The ordinary late filing penalty is worked out on a balance owing. For the 2025 tax year it is 5 per cent of that balance, plus 1 per cent for each full month the return is late, to a maximum of twelve months. A partnership does not pay the tax on its own income, so on a partnership information return there is usually no balance for that calculation to bite on. The exposure sits on the form and the delay instead. That is why an unfiled partnership year with no tax in it can still be expensive, and why the fact that nothing was owed is not an answer to the letter.
What is the late filing penalty for Form T5013?
- 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
The partnership information return and partner slips, including the reporting of non-resident partners. 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
The partnership information return and partner slips, including the reporting of non-resident partners.

The exception that catches people
The partnership pays no tax and determines everyone's. Allocation and source of income decided here flow into each partner's return in each country, and non-resident partners bring withholding questions the partnership has to answer.
Your next step
The full treatment — who it binds, the deadline, the penalty and the fixed fee — is on T5013 — partnership information return. If a letter prompted this, bring the letter — it usually contains the answer to half the questions.
Reviewed for the 2025 and 2026 filing seasons by Udit Gupta, International Tax, Cross-Border Tax & Transfer Pricing Expert, Legal Quotient Consultants. General information, not advice for your circumstances — call our 24-hour helpline to discuss your own position.
Cross-border tax case studies
Unfiled partnership returns found when a partner's overseas adviser asked for slips
A Canadian partnership had not filed its information return for several consecutive years. Nobody noticed until an overseas adviser acting for one partner asked for the slips supporting a foreign claim. We reconstructed the allocation for each open year from the partnership agreement and the accounts, reconciled the partners' capital accounts to the same figures, and prepared the outstanding returns and slips as one set. The engagement produced a filed history for every open year and a single allocation each partner could use in both countries, rather than one figure at home and a different one abroad.
Read how this one runsLate partnership return where a non-resident partner had never been addressed
The partnership had admitted a partner living outside Canada and carried on filing as though nothing had changed, then stopped filing altogether. We established what each allocated amount actually was, took the partner's residency evidence onto the file, and set out in writing how the non-resident share was to be treated on the way out of Canada. The outstanding returns were then filed on that basis. What the work produced was a documented withholding position for the non-resident share, and slips the partner could hand to their own adviser.
Read how this one runsReissued partner slips after allocations were filed against the wrong agreement
A partnership had filed on time, but on percentages taken from a superseded version of its agreement. Partners had already filed personal returns on the slips. We compared the executed agreement with the accounts, rebuilt the allocation for the years affected, and prepared amended slips together with a note explaining the change for each partner's file. The result was a corrected set of returns and slips, and amendments for the partners affected, filed in an order that left nobody reporting a figure the partnership had withdrawn.
Read how this one runsPartnership that received a demand to file before it came to us
The partnership arrived with a demand for outstanding information returns and an earlier penalty already on its record. We treated the demand as the fixed point in the timetable and worked backwards: the accounts were closed for each open year, the allocation settled with the partners, and the returns filed in date order. We also wrote up what had gone wrong in the bookkeeping that let the years accumulate. The engagement produced the filed returns, and a written account of the compliance history for the partners to hold.
Read how this one runsInvestment partnership that believed it sat below the filing requirements
The partners had been told the structure was too small to file and had relied on that for years. We tested the position against the filing requirements themselves rather than the recollection of them, and found the partnership inside them for part of the period and outside them for the rest. The outstanding years were prepared and filed; the years genuinely outside were documented as such, so the question would not be reopened at the next change of adviser. The output was a filed record for the years that needed one and a written basis for the years that did not.
Read how this one runsHistoric partnership filings cleared before a wind up and final distribution
A partnership was closing and the partners wanted their capital out, but several information returns were still outstanding and the final allocation could not be agreed until those existed. We prepared the overdue returns and slips first, in order, so each partner's running allocation was fixed, then dealt with the closing year. A partner was outside Canada, so the source of each closing amount had to be stated rather than assumed. The engagement produced a complete filing history to the final year and a final allocation the partners signed off.
Read how this one runsAccounts Reported Late When the Income Already Was
Where the income was on the return and only the account report was missed, a narrow route allows late filing with a reason attached. It is open only while no income is unreported and no examination has begun, which is why it is checked first.
Read how this one runsAn Estate Using Its Graduated Rates in Time
The favourable rate treatment an estate can access is time-limited and conditional, and it is lost by administration rather than by decision. The file identifies the window and the filings that keep it open.
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
- 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
Holding structures live or die on treaty access, beneficial ownership and substance — the MLI's principal-purpose test now sits over every arrangement.
A holding structure is only as good as its reporting. Foreign affiliates, accrued passive income and distributions each carry their own return, and the penalties on those attach to the form rather than to any tax being owed — so a structure that saves tax can still cost money if the information returns are late.
- Treaty access & PPT reviews
- FAPI & surplus computations
- Withholding-efficient routing
- Governance & substance
Asked next about Form T5013
They can, and sometimes they have to, but they are then filing on figures the partnership has not yet fixed. The allocation and the source of income are decided on the partnership return, and both flow straight into each partner's own return, in each country where a partner files. If the late return changes either, every partner's filing has to be amended behind it. Where a partner files in two countries an amendment is two amendments, on two timetables. It is usually cheaper to settle the allocation first and file once.
No. Repetition on its own is not what triggers the higher figures. For the 2025 tax year the higher rate applies where the CRA issued a demand to file and had already charged a late filing penalty in any of the three preceding tax years: 10 per cent of the balance owing, plus 2 per cent for each full month the return is late, to a maximum of twenty months. Both conditions have to be met. Twenty months is also not double twelve, so the higher figures are not simply the ordinary ones doubled. If a demand has been received, say so at the first meeting, because it changes the order of the work.
The penalty itself does not compound. Interest does: it compounds daily on an unpaid balance. On a partnership the two come apart, because the partnership is not the party holding the balance. The tax on partnership income is assessed on the partners, so interest accrues on their accounts while the slips they need are still outstanding. A partner who cannot see their allocation cannot pay the right amount, and the interest carries on regardless. That is the reason to get the slips dated and issued before arguing about anything else.
The same way as on a timely one, and that is the point: the late return still has to state the allocation and the source of each amount, and a non-resident partner's share brings withholding questions the partnership has to answer rather than pass along. Before the return goes in, the partnership needs the partner's residency evidence on file and a settled view of what each allocated amount actually is, because the character of the income and the partner's residence together decide how it is treated on the way out of Canada. Filing first and asking afterwards is how partnerships end up amending.
Yes, in almost every case. An overdue return filed on allocations that do not match the partnership agreement produces slips that are wrong, and those slips have usually been used by the time anyone notices. Each partner then carries a filing built on a figure the partnership has since changed. Reconstruct the allocation from the agreement and the accounts, agree it with the partners, then file. Fixing the order of the work costs a few weeks; fixing it afterwards costs an amended return for every partner, in every country where one of them files.
Yes, for almost anything it must do: file its returns, operate payroll, open a bank account, and act as a withholding agent on payments abroad. It is applied for on Form SS-4, and the part that stalls foreign owners is the responsible party — a real person with a US identification number is expected, and where none exists the application route and the supporting explanation both change. It is worth starting early because downstream registrations queue behind it. See EIN applications.
Not at full rates if the relief is claimed. The paying country usually withholds at source, capped by treaty where one applies and the paperwork is in place; your residence country then taxes the dividend and credits the foreign withholding against its own charge. Where the withholding exceeded the treaty rate because no declaration was filed, the excess is recovered from the paying country, not credited at home. See the dividends article.



