In one sense, the High Court judgment in FCT v Carter [2022] HCA 10 (Carter) will come as welcome relief for tax advisors. That is, after dealing with the Australian Taxation Office’s (ATO) view of the ‘lore’ in the form of practical compliance guidelines, Carter turns minds back to the ‘law.’ Unfortunately, the law in Carter can result in unpleasant tax outcomes for certain trust beneficiaries.

Quoting Winston Churchill, we said that the Federal Court decision in Guardian AIT Pty Ltd ATF Australian Investment Trust v FCT [2021] FCA 1619 (Guardian AIT) concerning section 100A of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 is perhaps the “end of the beginning” of what may become increased clarity on the judicial and administrative approach to that section.

We considered the Australian Taxation Office’s (ATO) recently released guidance on section 100A here and here. Those documents give the clearest public indication to how the ATO interprets section 100A of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (ITAA 1936).

After our semi-serious opening statement on the Australian Taxation Office’s (ATO) recently released guidance on section 100A and unpaid present entitlements, this is one of a series of deep-dive articles on that guidance.

The question of when a taxpayer holds shares or any other investment on capital account or revenue account is fundamental in determining whether gains from the investment are capital in nature or ordinary income.

After our semi-serious opening statement on the Australian Taxation Office’s (ATO) recently released guidance on section 100A and unpaid present entitlements, this is one of a series of deep-dive articles on that guidance. These articles look at each of the ATO guidance products separately and then we discuss what the overall impact may be.

After our semi-serious opening statement on the Australian Taxation Office’s (ATO) recently released guidance on section 100A and unpaid present entitlements, this is one of a series of deep-dive articles on that guidance. These articles look at each of the ATO guidance products separately and then we discuss what the overall impact may be.

Amongst all the furore about the Australian Taxation Office’s (ATO) draft guidance on section 100A, on 23 February 2022, the ATO also issued draft guidance on determining when expenses incurred in establishing and administering an employee share scheme (ESS) are deductible.

After six years the ATO has released draft guidance on section 100A. Keeping with the draft theme, the ATO also released (updated) draft views on when an unpaid present entitlement held on sub-trust becomes financial accommodation for purposes of Division 7A.

Winston Churchill famously said “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”

We have previously discussed Addy v FCT [2021] HCA 34 here. In this case, the High Court unanimously allowed Ms Addy’s appeal and found that a UK working holiday visa holder, who was a tax resident of Australia, was entitled to the tax-free threshold and taxation at the rate that applied to Australian resident nationals.

16 December 2021 may, or may not, become the day from which the allocation of professional firm profits fundamentally changed.

The High Court recently allowed the taxpayer’s appeal in the case of Addy v FCT [2021] HCA 34 that concerned the so-called ‘backpacker tax’.

Overview

• Revenue losses and application of PCG 2016/16

Whether an employee has genuine restrictions on disposing of an option/right or share issued under an employee share scheme (ESS) can determine whether tax can be deferred, and until when, under the ESS.

Legal professional privilege (LPP) has once again become a topic of significant interest following the recent Full Federal Court decision of CUB Australia Holding Pty Ltd v FCT [2021] FCAFC 171 (CUB Decision) and the release of the draft LPP protocol from the Australian Taxation Office (ATO).

In 2014, the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) undertook the high-profile amnesty – Project DOIT – that allowed Australian taxpayers to voluntarily disclose (undeclared) offshore income in return for a range of ATO administrative concessions on the period-of-review, penalties, and shortfall interest.

The Full Federal Court decision in Advanced Holdings Pty Limited as Trustee for The Demian Trust v FCT [2021] FCAFC 135 highlights important principles of trust deed interpretation and the limitations of statutory provisions concerning the evidentiary force of company records.

It also serves as a “sobering bookkeeping reminder” to directors of small companies and corporate trustees to keep good records, and as always, read the trust deed!

The Federal Court case of FCT v Ross [2021] FCA 766 concerned several aspects of taxation administrative law. This is the third article in a series on issues in FCT v Ross and discusses the onus of proof of disproving a default assessment.

The Federal Court case of FCT v Ross [2021] FCA 766 concerned several aspects of taxation administrative law. This is the second article in a series on issues in FCT v Ross and discusses death not being a factor to remit penalties.