The recent R.C. Land Management Pty Ltd v Commissioner of State Revenue [2026] VSC 49 has considered the nature of trusts for Victorian land tax purposes and whether the Commissioner can infer the existence of trusts and impose tax accordingly.

‍The Victorian Supreme Court in its recent decision has refused the taxpayer leave to appeal the VCAT decision of Tao v Commissioner of State Revenue [2024] VCAT 637.

This upholds the decision of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal that imposed landholder duty on a change of shareholder and director of a trustee company and confirms the drastic widening of the landholder duty change of control provisions which no longer requires the acquisition of units or shares or any rights similar to share or unit ownership.

What happens if I get a land tax assessment or a vacant residential land tax assessment that I do not agree with?  Can I appeal or object a land tax assessment or vacant residential land tax assessment?

The State Government has introduced a new bill to State Parliament to implement changes from the 2025-2026 Victorian State Budget.  Despite a promise of no new taxes or increased taxes, a new 50% penalty tax rate allows the State Revenue to impose higher penalties if it considers a taxpayer or their adviser has been “reckless”.

The 2025-2026 Victorian State Budget contains no new taxes or increased taxes, however previously announced changes have been confirmed – including increases to the congestion/car parking levy and the Emergency Services and Volunteers Fund levy.

A Victorian foreign purchaser who bought a property in her own name with funding provided by her Australian spouse was unsuccessful in a VCAT request for exemption from foreign purchaser stamp duty surcharge in Sim v Commissioner of State Revenue [2025] VCAT 349.

The decision of Malcolm v Commissioner of State Revenue [2025] VCAT 218 has considered the operation of the joint owners of land provisions for Victorian land tax purposes and confirmed that where two taxpayers own multiple parcels of land together, the joint owned land will be aggregated and the progressive scale of land tax rates will be applied only once.

The New South Wales Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal against a decision that a pipeline was dutiable for the purposes of the New South Wales landholder duty provisions in Conexa Sydney Holdings Pty Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2025] NSWCA 20.

The recent NCAT decision of T & A Skills Care Service Pty Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2025] NSWCATAD 18 demonstrates the importance of a taxpayer discharging its evidentiary burden in claiming the primary production exemption from land tax.

The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal decision of Caloutas as trustee for Caloutas Family Trust v Commissioner of State Revenue [2025] VCAT 82 has considered the interaction of bare or fixed trusts and the Victorian land tax trust surcharge provisions.

The Victorian Supreme Court decision of Aviation 3030 Pty Ltd (in liq) v Lao Holdings Pty Ltd [2024] VSC 800 has considered the ability for a company to recover landholder duty from the shareholders that had made the relevant acquisition.

The New South Wales Supreme Court has that Uber is not liable for payroll tax on payments made to drivers in Uber Australia Pty Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2024] NSWSC 1124.

A new tax will be imposed on both short stay service platforms and others who offer direct bookings of short stay accommodation. The levy will apply to stays less than 28 days but will exclude a homeowner’s principal place of residence or commercial residential premises (i.e. a hotel, motel etc).

On 8 August 2024, the Victorian Court of Appeal in Oliver Hume Property Funds (Broad Gully Rd) Diamond Creek Pty Ltd v Commissioner of State Revenue [2024] VSCA 175 confirmed that landholder duty applied on the separate acquisition of shares by 18 investors under a single capital raising.  The Court held that that capital raising amounted to substantially one arrangement and therefore was a relevant acquisition for landholder duty purposes.

The VCAT decision of Tao v Commissioner of State Revenue (Review and Regulation) [2024] VCAT 637 has confirmed the breadth of the Victorian landholder duty change of control provisions - despite no acquisition of units in a unit trust.

On 24 May 2024 the New South Wales Supreme Court held that landholder duty applied to value of a water carrying pipeline in Conexa Sydney Holdings Pty Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue (2024] NSWSC 628.

Employers and business entities must pay payroll tax in relation to wages paid to its employees. In addition, such entities must pay payroll tax in relation to contractors engaged under “relevant contracts”.

In our previous article, we discuss Revenue NSW’s announcement that it has determined that NSW surcharge purchaser duty and surcharge land tax are inconsistent with international tax treaties entered into by the Australian Federal Government and certain countries (Treaty Countries).

On 29 May 2023, Revenue NSW has updated its list of Treaty Countries to now include India, Japan, Norway and Switzerland.

On 21 February 2023 Revenue NSW announced that it has been determined that NSW surcharge purchaser duty and surcharge land tax (Surcharge Provisions) are inconsistent with international tax treaties entered into by the Australian Federal Government with New Zealand, Finland, Germany, and South Africa (Treaty Countries).

As discussed in Part 1 and Part 2 of this series, land tax is levied on the total taxable value of land held by a taxpayer in a particular jurisdiction. Land tax is then levied on a progressive graduated scale. That is, the higher the value of land that you own the higher the rate of land tax you pay.