Monthly Archives: February 2017

Sent v FCT – Taxpayer has applied to the High Court for Special Leave to Appeal decision that bonus amounts paid to a trust were ordinary income [22]

The taxpayer has applied for special leave to appeal to the High Court against the decision of the Full Federal Court in Sent v FCT [2012] FCAFC 187. The Full Federal Court had dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal and held that the full amount of accrued and unaccrued bonus entitlements of id=”mce_marker”1.6m that were instead paid…

Healey v FCT – taxpayer applies for special leave to appeal to the High Court after being assessed to a capital gain she was presently entitled from a trust [23]

The taxpayer has applied for special leave to appeal to the High Court against the decision of the Full Federal Court in Healey v FCT [2012] FCAFC 194. The Full Federal Court had unanimously dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal and confirmed that she was assessable on a capital gain of id=”mce_marker”4m to which she was presently…

*Binetter v DCT [2012] FCAFC 126 now stands after High Court refuses Taxpayer leave – s264 notice valid [24]

The High Court Fri 15.2.2013, refused the taxpayer’s application for special leave to appeal against the Full Federal Court decision in. The Full Federal Court decision, which now stands, had dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal from part of the judgment of Robertson J in Binetter v DCT(No 3) [2012] FCA 704 concerning the validity of a s 264…

*Commissioner appeals AAT loss in Re Dickinson and FCT; Re Fabig and FCT – where it was held that the taxpayers were entitled to scrip-for-scrip relief [25]

The Commissioner has appealed to the Federal Court against the decisions in 2 AAT cases that had identical circumstances – AAT Case [2013] AATA 25, Re Dickinson and FCT, and AAT Case [2013] AATA 26, Re Fabig and FCT. The AAT had held that 2 taxpayers in identical circumstances were entitled to scrip-for-scrip roll-over relief…

*Confidentiality of tax information to be wound back for multinationals – Government announces plans [7]

The Government on Mon 4.2.2013, announced it would alter the confidentiality of tax information rules for large and multinational businesses so they would be forced to publicly disclose Federal taxes they pay. The Assistant Treasurer said the move was to implement the Government’s intention “to improve the transparency of Australia’s business tax system”. “Large multinational…

*Government confirms no flood levy to rebuild after recent Queensland floods [8]

The Treasurer has affirmed that the Government will provide assistance to Queensland to rebuild after the recent flood disasters, but will do so without a flood levy. Although acknowledging the severity of the disaster, the Treasurer said it was not on the same scale as the disasters of 2011, and that the Government will account…

*Monthly tax instalments by large companies: consultation paper released [9]

The Assistant Treasurer on Thur 28.2.2013, released a consultation paper on the Government’s proposal (announced in the MYEFO on 22 October 2012) for 3-year process to reform the timing of company tax payments by large companies. The consultation paper sets out the proposed implementation and design details for how to better align the timing of PAYG instalments…

*Southgate Investment Funds Limited & Ors v DCT – Taxpayer wins right to have refusal to grant stay of execution re-heard [10]

The Full Federal Court has unanimously allowed a company taxpayer’s appeal and held that decision of the Court at first instance (Kenny J) in DCT v Hua Wang Bank Berhad (No 2) [2010] FCA 1296 had miss-carried (that decision was to grant summary judgment for $9.7m in tax debts against the company and to deny it…

*FCT v Macquarie Bank Limited & Anor (Mongose) – Pt IVA: Commissioner loses appeal on gain from sale of shares after consolidation – no tax benefit [11]

The Full Federal Court has unanimously dismissed the Commissioner’s appeal from the decision in Macquarie Bank Limited v FCT [2011] FCA 1076. In that case, the Federal Court had held there was no “dominant purpose” of seeking to obtain a “tax benefit” under Pt IVA of the ITAA 1936 from the sale of shares by…

*Yazbek v FCT – individual can an amendment outside the 2-years limit, under the ‘beneficiary of a trust’ qualification, despite being only a discretionary beneficiary and the amendment not being as a beneficiary [12]

The Federal Court has dismissed a taxpayer’s appeal from the decision in AAT Case [2012] AATA 477, Re Yazbek and FCT in which the AAT held that the taxpayer was at all relevant times a beneficiary of a trust [for the purpose of qualification (d) to s170(1), item (1) of the ITAA36]. The taxpayer argued…