MAPLE GROOVE ◆ FINANCIAL
Case study · Interactive model · The legacy flow board

WHERE EVERY DOLLAR LANDS

One family balance sheet on the left; three claimants on the right, the children, the family's charitable fund, and the CRA, plus the lane the cash pool actually belongs in: new investments. Every strategy routes the same dollars differently, and this board shows the routing as one continuous motion. Press a strategy chip and the ribbons re-route mid-flight; slide any dial and the whole flow re-balances. The couple's real situation is already dialled in, rounded to protect the family.

Scenario setup · typed or slid, your call
MG·FLOW·01
The flow of the money window totals · versus doing nothing
MG·FLOW·02
The years, one by one tax plus clawback per plan year · dashed line = doing nothing
Every plan year, both spouses, every credit, for your own spreadsheet.
What this model assumes, and what it leaves out
  • 2026 tax year, Alberta residents, published parameters. Federal and Alberta brackets, the basic personal amounts, the age and pension credits, the dividend tax credit, the OAS recovery threshold of $95,323, and the donation credit tiers are the 2026 published figures. The federal donation credit's first $200 earns 14%, Alberta's earns 60%.
  • Figures are rounded on purpose. Balances, positions, and income figures default to representative values rounded to the nearest $5,000, derived from the real portfolio; the engine underneath is exact, so any figure can be typed in precisely.
  • RIF and LIF minimums are age-factor percentages of the January-1 balances (5.53% at 73, 5.40% at 72); the Alberta LIF maximum at 73 is 9.00%. Statement balances are treated as January-1 balances.
  • The dividend gross-up inflates the clawback base: eligible dividends count at 138% against the OAS recovery threshold, so $21,000 of dividends occupies about $29,000 of headroom. The OAS repayment is deducted before taxable income, and that offset is modelled.
  • Some OAS clawback is structural at these incomes. Optimally split, the couple's combined net income still sits about $21,000 above two full recovery thresholds, so the optimizer parks her exactly at the threshold and leaves the remainder with him (about $3,200 a year at the defaults). On his margin the effective rate runs near 45%: the 20.5% federal and 10% Alberta brackets plus the 15% recovery tax, one bracket line short of the 26% federal step. The split shrinks the bite; it cannot erase it.
  • Joint accounts are attributed 50/50. Pushing a sale's gain entirely to one spouse changes the sell-and-gift result by only about $135, because pension splitting re-equalizes in either direction; the model splits pension income by grid search each year, in whichever direction wins.
  • The donation math states its honest limits. A donor-advised fund gift is irrevocable; the donors hold grant-advisory privileges only, successor advisors can carry the family's giving forward, and whether an advisor can manage the fund's assets depends entirely on the provider's program. The receipt equals market value at transfer, gifted listed securities carry a 0% capital-gains inclusion, the annual claim limit is 75% of net income (never binding here), and unused credits carry forward five years.
  • Flow-through shares were priced and set aside. The couple was pitched them; the engagement modelled both formats honestly, and the edge came out thin (about 93 cents per dollar delivered at a realistic 30% all-in haircut, worse than plain cash near 33%) against a long risk list: junior-mining price risk, renunciation risk, a tax-shelter number on the return, and multi-year claim choreography. The income double-check confirmed the call, so the strategy came off the board; the full analysis lives in the engagement record.
  • A cheaper-cash lever exists and stays in the toolkit: selling only the low-gain fund units and pairing them with the household's one harvestable loss (about $4,700) raises comparable cash for roughly $1,100 of total tax cost, but it liquidates the diversifiers and leaves the concentration untouched, so it is not the lead recommendation.
  • The cash pool earns while it waits. The joint accounts hold about $265,000 of high-interest savings units earmarked for further investment; the model taxes that interest (the HISA rate dial, 2.1% default) as ordinary income split 50/50, flat across the window. Cash inside the registered accounts stays sheltered until withdrawal. The blend routes this pool into new investments rather than out as gifts; deployment timing and returns are not modelled, so the interest keeps accruing at the HISA rate in every plan year.
  • No growth, no reinvestment, flat incomes across the window. The model compares strategies over one to five years in today's dollars; forgone dividends on donated shares (about $3,600 a year on the lead position) are noted, not netted, because losing income is not a saving.
  • What is deliberately out: the alternative minimum tax beyond a flag, the OAS 10% uplift at 75, probate and estate administration, and provincial variations outside Alberta.
  • Estimates for education, not advice. Tax, donation, and investment outcomes depend on your own facts; get advice on your own numbers before acting. Maple Groove Financial · Calgary, Alberta.