ATO criticised on super surcharge admin
The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) has criticised the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) over its administration of the superannuation contributions surcharge, pointing to a range of important deficiencies.
In an audit report tabled this week, the ANAO said that the ATO’s administration of the surcharge “had not been managed well and pointed to deficiencies relating to past surcharge governance arrangement, systems, processes and controls and surcharge compliance.
In making the criticisms, the ANAO acknowledged that the ATO had been presented with a difficult challenge involving a complex collection mechanism and the pressures which had flowed from amendments to the surcharge legislation and the introduction of tax reforms.
As well, the ANAO said there had been a reduction in ATO funding for the surcharge.
Seventeen recommendations have flowed from the ANAO’s adverse report including better planning and risk management, improved procedures and systems documentation and the development of a robust surcharge compliance framework.
In responding to the ANAO report, the ATO said overseeing the surcharge had been one of its most difficult challenges, because of the environment in which it had been introduced.
It said that at the time of the surcharge introduction the ATO had been under considerable pressure, implementing numerous amendments to the superannuation legislation and the introduction of a major tax reform program.
“The ATO has not performed to the high standard the community expects,” the ATO’s response said. “The ATO is dedicated to addressing these shortcomings and has made significant progress to ensure they do not recur.”
Recommended for you
ASIC has released the results of its first adviser exam to be held in 2025, with 241 candidates attempting the test.
Quarterly Wealth Data analysis has uncovered positive improvements in financial adviser numbers compared with losses in the prior corresponding period.
Holding portfolios that are too complex or personalised can be a detractor for acquirers of financial advice firms as they require too much effort to maintain post-acquisition.
As the financial advice profession continues to wait on further DBFO legislation, industry commentators have encouraged advisers to act now in driving practice efficiency.
