Am I Still a Canadian Tax Resident? The Order the Tests Actually Run In

It turns on your residential ties, and the tests run in a set order. Factual residence comes first: if you kept a home, a spouse or partner, or dependants in Canada, you’re probably still a resident, and nothing downstream changes that unless the US also claims you. Only if you’re not factually resident does the 183-day sojourner rule apply. The treaty tie-breaker starts only where the US claims you too, and it runs on top of where the first two tests left you. If it lands on the US, section 250(5) deems you a non-resident, and that’s a departure event.

What order do the residency tests actually run in?

Four tests. Test 1 gates test 2, and the treaty tests run on top of whatever those two produce, but only if the US claims you too. Factual residence comes first, decided by your ties to Canada. The 183-day rule reaches only someone who isn’t already factually resident. Steps 3 and 4 then sit on top: the tie-breaker’s core population is people who are still Canadian factual residents, and section 250(5) only reaches someone who would otherwise be resident here. Skip the order and you land on the wrong answer, which is how the wrong-departure-year filing happens.

Order	Test	What it asks	Source	What happens if it applies
1	Factual residence (ordinarily resident)	Did you keep significant residential ties: home, spouse or partner, dependants?	ITA 250(3); Folio 1.10-1.11	You’re still a Canadian resident. Stop here unless the treaty later bumps you out.
2	Deemed residence (sojourner)	Only if not factually resident: did you sojourn 183 days or more this calendar year?	ITA 250(1)(a); Folio 1.30-1.32	Deemed resident for the whole year, taxed on worldwide income all year.
3	Treaty tie-breaker	Only if the US also claims you: which country wins on permanent home, then centre of vital interests, then habitual abode, then citizenship?	Treaty IV(1)-(2); Folio 1.40-1.51	If the US doesn’t claim you, this never runs, and your status stays whatever steps 1 and 2 made it.
4	Section 250(5) deemed non-resident	Did the tie-breaker point to the US?	ITA 250(5); Folio 1.38	You’re a non-resident for all purposes from that date, which is itself a departure event.

Residency is the threshold that decides everything downstream: Canadian tax is charged on the taxable income of every person resident in Canada at any time in the year (Income Tax Act section 2(1)). For a resident, that reaches worldwide income. If you were resident for only part of the year, section 114 confines the reach to the part of the year you were resident here (ITA section 114; Folio 1.1).

What makes you a factual resident, and why isn’t it just a day count?

Your residential ties, weighed as facts about your life in Canada. A reference to a person resident in Canada includes anyone who was “ordinarily resident” in Canada (ITA section 250(3)). The CRA reads that through residential ties, and unless you sever all significant ties on leaving, you stay a factual resident while abroad. The ties that “almost always” count are your dwelling place, your spouse or common-law partner, and your dependants (Folio S5-F1-C1, paragraphs 1.10 to 1.11). It’s the step people skip when they assume the flight date did the work.

Tie type	What’s in it	Weight at step 1
Primary	Dwelling place, spouse or common-law partner, dependants	Usually significant; an arm’s-length lease can displace the dwelling on all the circumstances (Folio 1.12-1.13)
Secondary	Personal property, social and economic ties, a licence, health coverage, a passport	Weighed collectively; one alone rarely decides (Folio 1.14)

A single secondary tie would rarely make you factually resident on its own (Folio 1.14).

The dwelling place has a carve-out worth knowing. If you lease the Canadian home to a third party on arm’s-length terms, the CRA weighs all the circumstances, including who the tenant is, the real estate market when you left, and why you went, and it may treat that home as a significant tie only alongside your other ties (Folio 1.12). Renting the place out is common on departure, and it carries its own filing track: the NR6 and section 216 route for a Canadian rental after you move.

Isn’t the 183-day rule the test?

No. The 183-day rule is a backstop, and it only reaches people who aren’t factually resident already. Someone in that position who sojourns in Canada for 183 days or more in a calendar year is deemed resident for the entire year (ITA section 250(1)(a)); deemed residence has no application until you’ve been found not to be factually resident (Folio 1.30). It then reaches worldwide income for the whole year, well beyond the part of it you were actually here (Folio 1.32).

When does the treaty tie-breaker actually kick in?

Only when the US also claims you as a resident under its own law, so both countries claim you at once. It exists to resolve that dual residence, and it engages only where, under paragraph 1, you’re a resident of both countries (Canada-US treaty Article IV(2)). Paragraph 1 defines a resident as a person liable to tax there by domicile, residence, citizenship, or a similar criterion (Article IV(1)). The CRA reads “liable to tax” as the fullest form of taxation, meaning full liability on worldwide income (Folio 1.40 to 1.41).

Where it does run, it cascades in a set order (Article IV(2)(a) to (d)).

• permanent home
• centre of vital interests
• habitual abode
• citizenship
• a competent-authority agreement

The courts have held that green-card holders are resident in the US for paragraph 1 purposes (Folio 1.44), so a green-card holder with lingering Canadian ties is a dual resident and the tie-breaker runs. If the US doesn’t yet tax you on your worldwide income, the tie-breaker never starts, and steps 1 and 2 stand as your answer.

If the tie-breaker points to the US, what does section 250(5) do to me?

It deems you a non-resident of Canada from that date, and that date is itself a departure event. Where you’d be resident here but a treaty makes you a resident of the other country and not of Canada, section 250(5) deems you not resident here, notwithstanding any other provision of the Act (ITA section 250(5)). It overrides both factual and deemed residence, and it does more than relabel you: from that date you’re a non-resident for every purpose of the Act, the ceasing-to-be-resident rules apply including the deemed disposition of your property, and Part XIII withholding starts (Folio 1.38).

• non-resident for all purposes of the Act
• the ceasing-to-be-resident rules from that date, including the deemed disposition of property
• Part XIII withholding

The mechanics live elsewhere: the deemed disposition that fires the moment you become a non-resident: T1161, T1243, and the math.

If you want the CRA’s own read, Form NR73 is the optional route to an opinion on your status. In most cases the CRA can give one from the form, that opinion is based entirely on the facts you provide on it, and it isn’t binding and can be reviewed later (Folio 1.54 to 1.55). Filing it is your call; here’s whether to file Form NR73 at all, and what the CRA’s opinion is worth.

That split-household case has a guide of its own: if your spouse stayed in Canada and you didn’t, the filing question changes on both sides at once.

What should I do next?

Run the four tests in order for your own facts, and be honest about step 1: what did you actually keep in Canada? If you kept a primary tie, you’re a Canadian resident at step 1, and only the treaty can change that, which needs the US to claim you too. If you severed everything, you’re a non-resident at step 1 and the departure event is already behind you. Step 4 is the case where you’d still be resident here but the treaty sends you south.

Confirm which step you land on before you file, because the wrong step produces the amendment. Then follow the step-by-step tax checklist.

This guide is general information, not tax advice for your specific situation. Which points apply, and how, depends on your facts.