ATO settlement offer slammed
Taxpayers Australiahas labelled a settlement offer by theAustralian Tax Office(ATO) for involvement in mass-marketed agricultural schemes “rough justice” following a court decision last week ruling in favour of taxpayers.
Last year the ATO made a settlement offer to around 60,000 taxpayers who had invested in ‘tax-effective’ agricultural projects.
Under the settlement the taxpayers were required to pay back the deductions they received as a result of the tax schemes, but would still be able to claim their cash outlay as deductions and avoid paying any penalties or interest on the tax debts they owed to the ATO.
While it was a condition of the offer that they could not then benefit from any favourable court outcome, around 87 per cent accepted the offer, which expired on June 21 2002.
However in a decision handed down early last week, the Federal Court found in favour of a taxpayer in the case of Sleight v Commissioner of Taxation.
The Federal Court ruled that the taxpayer did not enter the project for the dominant purpose of acquiring a tax benefit.
Taxpayers Australia says, “This is a win for taxpayers who held out, but a loss for those who accepted the ATO’s settlement offer in good faith”.
“This decision by the court sends a clear message that the ATO’s blanket approach to denying deductions to investors in all tax effective investment projects, irrespective of the facts and circumstances of each case, is rough justice.”
Recommended for you
The FSCP has announced its latest verdict, suspending an adviser’s registration for failing to comply with his obligations when providing advice to three clients.
Having sold Madison to Infocus earlier this year, Clime has now set up a new financial advice licensee with eight advisers.
With licensees such as Insignia looking to AI for advice efficiencies, they are being urged to write clear AI policies as soon as possible to prevent a “Wild West” of providers being used by their practices.
Iress has revealed the number of clients per adviser that top advice firms serve, as well as how many client meetings they conduct each week.
