When involved in a dispute with the Australian Taxation Office (ATO), dealing with the interest and penalties that may be imposed by the ATO in relation to a tax liability by seeking remission of those amounts, objecting, or having a reasonably arguable position opinion can be an important part of any dispute resolution strategy.
When involved in a dispute with the Australian Taxation Office (ATO), it is always in a clients’ best interest to seek to either resolve or narrow and define the relevant issues in dispute as quickly and efficiently as possible. We will always advise a client to seek to engage with the ATO to resolve a tax dispute, when possible.
We previously reported here and here on the Full Federal Court decision of Pintarich v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation  FCAFC 79 (Pintarich) and the unsuccessful application for special leave to the High Court.
The High Court in Commissioner of Taxation v Tomaras & Ors (2018) HCA 62 (Tomaras) has confirmed the Federal Circuit Court had jurisdiction to make orders altering the property interests of parties to a marriage substituting one party for the other party as sole debtor to the Commissioner of Taxation (Commissioner) in respect of income tax liabilities owed by the first party.
As previously reported in February 2018 (see here), the Commonwealth Government introduced into Parliament legislation that would require purchasers of taxable supplies of new residential premises or new subdivisions of potential residential land to pay either 1/11, or 7% if the margin scheme applies, of the purchase price to the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) at settlement.
As previously reported in November 2017 (see here), the Treasury Laws Amendment (Housing Tax Integrity) Bill 2017 introduced to the Parliament in October of that year dropped, without notice or explanation, reference to the proposed change to the CGT main residence exemption as that exemption applies to foreign residents.
On 7 February 2018 the Commonwealth Government introduced into Parliament legislation which if enacted will, subject to a transitional rule (discussed further below), require from 1 July 2018 that purchasers of taxable supplies of new residential premises or new subdivisions of potential residential land pay either 1/11, or 7% if the margin scheme applies, of the purchase price to the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) at settlement (the Legislation).
In the 2016-2017 Economic and Fiscal Outlook (http://www.budget.gov.au/2016-17/content/myefo/download/09-Appendix-A-Revenue.pdf), the Government announced that the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) would be allowed to report to credit reporting agencies the tax debt information of entities that don’t effectively engage with the ATO to manage those tax debts.
Following an announcement in the 2017 Budget (see our article here), the Government on 6 November 2017 released exposure draft legislation which if enacted will, subject to a transitional rule (below), require from 1 July 2018 that purchasers of taxable supplies of new residential premises or new subdivisions of potential residential land pay 1/11 of the purchase price directly to the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) at settlement. The 1/11 of the purchase price is irrespective of whether the margin scheme or otherwise applies to calculate the actual GST liability.
The strength of the Commissioner of Taxation’s (Commissioner) hand in raising taxation assessments, and the difficulties taxpayers face in challenging a taxation assessment other than under Part IVC of the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Administration Act) has again been illustrated in the Federal Court decision of Chhua v Commissioner of Taxation  FCA 1127 (Chhua).
On 25 January 2017, the Commissioner of Taxation (Commissioner) released Taxation Determination, TD 2017/1 (Determination) concerning whether intangible capital improvements made to a pre-CGT asset can be a separate asset for the purpose of subsections 108-70(2) or (3) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997.
This article discusses whether a new law administration practice statement will give trustees comfort that the Australian Taxation Office will not issue an assessment outside of the normal 2/4 year periods.
The Treasury has finally released long awaited draft exposure legislation regarding ‘look-through’ CGT treatment to earnout arrangements (Draft Bill).
On 12 May 2010, the former Assistant Treasurer, Senator the Hon. Nick Sherry disseminated a media release announcing the previous Government’s intention to amend the law to provide look-through capital gains tax (CGT) treatment for qualifying earnout arrangements entered into as part of the sale of business assets.