Ancillary Funds 2000-2012

Private Ancillary Funds (PAFs) are trusts to which Australian taxpayers can make tax deductible donations, enabling families, businesses and individuals to create a tax effective closely held charitable trust, whose sole purpose must be to provide money, property or benefits to deductible gift recipients. This Current Issues Information Sheet charts the movement in approval of PAFs, donations made to and distributions made by PAFs during the period 2000-01 to 2011-12. This information sheet also examines for the first time Public Ancillary Funds (PuAFs).

An examination Of tax–deductible donations made by individual taxpayers in Australia for 1999/2000

Each year QUT’s Centre of Philanthropy and Nonprofit Studies collects and analyses statistics on the extent of tax-deductible donations claimed by Australians in their individual income tax returns to deductible gift recipients (DGRs). The information presented below is based on the amount and type of tax-deductible donations claimed by Australian taxpayers to deductible gift recipients (DGRs) for the period 1 July 1999 to 30 June 2000. This information has been extracted from the Australian Taxation Office's publication Taxation Statistics 1999-2000 which provides an overview and profile of the income and taxation status of Australian taxpayers using information extracted from their income tax returns for the period 1 July 1999 to 30 June 2000. The 1999/2000 report is the latest report that has been made publicly available...

Charities and the industry commission

On 27 October 1994 the Industry Commission (the Commission) handed down a draft report on its inquiry into charitable organisations. The Commission had spent nearly 12 months investigating community social welfare organisations (CSWOs) including the appropriateness of the present taxation treatment of charitable organisations. The draft report makes recommendations for the taxation of CSWOs including alterations to their exemption from sales tax, fringe benefits tax and other indirect taxes with alterations to the threshold of tax deductible gifts and range of organisations qualifying for public benevolent status. This article examines the current taxation treatment for these organisations and the recommended changes made by the Industry Commission.

Private Ancillary Funds (PAFs)

PAFs are trusts to which taxpayers can make tax deductible donations.1 The term private ancillary fund is defined in the taxation legislation and has some similarities with the US private family foundation. This new arrangement allows families, businesses and individuals to create a tax effective closely held charitable trust which was not possible prior to the initiative. The sole purpose of a PAF must be to provide money, property or benefits to funds, authorities or institutions, which are deductible gift recipients (DGRs).

Tax concessions in support of charitable giving: an international comparison

The Australian taxation system encourages charitable giving through tax deductibility for donations made by individuals and companies, and via tax exemption for income distributed to charities through charitable trusts. Other means of giving, such as through bequests enjoy little tax concessions...

Should tax incentives for charitable giving stop at Australia's borders?

Around the world, philanthropic gifts are increasingly crossing borders, driven by globalisation and facilitated by liberalised cross-border tax incentives. Australia is considered to have one of the strictest regimes for the tax treatment of cross-border donations. With bipartisan political support for a significant reduction in the amount and scope of Australian foreign aid, the nation’s international presence through the ‘soft power’ of aid will fall increasingly upon private philanthropy. Are the current tax incentives for Australian cross-border philanthropy and the supervision of those incentives appropriate to both facilitate and regulate international giving? To address this question, this article analyses the amount of Australian cross-border philanthropy and explains the current legislative architecture affecting the tax deductibility of cross-border gifts. It then examines the Australian Government’s proposed ‘in Australia’ reform agenda against the underlying fiscal and regulatory policy imperatives, and makes recommendations for the future tax treatment of Australian cross-border philanthropy.

The Definition of Charity and its Nexus with Tax Preference Issues

Charity, since the Reformation, has been secularised to the extent that the continued use by the courts of analogies to a four hundred year old statute in order to determine charitable purpose with respect to tax exempt status, is giving rise to absurd situations. Tax exempt status is generally assigned by an agent of the government, for example the Inland Revenue Department in New Zealand, without any evaluation of the impact of the activities of the charitable organisation on social or economic policies. It is only when the activities of the charitable organisation are challenged in the courts, that the charitable organisation may lose its privileged position. From this brief analysis, it can be seen that the situation which is developing is a classic case of 'putting the cart before the horse'. A recent New Zealand case demonstrates the folly of assigning tax exempt status without first having examined the charitable purposes of the trust, and without having conjointly undertaken an evaluation of the social and economic impact of that charitable organisation. It is apparent that there is a need for substantial changes in charity law, with respect to charitable purpose and fiscal issues, in today's social and economic climate.

Symone Anstis : the tax advocate for higher education students

Many who have taken a tax course in the last few years will be aware of the plight of Ms Symone Anstis. Her story is a simple one. The year is 2006 and Ms Anstis, an undergraduate student is undertaking a teaching degree at the Australian Catholic University. To support herself she works at Katies earning $14,946, and receives Youth Allowance of $3,622. In her tax return for that year Ms Anstis claims $920 for ‘self-education expenses’ comprising travel, supplies, student administration fees, depreciation on her computer, textbooks and stationery. These expenses totalling $1,170 are correctly reduced by the non-deductible first $250, per s 82A of the Income Tax Assessment Act (1997) (Cth) (ITAA97). Ms Anstis claims a deduction for ‘self-education expenses’ on the basis that a condition of receiving Youth Allowance is the enrolment and satisfactory progress in an acceptable course of study. Generally, a deduction is allowed where a loss or outgoing is incurred in gaining or producing assessable income and that loss or outgoing is not of a private or domestic nature. Ms Anstis claims the expenses are incurred to meet the requirements of maintaining Youth Allowance so the nexus is satisfied. On assessment, the Commissioner of Taxation disallows the deduction claimed on the basis that ‘self-education expenses’ are only deductible if they have a relevant connection to the taxpayer’s current income-earning activities or they are likely to lead to an increase in a taxpayer’s income from his or her current income-earning activities in the future.

Corporate philanthropy, reputation risk management and shareholder value: A study of Australian corporate giving

This study examines the role of corporate philanthropy in the management of reputation risk and shareholder value of the top 100 ASX listed Australian firms for the three years 2011-2013. The results of this study demonstrate the business case for corporate philanthropy and hence encourage corporate philanthropy by showing increasing firms’ investment in corporate giving as a percentage of profit before tax, increases the likelihood of an increase in shareholder value. However, the proviso is that firms must also manage their reputation risk at the same time. There is a negative association between corporate giving and shareholder value (Tobin’s Q) which is mitigated by firms’ management of reputation. The economic significance of this result is that for every cent in the dollar the firm spends on corporate giving, Tobin’s Q will decrease by 0.413%. In contrast, if the firm increase their reputation by 1 point then Tobin’s Q will increase by 0.267%. Consequently, the interaction of corporate giving and reputation risk management is positively associated with shareholder value. These results are robust while controlling for potential endogeneity and reverse causality. This paper assists both academics and practitioners by demonstrating that the benefits of corporate philanthropy extend beyond a gesture to improve reputation or an attempt to increase financial performance, to a direct collaboration between all the factors where the benefits far outweigh the costs.

Keeping giving going : charitable bequests and Australians

The potential of bequests to contribute to the sustainability of charities1 is immense, with social and economic trends opening up the bequest landscape. Yet so much is unknown about how Australians think about charitable bequests – particularly about the motivations, barriers and triggers surrounding this behaviour. Do bequestors differ from other donors? What prevents good intentions from becoming good actions? Where do charities figure in this process? This study aims at a better understanding of those Australians who make a charitable bequest and those who might. It offers individual charities, and the sector as a whole, empirical evidence to support and extend the anecdotal knowledge of those working with donors around this sensitive, but vital, area. This research has been supported by the Perpetual Foundation, the EF and SL Gluyas Trust and the Edward Corbould Charitable Trust under the management of Perpetual Trustee Company Ltd.

Good times and philanthropy : giving by Australia's affluent

This report draws upon the latest research to examine giving trends by affluent individuals in Australia and how these compare with overseas counterparts. It is driven by several factors. Giving by individuals matters enormously to the nonprofit sector, far exceeding business donations. Whether the richest of the population gives commensurate with their wealth is a question worth asking.

Measuring the managerial benefits of tax compliance : a fresh approach

Managerial benefits of tax compliance have been identified by many authors in the tax compliance costs literature; they have however often been ignored when measuring the net effect of tax compliance on business taxpayers because it was believed that the measurement of such benefits was impossible or difficult. This paper first discusses the theoretical issues surrounding the valuation of managerial benefits, including the related tax/ accounting costs overlap problem; it then proposes a fresh approach for measuring managerial benefits. The proposed measurement model incorporates a subjective evaluation of useful accounting information by owner‑managers and objective measurements of accounting costs. Two main components of managerial benefits are identified: the incremental value of managerial accounting information and the savings on reporting costs. A study of small businesses conducted in late 2006, compared accounting practices between tax complying entities (TCEs) and tax compliance free entities (TFEs) and investigated how accounting information was valued by owner-managers in TCEs. The research adopted a mixed methodological design including a major quantitative phase followed by a minor qualitative phase. The results show that while a vast majority of TFEs maintained basic accounting functions, record keeping requirements imposed by tax compliance led to the implementation of more sophisticated accounting systems in TCEs. It was also found that TCE owner-managers assigned a relatively significant value to the managerial accounting information that is generated as a result of record keeping imposed by tax compliance, suggesting that substantial managerial benefits might be derived.