Form RC268 goes in with your return, so what is at stake is the late filing penalty on that return rather than a separate charge for the schedule itself. For the 2025 tax year the penalty is 5 per cent of the balance owing, plus 1 per cent of that balance for each full month the return is late, to a maximum of 12 months. Two things follow. If the return leaves no balance owing, there is nothing for the percentage to work on. And because the penalty is measured against the balance, claiming the deduction you are entitled to reduces the penalty as well as the tax.
What is the late filing penalty for Form RC268?
- 15+Years of the founder's cross-border experience
- 18,000+Clients served across our offices in India, the USA, Canada and the UAE
- 5.0Google rating
- 4Global offices — India, USA, Canada & UAE
Deducts contributions to a US retirement plan by a Canadian resident who is not a daily commuter. The exposure on this kind of filing is charged by reference to the form and the delay rather than to the tax, which is why an unfiled year with no tax can still be expensive.
What a late filing costs
Deducts contributions to a US retirement plan by a Canadian resident who is not a daily commuter.

When it does not bind you
The deduction is treaty-based and interacts with Canadian registered-plan room, so claiming it correctly protects both this year's deduction and next year's contribution space.
How to get this moving
The full treatment — who it binds, the deadline, the penalty and the fixed fee — is on RC268 — US plan contributions (cross-border). Bring last year's returns and we will tell you what is missing.
Reviewed for accuracy for the 2025 and 2026 filing seasons by Udit Gupta, International Tax, Cross-Border Tax & Transfer Pricing Expert, Legal Quotient Consultants. Written as general guidance, not as a recommendation for your situation. Talk it through with us before acting on it.
Cross-border tax case studies
Unfiled years where the deduction removed the balance owing
A client had not filed returns for consecutive years covering an assignment in the United States, largely because the plan statements had never arrived. The fear was a penalty that had been compounding all the while. The work was to obtain the statements, prepare the returns with the treaty deduction claimed, and only then calculate the exposure on the balance that actually remained. The engagement produced filed returns for both years, a penalty calculation the client could check line by line, and a written note explaining why the charge was smaller than the one they had been carrying around.
Read how this one runsA demand to file that changed which penalty rate applied
The client had more than one late year and assumed the later one attracted a higher rate simply because it was not the first. The correspondence told a different story. The work was to read the CRA file in date order, establish whether a demand to file had been issued and whether a penalty had actually been charged in the preceding years, and then apply the rate the facts supported. The engagement produced a filed return, a penalty calculation on the correct basis, and a chronology of the correspondence, which is the document that settles the question if it is raised again.
Read how this one runsSeparating penalty from interest on a statement of account
The client believed the penalty had been compounding and that the balance on the statement of account was mostly penalty. It was not. The work consisted of reconciling the statement charge by charge, splitting the late filing penalty from the interest that compounds daily on the unpaid balance, and showing which part stops and which part continues. The engagement produced a reconciliation of the account and an instalment arrangement covering the part that keeps moving, which is the balance itself rather than a penalty that has already reached its limit.
Read how this one runsA return filed on time with the plan deduction left out
Here the return had gone in by the deadline, so no late filing penalty was in issue at all, but contributions to the United States plan had never been claimed. The client had been told the omission would be expensive. The work was to confirm the assignment period and the plan, obtain statements for the year, and prepare an adjustment request rather than a late return. The engagement produced an adjustment request with the supporting documents attached, and an explanation of why the penalty material the client had been reading did not apply to their situation.
Read how this one runsPlan statements from abroad that arrived after the filing deadline
The administrator of the United States plan did not produce the client's annual statement until well after the Canadian filing date had passed. The choice was to file late with complete information or on time with an estimate. The work was to file on the information that was available, record the estimate internally, and adjust once the statement arrived, so the penalty clock stopped while the figure was still being settled. The engagement produced a filed return, a later adjustment, and a diarised reminder to request the statement earlier the following year.
Read how this one runsContributions claimed as an ordinary deduction on a late return
An earlier preparer had put the United States plan contributions through a late return as though they were an ordinary deduction, with nothing on the file about the treaty or the assignment they arose from. The figure happened to be close to right. The basis was not, and a claim resting on the wrong footing is the one that falls over when it is questioned. The work was to restate the claim on its treaty basis, evidence the assignment period and the plan, and record why the deduction is available at all. The engagement produced an amended position and working papers that set out the basis rather than only the amount.
Read how this one runsInformation Returns Missed Behind a Correct Return
The heaviest exposure on a cross-border file is often a disclosure form rather than the tax. Where the return itself was right, the procedures for late information returns turn on a reasonable-cause narrative with dates and documents behind it.
Read how this one runsA US LLC Owned From Canada
The two countries classify the vehicle differently, so relief that ought to apply frequently does not and the same profit can be taxed in both hands. The engagement examines whether the structure can be changed and what the change itself costs.
Read how this one runsAll case studies — every published engagement in one place.
Core International & Cross-Border Tax Services
Strategy and compliance for income, assets and families spread across borders.
Industries & Client Types We Serve Worldwide
- Foreign VAT / GST / sales tax registrations
- Marketplace withholding reviews
- Inventory nexus & PE analysis
- Multi-currency books reconciled
- Cross-border revenue sourcing & withholding
- IP structuring with real substance
- Equity for cross-border teams
- U.S. expansion: entity & PE setup
Firms and partners working across borders meet Regulation 105 withholding, PE risk on long engagements and per-country payroll for travelling staff.
A partnership is taxed in the hands of its partners, so one engagement abroad can reach every partner's personal return. The order matters: the waiver is applied for before the invoice, the presence is tracked before it becomes an establishment, and the payroll is registered before the first day worked in the other country.
- Reg 105 / 102 waivers
- Permanent establishment risk
- Partner mobility planning
- Cross-border withholding recovery
- Section 216 rental returns
- FIRPTA withholding recovery
- Section 116 clearance
- Treaty credit optimization
- Transfer pricing documentation (s.247)
- Customs value vs transfer price
- Foreign affiliate reporting (T1134)
- Country-by-country reporting
- Reg 105 & U.S. CWA agreements
- Multi-state & country calendars
- Touring income allocation
- Royalty & image-rights withholding
- Residency analysis before moving
- Employer payroll exposure
- Totalization & social security
- Foreign tax credits
- Treaty access & PPT reviews
- FAPI & surplus computations
- Withholding-efficient routing
- Governance & substance
The follow-up questions on Form RC268
The late filing penalty for the 2025 tax year is calculated as a percentage of the balance owing, so where the return leaves nothing owing the calculation produces nothing. That is not the same as saying a late filing is free. The deduction is treaty based and it has to be claimed on a filed return, so an unfiled year is an unclaimed deduction, and the interaction with your Canadian registered plan room stays open for as long as the year does. Interest also runs on any balance that does exist. File the year, claim the deduction, and deal with the balance once it is known rather than guessing at it.
It can be, but not simply because it happened twice. For the 2025 tax year the higher charge is 10 per cent of the balance owing plus 2 per cent for each full month, to a maximum of 20 months, and it applies where the CRA issued a demand to file and charged a late filing penalty in any of the three preceding tax years. Both parts have to be present. A second late filing on its own is not the trigger, and the higher figures are not a doubling of the ordinary ones, because the period they can run for is different as well. Check the correspondence for a demand before assuming which rate applies, and read it against the assignment years, because the year the demand relates to is not always the year you are now filing.
Not indefinitely. For the 2025 tax year the ordinary penalty stops accruing after 12 full months, and the higher charge that follows a demand to file stops after 20. The penalty itself does not compound. Interest is the part that keeps moving: it compounds daily on the unpaid balance and is not limited by a month count. So the shape of the exposure changes over time. Early on, the penalty is the larger figure and filing quickly is what saves money. On a year that has been outstanding a long while, the penalty has settled and it is the interest on the balance that is still growing.
It leaves the question open, which is the practical cost. The deduction for contributions to the United States plan is treaty based and it interacts with the room you have for Canadian registered contributions, so until the year is filed and the claim settled you do not know what the room for the following year should have been. People in that position often carry on contributing in Canada on a standing instruction while the unfiled year sits there. Deal with the years in order, claim the plan contributions on each, and let the registered position follow from a settled figure rather than from an assumption made years earlier.
The deduction is claimed on the return, so the way to claim it is to file the year. That is worth doing even where the year is old. The claim is treaty based and it also bears on your Canadian registered plan room, so an unfiled year leaves two questions open rather than one. Before filing, gather the plan statements for that year and the payroll records connecting the contributions to the work in the United States, because an administrator in another country can be slow to respond. Then file with the deduction in place, so that any penalty is measured against the balance that remains after it.
It starts with facts rather than structures: which countries have a claim on you, what each one taxes, and where the two overlap. From there the decisions are about order and timing — which country taxes first, where relief is claimed, and whether a filing or a certificate has to be in place before money moves rather than after. Most of the value is in the sequencing, because relief claimed late is usually relief recovered slowly. See international tax planning.
It depends on the country, and a day count is only ever the start. Many use a threshold in a tax year, some also look at averages across several years, and some have no day test at all and decide on where your home and life are. Two countries can both conclude you are resident, which is what the treaty tie-breaker exists to settle. Counting days without checking the tie-breaker is how people end up filing as resident nowhere. See the residency tie-breaker.



