Refund of imputation credits

The purpose of this paper is to explain the features of the new provisions for the refund of imputation credits, which are contained in the New Business Tax System (Miscellaneous) Act (No1) 2000.1 The provisions have been introduced to ensure that:  certain eligible resident taxpayers are taxed on their dividend income at their personal marginal rate of tax; and  certain eligible resident nonprofit organisations can apply their tax exemption on their dividend income. The provisions are contained in Division 67 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 for refunds to resident individuals and superannuation entities and Division 7AA of Part IIIA of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 for refunds to endorsed income tax exempt charities and certain deductible gift recipients.

International transfer pricing : the Australian approach and lessons for Canada

In response to developments in international trade and an increased focus on international transfer-pricing issues, Canada’s minister of finance announced in the 1997 budget that the Department of Finance would undertake a review of the transfer-pricing provisions in the Income Tax Act. On September 11, 1997, the Department of Finance released draft transfer-pricing legislation and Revenue Canada released revised draft Information Circular 87-2R. The legislation was subsequently amended and included in Bill C-28, which received first reading on December 10, 1997. The new rules are intended to update Canada’s international transfer-pricing practices. In particular, they attempt to harmonize the standards in the Income Tax Act with the arm’s-length principle established in the OECD’s transfer pricing guidelines. The new rules also set out contemporaneous documentation requirements in respect of cross-border related-party transactions, facilitate administration of the law by Revenue Canada, and provide for a penalty where transfer prices do not comply with the arm’s-length principle. The Australian tax authorities have similarly reviewed and updated their transfer-pricing practices. Since 1992, the Australian commissioner of taxation has issued three rulings and seven draft rulings directly relating to international transfer pricing. These rulings outline the selection and application of transfer pricing methodologies, documentation requirements, and penalties for non-compliance. The Australian Taxation Office supports the use of advance pricing agreements (APAs) and has expanded its audit strategy by conducting transfer-pricing risk assessment reviews. This article presents a detailed review of Australia’s transfer-pricing policy and practices, which address essentially the same concerns as those at which the new Canadian rules are directed. This review provides a framework for comparison of the approaches adopted in the two jurisdictions. The author concludes that although these approaches differ in some respects, ultimately they produce a similar result. Both regimes set a clear standard to be met by multinational enterprises in establishing transfer prices. Both provide for audits and penalties in the event of noncompliance. And both offer the alternative of an APA as a means of avoiding transfer-pricing disputes with Australian and Canadian tax authorities.

An examination of recent taxation amendments, corporate law reforms and Queensland legislative reforms affecting nonprofit organisations

There is a tax amendment bill which will be debated. The Government has promised to outline its plan for the reform of the taxation system sometime this year. The plans appear to go beyond the mere introduction of some sort of goods and services tax to reform of the whole taxation system including fiscal relations with the States. Not for profit organisations will find their taxation environment will change. Governments are reluctant to permit exemptions to a GST style arrangements. GST trade offs such as reduced income tax rates and abolishing indirect taxes are useless to nonprofit organisations, as many are already exempt from such imposts. Administrative changes to tax collections may also have an impact. If the government decides to make an individual PAYE taxpayer return optional in exchange for no or standard deductions, this may have an effect on fundraising. The FBT and salary packaging schemes that not for profit organisations use will be under intense scrutiny. A regionalisation of the ATO along the successful model of the ASC would see discrete areas such as not for profit exemptions being centralised in one regional office for the whole of Australia. For example the Tasmanian ASC Office has the responsibility for much work in respect of corporate charities and not for profit companies.

A select and annotated bibliography of nonprofit taxation

It seems likely that the Industry Commission Inquiry on Charitable Organisations will include a reference to examine the state of taxation and charities. There will no doubt be discussions on the taxation benefits enjoyed by charities. These benefits include not only the exemption from being liable for income tax and enjoying the status of being a "deductible body" for the purpose of gifts, but also fringe benefits tax, sales tax, land tax, stamp duty, financial institutions duty, local government rates and charges as well as electricity, gas, telephone and motor vehicle concessions.

Nonprofits and the GST : don't sign anything until you've read the fine print, (if you can find it to read!)

On 13 August, 1997 Prime Minister Mr Howard announced five principles as a foundation for a Tax Reform Package to revitalise the Australian economy. They were that: 1. there should be no overall increase in the overall tax burden; 2. any new taxation system should involve major reductions in personal income tax with special regard to the taxation treatment of families; 3. consideration should be given to a broad-based indirect tax to replace some or all of the existing indirect taxes; 4. there would be appropriate compensation for those deserving of special consideration; and 5. reform of Commonwealth-State financial relations must be addressed...

Sale of Businesses in Australia (2nd ed.)

The greater volume of businesses sold in Australia each year are small to medium enterprises. The administration of business contracts presents far different challenges than, for example, contracts for the sale of goods alone or contracts for the sale of land. The subject matter comprises both real and personal, and tangible and intangible property. Other considerations that do not affect those other commonplace contracts include dealing with employees who are both remaining and departing, taking account of restraints of trade, and the phenomena of the passing of property being different in respect of different forms of property being transferred in the same contract. In keeping with the format of the previous edition, the book is written with the busy practitioner in mind. It deals with the formation of business contracts, all aspects of disclosure both contractual and statutory, the role of agents, and detailed consideration of the different types of subject matter of small business contracts including, the lease of the premises, intellectual property, goodwill, licences, book debts and plant and equipment. It has up to date treatment of income tax implications of the sale and the impact of the latest Commonwealth legislation on dealing with employees of a business on sale. Consistent with the last edition, the book has chapters on time of the essence and completion, personal securities, restraint of trade clauses, special conditions and remedies for breach by both parties and misleading or deceptive conduct by the seller. In relation to personal securities, whilst the current State and Territory based law on Bills of Sale and other Chattel Securities has been the subject of commentary, the proposed national reform agenda has also been commented upon although that legislation is not due until May 2010 at the earliest

Tax and equality in 1972: The case of Lodge v FCT

This paper is part of a larger project described at http://www.law.uq.edu.au/australian-feminist-judgments-project as follows: This project draws its inspiration from two significant recent developments in law and feminist scholarship. The first has been the emergence in Canada and the UK of feminist judgment-writing projects, in which feminist academics, lawyers and activists have written alternative judgments in a series of legal cases, imagining the different decision that might have been made by a feminist judge hearing the case. The second has been the incremental shift in recent years in the number of women judges and Magistrates presiding in courts and tribunals throughout Australia. As part of this project, a group of scholars will write alternative feminist judgments. This paper is one of the alternative feminist judgements. The case used for this discussion is Lodge v Federal Commissioner of Tax [1972] HCA 49. In that case, a woman, earning income by way of commission in her occupation as a law costs clerk, which she carried out at her home, claimed to deduct from her assessable income child care fees that enabled her to devote time and attention to her work. The High Court held that no right to a deduction had arisen. It found that, although the purpose of the expenditure was for gaining assessable income, it did not take place in, or in the course of, preparing bills of cost. Further, the expenditure was of a ‘private or domestic’ nature. This seminal taxation decision, which prevents deductions for childcare, has broad financial ramifications for workers in the home and those with childcare responsibilities. It designates childcare duties as ‘private’, notwithstanding the need for these in order, particularly for women, to work in the public sphere.

On inequality tax evasion and progressive taxes

This paper proposes a simple variation of the Allingham and Sandmo (1972) construct and integrates it to a dynamic general equilibrium framework with heterogeneous agents. We study an overlapping generations framework i n which agents must initially decide whether to evade taxes or not. In the event they decide to evade, they then have to decide the extent of income or wealth they wish to under-report. We find that in comparison with the basic approach, the ‘evade or not’ choice drastically reduced the extent of evasion in the economy. This outcome is the result of an anomaly intrinsic to the basic Allingham and Sandmo version of the model, which makes the evade-or-not extension a more suitable approach to modelling the issue. We also find that the basic model, and the model with and ‘evade-or-not’ choice have strikingly different political economy implications, , which suggest fruitful avenues of empirical research.

Tax concessions for charities : competitive neutrality, the tax base and "public goods" choice

It is argued that concerns arise about the integrity and fairness of the taxation regime where charitable organizations, which avail themselves of the tax exemption status while undertaking commercial activities, compete directly with the for-profit sector. The appropriateness of the tax concessions granted to charitable organizations is considered in respect of income derived from commercial activities. It is principally argued that the traditional line of reasoning for imposing limitations on tax concessions focuses on an incorrect underlying inquiry. Traditionally, it is argued that limitations should be imposed because of unfair competition, lack of competitive neutrality, or an arbitrary decision relating to a lack of deserving. However, it is argued that a more appropriate question from which to base any limitations is one which considers the value attached to the integrity of the taxation regime as a whole, and the tax base specifically compared to the public good of charities. When the correct underlying question is asked, sound taxation policy ensues, as a less arbitrary approach may be adopted to limit the scope of tax concessions available to charitable organizations.

The allocation of taxing rights of ship and aircraft leasing profits under Australia's tax treaties

The Australian Federal Commissioner of Taxation recently released Draft Taxation Ruling TR 2008/D3 with the stated purpose of clarifying ‘what profits derived from the leasing of ships or aircraft fall within the ship and aircraft articles of each of Australia’s tax treaties’. In particular, TR 2008/D3 explains the taxing rights over different types of leasing profits, such as a full basis lease in respect of any transport by a ship operated in international traffic and bareboat leases which are ancillary to the lessor transport operations of ships in international traffic. This article outlines the Commissioner’s views on the application of the standard ships and aircraft articles in the tax treaties to which it is a party as well as considering the major variations on the standard adoption. In doing so, guidance is provided as to the allocation of taxing rights of ship and aircraft leasing profits under Australia’s tax treaties.

The taxation of multinational banking income : is the traditional rationale correct?

This article argues that multinational banks have characteristics which are unique and distinguishable from traditional multinational entities. The first distinguishing feature is the unique nature of the services and consequent products supplied by multinational banks, which are aimed at meeting client global demand. The second distinguishing feature is the non-traditional organisational structure that is adopted. This structure, also designed to meet client global demand, introduces issues previously not recognised in the traditional taxation system, which is designed for the structure of traditional multinational entities. The unique differences between traditional multinational entities and multinational banks means there may be the need for a distinct international tax regime. It is argued that there are “outmoded economic assumptions” upon which the present tax laws relating to multinational banks are based. An examination of the unique nature of multinational banks leads to the conclusion that the appropriate tax treatment of these banks is different from the appropriate tax treatment of multinational entities generally.

Powering innovation through tax concessions : the changing research and development tax incentives

The changing R&D Tax Concession has been touted as the biggest reform to business innovation policy in over a decade. But, is it a changing tax for changing times? This paper addresses this question and further asks ‘what’s tax got to do with it?’. To answer this question, the paper argues that rather than substantive tax reform, the proposed measures simply alter the criteria and means by which companies become eligible for a Federal Government subsidy for qualifying R&D activity. It further argues that when considered as part of the broader innovation agenda, the R&D Tax Concession should be evaluated as a government spending program in the same way as any direct spending on innovation. When this is done, the tax regime is arguably only the administrative policy instrument by which the subsidy is delivered. However, it is proposed that this may not be best practice to distribute those funds fairly, efficiently, and without distortion, while at the same time maintaining adequate government control and accountability. Finally, in answering the question of ‘what’s tax got to do with it?’ the paper concludes that the answer is ‘very little’.

Prescriptions for reform of Australia's superannuation tax concessions

The highly controversial and often politicised issue of Australia’s retirement savings regime featured prominently throughout the two day Federal Government’s October 2011 Tax Forum. Calls for reform of this regime are by no means new. Reform debate over the years has focused on each of the three separate pillars: the age pension, compulsory superannuation, and voluntary saving, as well as the interaction of those three elements. However, recently there has been a significant shift away from reliance on the age pension, with its associated risks falling to the government, to a defined contributions scheme where the associated risks fall to the individual taxpayer. Consequently, Australia’s superannuation regime is predominantly subject to current debate, and, as such, the subject of this article. This article considers the history of Australia’s retirement savings regime, along with a framework for evaluating the superannuation tax concessions. It then discusses the recommendations of the Australian Future Tax System (AFTS) Review Panel and ensuing debate at the Tax Forum. Finally, it suggests two proposals to achieve the objectives of the AFTS Review in relation to retirement, those objectives being a system which is broad and adequate, acceptable to individuals, robust, simple and approachable, and finally sustainable. The first, whilst potentially requiring some tinkering’, is relatively simple and a blue print has already been provided to the Federal Government – the adoption of Recommendations 18 and 19 of the AFTS Review. The second is one of management. Superannuation concessions are fundamentally categorised as tax expenditures and the management of these tax expenditures, not just the reporting, should be undertaken.