The client
A self-employed consultant in Sept-Iles buying a $305,000 home at 15% down, paid in part by an offshore client in cryptocurrency, with no CAD banking relationship of the client's own.
Purchase price
$305,000, Sept-Iles
15% down, insured
Income source
Self-employed consulting, paid partly in cryptocurrency
Two-year-average qualifying income
$8,100/month
Other debt
$235/mo car loan
The problem
An offshore client with no Canadian banking relationship paid part of its invoices in cryptocurrency -- and converting that cryptocurrency to cash had to answer two different questions for the same file: was this real, documentable business income, and was the down payment's source of funds clean.
Two questions, one conversion
- ▸The income question: was the cryptocurrency payment genuine, recurring consulting income, verifiable the way any other invoice would be
- ▸The source-of-funds question: once converted to cash, could the down payment be traced back to a legitimate, documented origin
- ▸Neither question could be answered from a bank statement alone -- the cash simply appeared as a deposit from a Canadian exchange, with nothing showing where it came from
The consultant had done nothing unusual for their business. The file just needed the one document that could answer both questions at once.
The numbers
Once the conversion trail was documented, the insured purchase's own math followed directly from the confirmed income.
| The insured purchase, income and source confirmed | Amount |
|---|---|
| Base mortgage (85% of purchase price) | $259,250 |
| CMHC premium (2.80% at 85% LTV) | +$7,259 |
| Total insured mortgage | $266,509 |
| Ratio check at the qualifying rate | Figure |
|---|---|
| Payment at the qualifying rate (7.20%), 25 years | $1,900/mo |
| GDS (payment + $295 tax + $120 heat) ÷ $8,100 income | 28.6% |
| TDS (GDS numerator + $235 car loan) ÷ $8,100 income | 31.5% |
28.6% and 31.5% sit well inside CMHC's 39% GDS and 44% TDS maximums -- once the crypto conversion trail confirmed the income, the file cleared with room to spare.
The solution
A courtier hypothecaire licensed under Quebec's Act respecting the distribution of financial products and services treated the crypto conversion as the single document trail that could satisfy both the income file and the source-of-funds review.
First, pulled the exchange's own trade-history export, showing the cryptocurrency received for services, the date and rate of its conversion, and the resulting CAD proceeds.
Second, matched that export against the wallet-to-bank transfer record, showing those exact proceeds landing in the consultant's own bank account.
Third, used the same document set for the two-year income average, treating the converted crypto payments as ordinary invoiced consulting income once their origin and conversion were both documented, consistent with the same FINTRAC client-identification standard applied to any source-of-funds review.
The outcome
The purchase funded insured at 28.6% GDS and 31.5% TDS, with Quebec's welcome tax on the $305,000 purchase coming to $2,736.
Both ratios sit well inside CMHC's 39% GDS and 44% TDS maximums; the file was never close to either ceiling once the income and source-of-funds questions were both resolved.
What to take from this file
- 01Cryptocurrency paid for genuine services is business income, not a mystery deposit -- but only once its origin is documented. An exchange conversion, by itself, tells a lender nothing about where the crypto came from.
- 02One conversion trail can answer both the income question and the source-of-funds question. Pulling the exchange's own trade history and the wallet-to-bank record together avoids duplicating the same explanation twice.
- 03Corroborate crypto income against the underlying client invoices. The conversion shows the money moved; the invoice shows why it was paid in the first place.
- 04FINTRAC's client-identification and source-of-funds obligations apply the same way to a crypto-funded deposit as to any other large, unexplained deposit. Document it properly rather than treat it as a workaround.
Sources
Every regulatory figure in this file traces to one of these primary sources. Client details and anything that varies by lender are illustrative, as flagged below.
- ▸CMHC — Purchase (Mortgage Loan Insurance) — default-insurance premium schedule by LTV band (25-year amortization).
- ▸CMHC — CMHC Home Start — minimum down payment tiers (5%/10%) and the $1.5M insured price cap.
- ▸OSFI — Minimum qualifying rate for uninsured mortgages — the minimum qualifying rate — greater of contract rate + 2% or 5.25%.
- ▸CMHC — CMHC Reviews Underwriting Criteria — GDS 39% / TDS 44% maximums and the 600 credit-score floor for insured files.
- ▸Provincial/territorial mortgage-broker legislation fetched directly (bclaws.gov.bc.ca, legisquebec.gouv.qc.ca, fcaa.gov.sk.ca, web2.gov.mb.ca, nslegislature.ca, assembly.nl.ca) plus FCNB's own site for NB and CanLII's index for PE — see notes for per-province method — provincial mortgage regulators and licence titles.
- ▸Gouvernement du Québec — Droits sur les mutations immobilières — Quebec's transfer duties ('welcome tax') — 2026 indexed brackets.
Illustrative in this file — lender-specific, not rules:
- ▸5.20% contract rate — rates move daily; not a quote.
Authority & provenance
How this case file was built
We publish the origin, the verification method and the reviewer for every case file, so you can judge how far to trust it before you rely on it with a client.
Where it comes from
Derived from files handled by Treadstone’s fulfillment desk and from scenarios contributed by partner brokerages. Names, employers, exact amounts and dates are changed so no client or file is identifiable.
Provenance: Composite — a pattern seen repeatedly on fulfilled files, not a single transaction.
What is verified
Every regulatory figure traces to a primary source listed above and was checked against it on the date shown. The arithmetic is recomputed by machine on every rebuild.
Anything that varies by lender is labelled illustrative rather than stated as a rule.
Who reviewed it
Reviewed for Canadian regulatory accuracy before publication, and re-checked whenever a cited rule changes.
Reviewed by: Nicholas Parson, Treadstone Associates — reviews every case file before publication.
This case file is professional reference material for licensed mortgage professionals. It is not advice to a borrower, and it is not a lender commitment. Insurer rules, qualifying rates and provincial taxes change — confirm the current position with the insurer, regulator or lender before you rely on any figure here in a live file.