The claimant was entitled to IRBs. The insurer argued that it was entitled to deduct the claimant’s post-accident income from his personal business. The claimant argued that he did not “earn” the income from his business because he was not actively engaged in the business. Adjudicator Watt concluded that the claimant was actively involved in the operations of his business, even though he did hire additional help. The adjudicator also held that the SABS did not make a distinction between “earned income” and “passive income;” any net income earned post-accident was to be deducted from the claimant’s weekly IRB. Because the claimant’s post-accident income was over $120,000, his IRB entitlement was $0 per week.
