TAXATION2Issue:The present issue is based on the determination of the fringe benefit consequences ofShine Homes and Charlie. From the case study, it is found that Charlie worked as the realestate agent for Shine Homes Ptd Ltd and was provided with a sedan. As defined underSection 6 of the Miscellaneous Taxation Rulings and Fringe Benefit Tax Assessment Act1986 there are situations under which fringe benefit tax is levied on car (Barkoczy, 2016). Laws: a.Section 6 of the Miscellaneous Taxation Rulingsb.Fringe Benefit Tax Assessment Act 1986c.taxation rulings of MT 2027d.sub-section 136 (1) of the Miscellaneous Taxation Rulings of 2027e.section 51 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997f.Lunney and Hayley v FCT (1958)g.Newsom v Robertson (1952) 2 All ER 728; (1952)h.Simon in Taylor v Provan (1975) AC 194i.Tubemakers of Australia Ltd v. FC of T93Application:The taxation rulings of MT 2027 with reference to sub-section 136 (1) states that anyform of use made by employee that is not entirely related to the course of producing taxableincome by an employee shall be regarded as personal use. According to the paragraph 3 ofthe Miscellaneous Taxation Ruling details regarding business use of car must beincorporated in the log book or any similar file for the business kilometres travelled inapplying the operating cost method (Christie, 2015). As evident from the case study, Charlieused the car for 50 kilometres related to work purpose. In agreement with the sub-section

+13062052269

info@desklib.com