{"id":189383,"date":"2026-08-31T11:06:20","date_gmt":"2026-08-31T11:06:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/189383\/"},"modified":"2026-08-31T11:06:20","modified_gmt":"2026-08-31T11:06:20","slug":"cra-fines-vancouver-realtor-103785-for-pretending-a-rental-property-was-her-home","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/189383\/","title":{"rendered":"CRA fines Vancouver realtor $103,785 for pretending a rental property was her home"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Canada<\/a> Canada Revenue Agency, National Headquarters <\/p>\n

For five years, a Vancouver realtor collected her postal mail at a rental property she did not live in \u2014 just to convince the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) that it was actually her primary residence. <\/p>\n

It didn’t work. <\/p>\n

On August 25, 2026, Thi Nhan Nguyen, also known as Lynn Nguyen, was sentenced in B.C. provincial court to a nine-month conditional sentence and fined $103,785 \u2014 the same amount she evaded in income tax by falsely claiming a rental property as her principal residence<\/a>. <\/p>\n

In Canada, the principal residence exemption \u2014 where homeowners shelter capital gains from taxes when selling their home \u2014 is considered one of the most valuable tax breaks available to Canadian homeowners. It’s also one of the main triggers for a CRA tax audit. <\/p>\n

For any Canadian who owns more than one property, the Nguyen case shows exactly what kind of paper trail is used to catch these types of falsified principal residence exemption (PRE) claims. Furthermore, it’s a good reminder to find out whether your property still qualifies for the exemption. <\/p>\n

Don’t Miss Why the CRA just fined a B.C. landlord nearly $104K for lying about her “principal residence” <\/p>\n

Nguyen became the registered owner of a Vancouver residential property in April 2012, which she would then sell in 2017. During the entire five years of ownership, a tenant lived in the home; at the same time, Nguyen fabricated documents and took steps to make it look like her primary residence \u2014 including using the address for correspondence and arranging to pick up mail at the property on a regular basis. <\/p>\n

When Nguyen disposed of the property, she sold a 50% interest to a buyer and transferred the remaining 50% to a related party; however, she did not claim the sale when she filed her 2017 return. <\/p>\n

CRA auditors began to ask Nguyen questions about the property and transaction in 2017. At that time, Nguyen, through a representative, continued to claim that the rental property had been her principal residence. She backed up this assertion by providing misleading information. <\/p>\n

After almost a decade in the court system, Nguyen eventually pleaded guilty to one count of tax evasion under the Income Tax Act. She was handed the hefty fine while also receiving a nine-month conditional sentence for evading taxes. <\/p>\n

Story Continues <\/p>\n

Why the exemption is not a paperwork trick <\/p>\n

A PRE lets Canadians sell their primary home without paying capital gains tax on any increase in value. But the exemption only applies to a property you or your family actually lived in \u2014 what the CRA describes as “ordinarily inhabit” \u2014 not one you own on paper while a tenant lives there. <\/p>\n

Since Nguyen did not ordinarily inhabit her rental dwelling, the property cannot be considered a principal residence, for tax purposes. <\/p>\n

Read more: 3 essential money moves to make once you’ve saved $50,000<\/a> <\/p>\n

How a CRA rule change affected her case <\/p>\n

About a year before Nguyen sold her rental property, the CRA amended its disclosure requirements. That meant any property sold had to be reported, starting with the 2016 tax year. As a result, all Canadians must now complete Form T2091(IND), even when the entire capital gain on the property is exempt. <\/p>\n

Skipping that step \u2014 or designating a rental property that was never actually your home \u2014 doesn’t just trigger tax, it adds fines, interest and, in some cases, turns into a criminal matter. <\/p>\n

While the penalty was severe, the courts could have fined her up to 200% of the tax evaded and imposed a prison sentence of up to five years (in addition to repaying tax owed plus interest). <\/p>\n

Ultimately, Nguyen wasn’t caught and convicted because of one red flag. Her case involved several inconsistencies that CRA auditors pieced together over a multi-year audit \u2014 a tenant on record for years, an undisclosed sale and years of correspondence sent to an address the owner did not live at. <\/p>\n

What Canadian landlords should do instead <\/p>\n

If you have ever converted a home into a rental, or a rental into a home, the CRA has legitimate ways to manage the tax hit without misrepresenting the property. <\/p>\n

To keep on the right side of the tax authority, consider the following: <\/p>\n

The PRE exemption applies only to a home you or your family actually lived in \u2014 ownership length doesn’t matter; frequency and type of use do. <\/p>\n

Every residential property sale, including the sale of your principal home, must be reported on Schedule 3 and Form T2091(IND). <\/p>\n

Tax evasion fines can reach 200% of the amount owed, plus up to five years in prison. <\/p>\n

A CRA audit can look back for years, and inconsistencies compound over time. <\/p>\n

Section 45(2) and 45(3) elections can protect the exemption during a genuine change of use, without hiding anything. <\/p>\n

The takeaway from Nguyen’s case is that fabricating a trail of documents to defraud the tax authority is far riskier than disclosing and paying the taxes owed. <\/p>\n

What To Read Next <\/p>\n

The most expensive financial mistakes are often the ones you don’t see coming. Join 19,000+ Canadians who get the money moves, risks and opportunities shaping their finances \u2014 delivered free each week. Subscribe now.<\/a> <\/p>\n

This article originally appeared on Money.ca<\/a> under the title: CRA fines Vancouver realtor $103,785 for pretending a rental property was her home<\/a> <\/p>\n

This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Canada Revenue Agency, National Headquarters For five years, a Vancouver realtor collected her postal mail at a rental…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":189384,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[15],"tags":[817,187,59741,95],"class_list":["post-189383","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-vancouver","tag-canadians","tag-cra","tag-nguyen","tag-vancouver"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/189383","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=189383"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/189383\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/189384"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=189383"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=189383"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=189383"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}