PF1準備急流はタイミング機能を高め、内容は理解しやすく、重要な情報を簡素化しました。 PF1テストブレインダンプは、より重要な情報をより少ない回答と質問で伝え、学習をリラックスして効率的にします。試験に不合格になった場合は、すぐに返金されます。National Payroll InstituteすべてのPF1試験トレントは、PF1試験に簡単かつ正常に合格するために多くの助けを与えます。 PF1試験問題を試してみてください。どれだけ優れているかがわかります。
| Section | Objectives |
|---|---|
| Payroll Records and Compliance Reporting | - Government reporting
|
| Payroll Fundamentals and Compliance Framework | - Payroll system overview in Canada
|
| Earnings, Deductions, and Taxation | - Types of earnings
|
>> National Payroll Institute PF1日本語版参考資料 <<
なぜ我々のNational Payroll InstituteのPF1ソフトに自信があるかと聞かれたら、まずは我々Topexamの豊富な経験があるチームです、次は弊社の商品を利用してNational Payroll InstituteのPF1試験に合格する多くのお客様です。National Payroll InstituteのPF1試験は国際的に認められてあなたはこの認証がほしいですか。弊社のNational Payroll InstituteのPF1試験のソフトを通して、あなたはリラクスで得られます。
質問 # 71
A 900-series Social Insurance Number is issued to:
正解：B
解説：
A SIN that begins with "9" (often called a 900-series SIN) is issued to temporary workers-people who are neither Canadian citizens nor permanent residents-and who are authorized to work in Canada. Service Canada's employer guidance explicitly states that SINs beginning with "9" are issued to temporary workers who are neither Canadian citizens nor permanent residents, and these SINs are valid only until the expiry date shown on the immigration document that authorizes the person to work in Canada.
Service Canada also advises employers to confirm that employees with a SIN starting with "9" remain authorized to work and that their immigration document has not expired.
So, options A-C are incorrect because a 900-series SIN is not for permanent residents ("landed immigrants"), not for Canadians whose SIN "expires," and not based on working outside Canada. It specifically signals temporary status tied to work authorization in Canada.
質問 # 72
Which of the following situations would not require an employer to issue a Record of Employment?
正解：C
解説：
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.
質問 # 73
An employee-employer relationship is deemed to exist when:
正解：B
解説：
For separation/termination-related payroll decisions (including whether a payment can qualify as a retiring allowance and whether the relationship has truly ended), the key question is whether the employee-employer relationship is still continuing. CRA training material on "special payments and the end of employment" explains that ongoing health insurance coverage or accrual of pensionable time are indicators the employer- employee relationship is continuing.
Among the choices, the most direct, reliable indicator is continued accrual of benefits in the organization's pension plan (option D). If pensionable service continues to accrue, the relationship is still considered to exist-meaning the relationship has not been fully severed for payroll/tax purposes.
Option C ("no expectation of work") points the other way: that is consistent with a relationship being severed, not continuing. Option B ("refuses the right to be recalled") is not a standard indicator of an ongoing relationship. Option A can occur in some arrangements, but the CRA specifically highlights pension accrual (and ongoing coverage) as strong evidence the relationship continues.
質問 # 74
What is the portion of a retiring allowance eligible to be transferred into a Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP) or a registered pension plan (RPP) tax free based on?
正解：B
解説：
The CRA sets out that the "eligible" portion of a retiring allowance that may be transferred directly to an RRSP/RPP under special rules is based on years of service before 1996 (and potentially an additional amount for certain pre-1989 years if specific pension/DPSP conditions are met). The CRA explains the eligible part is
$2,000 for each year (or part-year) of service before 1996, plus you may be able to transfer an additional
$1,500 for each year (or part-year) of service before 1989 where no employer pension/DPSP benefit was vested (or previously paid) for those years.
This is why the correct basis in the answer choices is the employee's years of service prior to 1996, not wages, age, or average earnings. Payroll needs this service history (including related employers where applicable) to correctly identify the eligible/non-eligible split and apply the right withholding and transfer reporting.
質問 # 75
Anthony earns $750.00 per week. He has a cash taxable benefit of $25.00 per week. Anthony is exempt from CPP contributions. Calculate the net taxable income for the week.
正解：
解説：
$775.00
Explanation:
"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.
質問 # 76
......
PF1学習教材を世界中に確実に紹介し、幸運とより良い機会を求めるすべての人々が自分の人生の価値を実現できるようにするという大胆な考えを持っています。したがって、PF1練習問題は、PF1試験に合格し、より良い未来を勝ち取るのに役立ちます。また、常に先駆的な精神を持ち続け、あなたの道を歩むプロジェクトに積極的に取り組みます。 PF1トレーニング資料は、その素晴らしい品質のためにあなたを決して失望させません。
PF1模擬練習: https://www.topexam.jp/PF1_shiken.html