The case of Re Marsella; Marsella v Wareham  VSC 312 (13 June 2018) concerned a claim by the widower of the willmaker for further provision from the estate of the deceased pursuant to Part IV of the Administration and Probate Act 1958.
On 15 August 2018, the Australian Tax Office (ATO) updated Practical Compliance Guideline (PCG) 2017/13 to extend its application to Division 7A sub-trust arrangements adopted in accordance with Practice Statement Law Administration 2010/4 (PS LA 2010/4) that mature in the 2019 income year.
In Ellison v Sandini Pty Ltd  FCAFC 44, the Full Federal Court overturned decision which allowed Mr Sandini (the Taxpayer) to benefit from Capital Gains Tax (CGT) marriage breakdown rollover for the transfer of shares to an entity controlled by his former spouse, pursuant to a Family Court Order (FCO).
As previously reported in June this year, the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) published the Draft Taxation Determination TD 2017/D1 altering their previous published interpretation of the meaning of “distributes” for the purposes of the family trust distribution tax (FTDT).
The draft tax determination has now been published in its final form as TD 2017/20, confirming that FTDT can apply where there is a “distribution” to a person who is not a beneficiary of the trust.
Practical Compliance Guideline (PCG) 2017/13 confirms the ability for a sub-trust arrangement using the 7-year option 1 investment agreement to be converted into a compliant loan, as described under section 109-N of Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (ITAA 36). The ability to refinance UPE for an additional 7 years may be advantageous to taxpayers that would otherwise have been required to repay such arrangements by either 30 June 2017 or 30 June 2018.
The Treasury Laws Amendment (Enterprise Tax Plan) Bill 2016 was recently passed by the Senate containing amendments to progressively reduce the corporate tax rate and increase the small business turnover thresholds for access to small business tax concessions.
In Behman v Behman  NSWCA 295, the Supreme Court of NSW confirmed the primary judge’s finding that the respondent was entitled to an equitable proprietary estoppel founded on the basis of the appellant’s representations of him having an interest in the family property.
n Fischer & Ors v Nemeske Pty Ltd & Ors ( HCA 11;  NSWSC 203), the High Court yesterday upheld the decisions of the Supreme Court of New South Wales and Court of Appeal.
The High Court’s decision confirmed that the resolution of a trustee of a discretionary trust to distribute an amount equal to the value of shares owned by the trustee to a beneficiary (Nemes) created a debt payable upon demand enforceable against the trustee by Nemes’ executor upon Nemes’ death.
On 16 February, 2016 Sladen Legal delivered a presentation on Asset Protection Strategies.
Topics presented were:
- Protecting distributions, gifts and loans including the use of gift and loan arrangements – by Rob Jeremiah;
- Super contributions and asset protection – including the bankruptcy clawback rules – by Phil Broderick;
- Secured intra-family group loans and the Family Court – by Daniel Smedley.
Further information on SMSFs and Asset Protection are available from a presentation delivered by Phil Broderick, on SMSFs and Asset Protection, as part of the Television Education Network’s 3rd Annual Asset Protection Conference, on 15 October 2015.
The very public dispute between mining magnate Gina Rinehart and her children over access to family wealth held in a Family Trust came to a head this year, when the NSW Supreme Court appointed one of Gina’s 4 children (Bianca) as the new trustee of the Family Trust in place of Gina.
The Family Trust, in effect, owned a 24% shareholding in Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd (HPPL) and HHPL owned all the shares in the company which has an interest in an iron ore mine at Hope Downs. Bianca and her brother, John, had issued court proceedings against their mother to remove her as trustee so they could access their share of the Trust’s assets.