If you were hoping the Canada Revenue Agency’s (CRA) 100-day improvement plan would finally fix the ongoing mess of its services, you weren’t alone. Many Canadians waited with cautious optimism. But now that the “big reveal” has happened, it feels like waking up on Christmas morning to find a pair of socks instead of the shiny new bike you asked for.
Discontent
Let’s be clear — it’s not about hating the CRA. Most people understand the CRA’s job is tough. Tax laws in Canada are complex, constantly evolving, and difficult to manage. But that doesn’t mean the people who rely on the agency should settle for poor service or half-hearted attempts at improvement.
Over the past few years, the CRA’s budget has ballooned. That should’ve translated into better service, right? Sadly, that hasn’t happened. Call centres are still almost impossible to reach, and when you do manage to get someone on the line, there’s a decent chance they don’t have the proper training to help you.
And with more staff working from home, many have questioned the quality and professionalism of interactions — often distracted, uncoordinated, and inconsistent.
Disconnect
The CRA has a real problem: a growing gap between what Canadians need and what it delivers. The so-called “100-day plan,” launched after Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne demanded action, promised to close that gap. The public was told the CRA would enhance its call centre and taxpayer services within 100 days. A good idea in theory, but in reality, it barely scratched the surface.
What we got instead was a shiny dashboard, some surface-level tweaks, and lots of noise about answering 70% of calls. But is that really a win? If three out of ten people still can’t get through, how is that a success? Especially when those three people are likely trying to meet deadlines, avoid penalties, or fix incorrect assessments.
Symptoms
Instead of digging deep into why the CRA’s systems are breaking down, the plan focused on treating the symptoms. It’s like putting a band-aid on a broken bone — it may look better on the outside, but the problem is still there, lurking beneath the surface.
Take audits, for example. They’re often poorly conducted. The agents assigned sometimes lack the necessary training, and the resulting reassessments can be so far off the mark that taxpayers are forced to object. That takes more time, energy, and money — for both the CRA and the taxpayer. It’s a lose-lose situation.
Objections have spiked in recent months. Why? Because more and more Canadians are being hit with assessments that don’t hold water. And when they push back, the whole system gets even more bogged down.
Distraction
All of this was happening behind the scenes until the Auditor General’s scathing report came out. Suddenly, it all made sense. The timing of the 100-day plan wasn’t random — it was reactive. The CRA and the Finance Minister likely saw the report in advance and rushed to get ahead of the fallout. It wasn’t about genuine service improvement. It was about optics. Politics, once again, took the front seat.
Disappointment
On the morning of December 11 — the final day of the plan — Canadians were met not with change, but with self-praise. The CRA released a statement proudly pointing to minor improvements. There was no real accountability, no real roadmap for lasting change. Just another press release, another pat on the back, another shiny object.
Imagine calling the CRA with high hopes, only to find the same long wait times and limited help. That’s what happened. People tried phones, apps, and websites — only to realize not much had changed. No real breakthrough, no long-term solution, just a temporary patch.
Disconnect
This is about more than long wait times. It’s about trust. Canadians fund the CRA. We follow tax rules, file on time, and expect the agency to deliver basic services in return. Instead, we get half-measures, poorly trained staff, broken systems, and outdated processes.
What Canadians want is structural reform — not just a 100-day marketing campaign. We want agents who are properly trained. We want a call centre that actually works. We want a CRA that sees taxpayers as people, not numbers in a queue. We want a system that’s reliable, respectful, and responsive.
Table
Here’s a look at what was promised versus what was delivered:
| 100-Day Promise | Actual Outcome |
|---|---|
| Improve call centre access | Answer rate hit only 70% |
| Better-trained agents | No evidence of comprehensive training |
| Structural improvements | None reported |
| Transparency | Dashboard launched, but lacks depth |
| Long-term strategy | Only vague mentions, no real plan |
Desire
Here’s the truth: nobody’s rooting against the CRA. In fact, the loudest critics often care the most. The demand for better service isn’t based on dislike — it’s based on hope. A hope that the CRA can one day be an agency that listens, learns, and improves, without needing a flashy 100-day gimmick to do it.
Canadians deserve better. And maybe the CRA could take a page out of Santa’s book: deliver quietly, consistently, and with no need for applause.
FAQs
What was the CRA’s 100-day plan?
A short-term plan to improve call centre services.
Did the CRA improve call centres?
Only slightly; 70% of calls were answered.
Why are CRA audits criticized?
They’re often poorly done with incorrect reassessments.
Was the 100-day plan successful?
Not really; it focused on symptoms, not causes.
What do Canadians want from CRA?
Reliable, respectful, and well-trained taxpayer service.
