Données infra-provinciales

Suivre :

Données infra-provinciales
Votez :
Nombre de votes : 221
Veuillez prendre note que les commentaires sont modérés. Les commentaires peuvent prendre un certain temps avant d’apparaître en ligne. Pour de plus amples renseignements, veuillez consulter nos règles de participation.

Commentaires d'utilisateurs

Further to D. J. Roach's point, Greater detail in large population centres could be possible by amalgamating the 6 digit postal code contained on the T1 form. Cape Breton CMA, for example, is a large geography with many small communities contained within. Using community names would certainly provide some discrepancies, as your reply explains, but the 6 digit postal code would allow for specific geographies with minimal coding effort. The downside would be that postal codes do not necessarily line up with official geographies, like CMAs and CAs, but having the increased detail at finer community level would outweigh that drawback, in my opinion.


For some regions, the value under "Total - All Returns" does not match the Sum of (Under $10,000 - All Returns to $250,000 and over - All Returns).

What value does "Total - All Returns" represent?

It should match the Sum of (Under $10,000 - All Returns to $250,000 and over - All Returns).

If not please explain.

Thank you for your comment. The following response has been posted on behalf of the data owner : "We have undertaken a review of the tables and due to confidentiality and rounding rules applied to our data prior to publishing, the total count field does not always match the sum of the individual counts provided in the tables. It is important to note the total count is the actual number after data suppression and rounding, not the sum of the individual suppressed/rounded counts".

The data set aggregates all municipalities in the Vancouver Census Metropolitan Area ("CMA") into one record. This obscures the individual municipal income data rendering it impossible to find the income distribution for, say, the City of Burnaby, or an individual census data area ("CDA") within the CMA. And yet, a small community such as Enderby, BC, is included in the data set as a single record. Why? Is there a separate data set for each CMA (there must be)?

Thank you for your comment. The following response has been posted on behalf of Canada Revenue Agency :
"To alleviate the possibility of miscoding locality codes for taxpayers who filed returns with the wrong community name, CRA is presenting data for larger municipal areas by Census Metropolitan Area (CMA) and Census Agglomeration (CA) rather than the Census Division (CD) or Census Sub-division (CSD) level. This process eliminates municipalities from being either artificially inflated or deflated due to the miscoding. As an example, a taxpayer who lives in Mississauga but reports their community name as Toronto would be coded incorrectly. Smaller communities are presented at the CSD level because they are not part of a greater metropolitan area or agglomeration; they do not meet the population requirements to be included in a CMA or CA".

There is error in the 'Geographic Region' . The province should be 'Alberta', not 'Atlantic' because Atlantic is neither a province nor a territory.

Thank you for your comment. The following response has been provided on behalf of the dataset owner :
"The change has been made, thank you for reporting this error".