Re Mahaffy and the Tax Practitioners Board – tax agent has appealed to the Federal Court (whilst stay on not renewing registration continues) [39]

The applicant has appealed to the Federal Court against the decision in Re Mahaffy and the Tax Practitioners Board [2014] AATA 17. In that case, the AAT ordered that a decision of the Tax Practitioners Board refusing to renew a tax agent’s registration be stayed pending the hearing of the tax agent’s application for a…

Tax (financial) advisers: registration requirements – sufficient and relevant experience: TPB [37]

The Tax Practitioners Board (TPB) has issued the following Exposure Draft Information Sheets: TPB(I) D25/2015 Applying for registration during the transitional period: Sufficient experience to be able to provide tax (financial) advice services to a competent standard – explains the Board’s preliminary views on the meaning of “sufficient experience” and “competent standard” for registering as…

Tax (financial) advisers – TPB gives guidance of the ‘sufficient number’ requirements and on what constitutes a fee or other reward [36]

The Tax Practitioners Board (TPB) has issued the following Information Sheets: TPB(I) 23/2014 Sufficient number requirement for partnership and company registered tax (financial) advisers – assists entities to understand the Board’s approach to the sufficient number requirement for registration or renewal of registration as a tax (financial) adviser from 1 January 2016. TPB(I) 22/2014 Fee or other…

*IGT’s review of valuation issues in tax law – Assistant Treasurer releases his report [35]

The Assistant Treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, on Mon 19.1.2015, released the Inspector-General of Taxation’s Review into the ATO’s administration of valuation matters. He said valuation requirements have been an area of ongoing concern for taxpayers. The Inspector-General has identified inherent difficulties associated with the nature and associated costs of valuations. Given these issues, the Inspector-General has made…

*Phoenix operators prevented from avoiding SGC liabilities by ATO using new powers – SG Estimates and Director Penalties [32]

The ATO has advised that it has used new powers to recover $8m in workers’ superannuation entitlements from the operators of labour-hire companies in South Australia and Victoria who have engaged in phoenix behaviour. The ATO said the network of companies provided labour-hire services such as seasonal fruit picking and meat packing and had been…

*Olesen v Early Sunshine Pty Ltd & Ors – Pecuniary penalties imposed on directors of super fund trustee [31]

The Federal Court has imposed impose civil pecuniary penalties upon the directors of the trustee of a regulated superannuation fund in respect of admitted contraventions of the SIS Act. In the period 31 March 2000 to August 2013, the first respondent, Early Sunshine Pty Ltd (Early Sunshine), was the trustee of the George MacDonald & Sons Pty Ltd Superannuation…

*Albrecht & Ors v FCT – Super surcharge and WA police officers – appeals partly allowed [30]

The Full Federal Court has partly allowed appeals by commissioned officers of the Western Australian police force against superannuation contributions tax assessments. [See discussion above under ‘Cases’ – ‘Full Federal Court’.] (Albrecht & Ors v FCT [2014] FCAFC 176, Full Federal Court, Perram, Robertson and Griffiths JJ, 19 December 2014.) [LTN 1, 5/1/15]