one…

Read More

Employment law insights from Gbongbor v Multicultural Association of Fredericton

By Clarence Bennett, K.C., ICD.D, Mark Heighton, and Emma-Jean Griffin The recent decision in Gbongbor v Multicultural Association of Fredericton (“Gbongbor”)[1] from the New Brunswick Court of King’s Bench offered…

Read More

Lawrence Estate (Part I): When is a gift a gift?

BY Tipper McEwan

By Tipper McEwan The Nova Scotia Supreme Court recently heard a case that involved a gift from a parent to an adult child in Lawrence Estate v. Lawrence, 2025 NSSC…

Read More

Making 2025 changes real in 2026: A practical guide for employers

BY John Morse & Emma Jean Griffin

By John Morse and Emma Jean Griffin 2025 brought significant changes to Canadian workplace law, with courts and legislators prioritizing fairness, safety, and accountability. Employers now face new obligations around…

Read More

Search Archive