PF1 Payroll Fundamentals 1Exam Questions and Answers

An expense reimbursement is paid to repay an employee for actual business expenses the employee incurred while performing their job (for example, meals while travelling on business, supplies purchased for work, etc.). CRA’s taxable benefits guidance distinguishes reimbursements from allowances: an allowance is usually a predetermined amount paid without the employee having to support the expense with receipts, while a reimbursement is tied to actual costs.

That distinction matters because reimbursements are generally not compensation for work performed (so they are not “earnings”), and they are not “benefits” in the sense of a good or service provided by the employer (though CRA notes that benefits can include reimbursements of personal expenses—so payroll must still ensure the reimbursement is for business use and properly supported).

Option A correctly describes reimbursements. Option B is typically an allowance (for example, a vehicle allowance for using personal property). Option C describes earnings (wages/salary). Option D describes benefits (value of something provided or paid for on the employee’s behalf).

In ROE administration, the key concept is whether the employment relationship is still “active” (that is, whether there is an ongoing expectation the employee will work again). Service Canada’s ROE guidance ties ROE issuance to an interruption of earnings and specifically identifies situations where an employee is no longer on the employer’s active employment list (for example, no expectation of future work) as a trigger for issuing an ROE.

Options A and B describe circumstances that can still align with an ongoing employment relationship. For example, employees may remain eligible for certain benefits after a last day worked, and a right to recall means the employer may still consider the employee attached to the workplace (often still “active” depending on the arrangement). In contrast, when there is no expectation of work to be performed, the relationship is effectively ended for ROE purposes, and the employer generally proceeds with separation reporting and ROE completion based on the interruption of earnings rules.

Service Canada’s ROE Guide is clear that vacation pay paid because of separation (termination/layoff) must be reported in Block 17A – Vacation pay.

But it doesn’t stop there. Vacation pay is generally insurable earnings, so when you enter insurable earnings in Block 17A, you must also add those amounts into Block 15B (Total insurable earnings) and into Block 15C, Pay Period 1 (P.P. 1) as applicable. The ROE Guide explicitly states: when you enter insurable earnings in Blocks 17A/17B/17C, you must also add them to the totals in Blocks 15B and 15C (P.P. 1 field)—and it gives the example that vacation pay paid on separation must be added to 15B and 15C because it is insurable.

Therefore, vacation pay on termination is recorded in Blocks 15B, 15C P.P. 1, and 17A (option C).

The CRA defines a retiring allowance (also called severance pay) as an amount paid to an employee when or after they retire or lose their job, in recognition of long service or for the loss of office or employment. This matches option A.

The other options are specifically not retiring allowances under CRA guidance. The CRA states a retiring allowance does not include salary, wages, bonuses, or overtime, which rules out bonus or incentive pay and accumulated overtime. The CRA also states it does not include payments for accumulated vacation leave not taken before retirement, which rules out vacation pay.

This classification matters in payroll because retiring allowances have distinct rules: for example, they are not subject to CPP or EI deductions, and part of a retiring allowance may be eligible for direct transfer to an RRSP/RPP under special rules (based on pre-1996 service).

An ROE is required when an employee experiences an interruption of earnings, such as 7 consecutive calendar days with no work and no insurable earnings (the “7-day rule”), or when earnings fall below 60% of regular weekly earnings for specific reasons (the “60% rule”). That means a 6-week unpaid leave (A) typically triggers an interruption of earnings, and a drop to 40% of normal earnings (B) meets the “below 60%” threshold (when due to the listed leave reasons). A layoff with no recall (D) also triggers an interruption of earnings under the 7-day rule.

However, Service Canada lists a special situation for a change in ownership: the former employer does not have to issue ROEs if (1) there is no actual break in the employee receiving earnings, and (2) payroll records are available to the new owner and the new owner agrees to issue a single ROE covering both periods if needed. That is exactly option C, so no ROE is required in that scenario.

The payment type most clearly not subject to all statutory deductions is directors’ fees. CRA guidance on directors’ fees shows they are treated as a special payment with distinct deduction rules, and (depending on the situation) they may not have CPP, EI, and income tax all apply in the same way as normal employment earnings.

By contrast, retroactive adjustments and performance bonuses are treated as taxable remuneration where CRA’s tools (like PDOC) calculate CPP contributions, EI premiums, and income tax on those payments (up to annual maximums).

“Vacation pay when no time was taken” is also treated as a non-periodic payment and is included in CRA payroll deduction formulas as a type of amount on which statutory deductions are calculated (again, subject to annual maximums for CPP/EI).

So, among the options listed, directors’ fees are the one that would not necessarily be subject to all statutory deductions in the standard way.

For CRA automobile benefit purposes (standby charge on an employer-owned automobile), the “cost” used is the capital cost, which includes more than just the sticker price. CRA guidance states the cost includes the trade-in amount (if applicable), additions, and GST/HST and PST as part of the cost base used in the standby charge calculation.

Option D is the best match because it includes vehicle options/accessories, sales taxes, and additions that add to depreciation value. Importantly, CRA also notes that certain specialized equipment added to meet the requirements of a disabled person or employment (examples include heavy-duty suspension and power winches) is not considered part of the automobile’s cost for standby charge purposes. This directly rules out options A and C, since they treat specialized equipment as part of capital cost. Option B is incorrect because CRA includes sales taxes (GST/HST and PST) in the cost base.

In Block 6 (Pay period type), Service Canada instructs employers to enter the employee’s actual pay period type—one of the standard types such as weekly, biweekly, semi-monthly, monthly, or 13 pay periods a year.

Service Canada identifies a special rule only for employees “paid solely on commission or on salary plus irregularly paid commission”: in those cases, the employer must use a weekly pay period and average earnings using the weekly averaging formula.

Because this question specifies salary plus regularly paid commission (not irregularly paid commission), the “special situation” rule does not apply. Therefore, you enter the pay period type that matches the employer’s normal payroll cycle for that employee (for example, weekly, biweekly, semi-monthly, monthly, etc.).

In Quebec, employees must complete a Quebec-specific source deductions form so the employer can calculate Québec income tax to withhold. Revenu Québec identifies Form TP-1015.3-V (Source Deductions Return) as the form employees complete and provide to their employer/payer for this purpose. It is part of the onboarding/payroll setup process in Quebec and is used to determine personal tax credits and any additional withholding instructions for Québec provincial income tax.

The other options are not the standard Quebec source deductions return for new employees: T1213 is a CRA form used to request a reduction in tax deductions at source (federal), TD1-AB is a provincial TD1 for Alberta (not Quebec), and T2222 is not the Quebec source deductions return. From a payroll communication standpoint, the employer should request both the applicable federal TD1 and the Quebec TP-1015.3-V, then retain them on file to support accurate withholding calculations.

A retiring allowance is treated as a lump-sum payment for payroll withholding purposes. When part of a retiring allowance is transferred directly to an RRSP/RPP, CRA guidance indicates you do not withhold income tax on the transferred amount (up to the employee’s available limit), because it is not paid to the employee in cash.

Step 1: Determine the portion paid directly to the employee (non-eligible portion):

$25,000 − $15,000 transferred to RRSP = $10,000 paid/remaining.

Step 2: Apply CRA lump-sum withholding rates (outside Quebec):

For total lump-sum payments $5,001 to $15,000, the withholding rate is 20%.

Step 3: Calculate tax to withhold on $10,000:

$10,000 × 20% = $2,000.00.

So the correct option is B ($2,000.00).

“Net taxable income” for payroll withholding purposes is the amount of income on which income tax is calculated for the pay period. It generally starts with the employee’s gross taxable earnings for the period (regular wages plus any taxable benefits/allowances that must be included in income), then subtracts only those deductions that are deductible for tax at source (for example, certain registered pension plan contributions, union dues, etc., if applicable). A cash taxable benefit is treated like additional remuneration and is included in taxable income. (canada.ca)

Here, Anthony’s weekly taxable earnings are:

$750.00 wages + $25.00 cash taxable benefit = $775.00.

Being exempt from CPP contributions affects whether CPP is deducted, but CPP is not a “net taxable income” subtraction in this question (and in any case, no CPP is being deducted). The question also does not mention any other tax-deductible payroll deductions (like RPP contributions), so there is nothing to subtract from taxable earnings.

Therefore, Anthony’s net taxable income for the week is $775.00.

In Saskatchewan (outside Quebec), EI premiums are deducted at the 2026 employee EI premium rate of $1.63 per $100 of insurable earnings (1.63%).

CRA guidance confirms that wages in lieu of termination notice are subject to EI premiums, and to determine statutory deductions you include the wages in lieu with the regular income (if any) for the pay period.

Step 1: Determine total insurable earnings in the final pay (assuming both amounts are insurable and the annual maximum won’t be exceeded):

$12,523.00 + $1,080.00 = $13,603.00.

Step 2: Calculate EI premium:

$13,603.00 × 1.63% = $13,603.00 × 0.0163 = $221.7289, which rounds to $221.73.

So, the EI premium to deduct from Feraz’s pay for this combined payment is $221.73.

Payroll deductions are typically applied in a priority order to ensure the employer meets mandatory legal obligations first and avoids creating liability. Standard Canadian payroll training materials commonly present five categories withheld in this order: (1) statutory deductions, (2) legal deductions, (3) union deductions, (4) company-compulsory deductions, and (5) voluntary deductions.

Statutory deductions (CPP/QPP, EI, income tax, and where applicable NWT/Nunavut payroll tax) have top priority because employers are legally required to deduct and remit them.

Legal deductions (such as CRA requirements to pay/garnishments) are next because they are enforced by law and can create employer liability if not followed.

Union deductions follow where required by a collective agreement.

Company-compulsory deductions (for example, required benefit premiums) come after those.

Voluntary deductions (charity, savings plans, etc.) are last and only taken if funds remain.

Therefore, option D is the correct order.

An expense reimbursement is a repayment to an employee for business costs they already paid personally (for example, meals, mileage, supplies), typically supported by receipts or an expense report. CRA’s guidance explains that a reimbursement is a payment made to repay amounts the employee spent while conducting the employer’s business, and that a reasonable reimbursement is generally not included in the employee’s income.

That’s why reimbursements are generally not part of “earnings” for payroll calculations—they are not compensation for work performed; they are repayment of a business expense. This differs from an allowance, which is usually a fixed amount paid without requiring receipts; allowances are often taxable unless a specific CRA exception applies.

So the correct term for “dollar amounts paid to cover job expenses incurred, but not considered earnings” is expense reimbursements (option D). Payroll best practice is to ensure reimbursements are properly documented and reasonable to support non-taxable treatment.

The CRA defines a death benefit as the gross amount of any payment made on or after the death of an employee to recognize the employee’s service in an office or employment. It can be paid to a surviving spouse/common-law partner, heir, or the estate.

This is different from amounts the employee already earned before death (for example, regular wages up to the date of death, or vacation pay that was accrued/earned). CRA guidance treats wages and employment income earned up to and including the date of death as amounts to be reported on a T4 slip, not as a death benefit.

It’s also different from a life insurance payout from an insurer (which is not an employer-paid “death benefit” for payroll reporting purposes). The payroll impact is that a qualifying death benefit is generally reported as a special payment (often on a T4A), following CRA rules for deductions and reporting of death benefits.

A defined benefit (DB) pension plan promises a future pension benefit based on a formula (for example, service and earnings). Because the benefit is defined, the plan must ensure it is adequately funded to meet future liabilities. That requires actuarial valuations—professional studies that forecast future obligations and determine required contributions. Regulators describe DB plan funding as being based on actuarial calculations and require administrators to file actuarial valuation reports to establish funding and contribution requirements.

A defined contribution (DC) plan does not promise a specific future pension amount; contributions are defined, and the retirement outcome depends on investment performance—so it does not require the same ongoing actuarial funding valuations for promised liabilities. An RRSP is an individual savings plan, not an employer DB plan requiring actuarial funding reports.

Therefore, the correct answer is Defined benefit pension plan (option A).

The CRA defines a benefit as something the employee receives when the employer pays for or gives something that is personal in nature (a good or service), either directly to the employee or through a third party. CRA’s T4130 guide describes a benefit as a good or service you give (or arrange for) such as free use of employer property, and it is the value of that benefit that may need to be included in the employee’s income if taxable.

This matches the wording in the question: “dollar values attributed to something the employer has either provided…or paid for…on an employee’s behalf.” By contrast, earnings are pay for work performed (salary, wages, commissions). Allowances are fixed amounts paid to help cover anticipated expenses without receipts (often taxable unless an exception applies). Expense reimbursements repay actual business expenses (typically supported by receipts) and are generally not treated as earnings.

So the correct classification is Benefits.

Termination notice requirements come from the employment standards legislation that applies to the workplace, which is tied to the jurisdiction where the employee works (province/territory), unless the workplace is federally regulated. The Government of Canada explicitly directs employers and employees to consult the employment standards for the province or territory of work if they are not in a federally regulated industry.

Within a given jurisdiction, the minimum notice (or pay in lieu) is typically based on the employee’s length of continuous employment/service. For example, under the Canada Labour Code (federally regulated workplaces), required notice increases with service (and can be replaced with wages in lieu), showing service length is a core driver of notice entitlements.

That’s why “where they live” is not the deciding factor for notice rules: the governing employment standards are based on the jurisdiction of employment (where the work is performed / the employment is regulated), and the employee’s length of service under that jurisdiction’s rules.