This text provides answers to questions related to Australian taxation law, including residency status, income tax on gifts and prizes, and deductions for business loans. The text also includes computations for net income and taxable income. References to relevant cases and legislation are provided throughout.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
Running head: TAXATION LAW Taxation Law Name of the Student Name of the University Authors Note Course ID
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
1TAXATION LAW Table of Contents Answer to question 1:.................................................................................................................2 Answer to question 2:.................................................................................................................3 Answer to A:..........................................................................................................................3 Answer to B:..........................................................................................................................4 Answer to question 3:.................................................................................................................4 Answer to A:..........................................................................................................................4 Answer to B:..........................................................................................................................4 Answer to question 4:.................................................................................................................5 Answer to 4.1.........................................................................................................................5 Answer to 4.2:........................................................................................................................6 References:.................................................................................................................................7
2TAXATION LAW Answer to question 1: As per the definition given under“section 995-1 of the ITAA 1997”occupant or Australian dweller denotes individual that has their home in Australia, except for the tax officer is satisfied that the individual has their eternal place of house out of Australia (Woellner et al., 2016).“Section 6(1), ITAA 1936”explains that an individual is said to be an Australian resident if the person has been present in Australia on continuous basis or sporadically for more than six months of the income year except the tax officer is content that he or she has their usual residence out of Australia and hardly has any purpose of taking up the Australian occupancy. The case study highlights that Amity left Australia in 2015 to live in Kiribati for a period of two years and then take up the decision of whether to stay longer given the lifestyle suits her. The residential status of Amity has been considered in the below listed residency status. Resides Test:The resides test denotes dwelling enduringly or for a substantial period. The court in“FC of T v Miller (1946)”stated that the residency status of an individual is dependent on the question of “fact and extent” (Pinto, 2013). The intention of the taxpayer or the purpose of presence along with the household or occupation ties forms necessary in establishing the domiciliary position of a person. Domicile Test:As per the“Domicile Act 1982”a person is regarded as the Australian occupant if he or she has their domicile in Australian except the tax official is satisfied that the person has their everlasting place of abode out of Australia (Robin, 2017). A person obtains the domicile of origin by birth or by the operation of law where the taxpayer intends to take their home indefinitely. As held“FC of T v Applegate (1979)”the high court considered whether the permanent place of abode is out of Australia. The decision held by the
3TAXATION LAW court stated that the permanent do not mean eternal and it is judged respectively year. The taxpayer was having the permanent place of dwelling out of Australia and ultimately returned when he was ill. 183-day Test:Under the 183 days test a person is the Australian occupant if they had been present in Australia, uninterruptedly or sporadically for six months or more during the income year in Australian given the person has the normal dwellingout of Australia with no intention of residing in Australia. In the current case, Amity went to Kiribati for two years and also had the choices of extending the contract for three years. She maintained her social and living arrangements in Kiribati as her salary was paid into the Asia-Pacific bank. Though she intended to stay long but returned ultimately after her husband fell ill. Referring to“Applegate v FC of T (1979)” the actual intent of Amity was to reside outside Australia for two years’ period and also thought of extending her stay for given the lifestyle suits her. The social and living arrangements made by Amity reflected her intention of residing out of Australian without having any certain intent returning Australia. On a conclusive note, Amity cannot be held as resident of Australian under“section 6(1) of the ITAA 1936”since she did not meet the requirement of Domicile Test and also failed to meet the requirement of 183 days Test. Answer to question 2: Answer to A: Mere gift is not considered as income. The court in“Hayes v FCT”stated that the receipts from shares by the company boss was not held as income. Evidently in“Scott v FCT”the solicitor received 10,000 pounds of gift from the wife of client which was not treated as income (Blakelock & King, 2017). The employee dentist here received a computer
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
4TAXATION LAW game of $600 and hence the receipt did not constitute ordinary income under ordinary concepts of“section 6-5 of the ITAA 1997”. Answer to B: According to ATO a taxpayer winning from any prize or lottery that is run by bank should be treated as ordinary income that attracts tax liability. This includes cash, interest free loans and cars. In“Kelly v FCT”the taxpayer was awarded for being the fairest player. The amount is taxable because it was incidental to his employment (Burton, 2017). Similarly, in “FCT v Stone”the taxpayer was assessed for receiving prize money for carrying on the business of professional athlete. Therefore, receiving car as the prize from bank is an ordinary income under“section 6-5 of the ITAA 1997”. Answer to question 3: Answer to A: “Section 8-1, ITA Act 1997”, allows a person to deduction from their taxable income for any outgoings till the extent they are occurred in generating assessable income. ATO states that a person taking loan to use it for personal and business purpose then the taxpayer can apportion the interest on loan (Miller & Oats, 2016). In such circumstances the interest on loan must be divided under deductible and non-deductible segments. Betty and Barney can claim deduction under“section 8-1, ITA Act 1997”for interest on loan up to the amount of loan that is used for business purpose while the private portion of loan interest is excluded from deduction. Answer to B: “Section 8-1 of ITAA 1997”allows taxpayer to claim deduction for outgoings given that it is found in business operations which was previously carried on by the taxpayer for generating taxable earnings (Fleurbaey & Maniquet, 2018). In“FCT v Brown 1999 ATC”
5TAXATION LAW the taxation commissioner allowed deduction for interest on loan since the loan was entered into by the taxpayer to conduct the business activities and for generating income. i.A deduction under“section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997”will be permitted to Robert for loan interest when the business was under continuous mode. ii.Robert would also be permitted to claim deduction under“section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997”when the business operation was ceased since the loan was entered into by the taxpayer to conduct the business activities and for generating income. Answer to question 4: Answer to 4.1 ParticularsAmount ($)SectionExplanation Assessable Receipts Receipts from Sale527000Section 6-5 of the ITAA 1997Ordinary Income Proceeds from loan500000 Receipts from Supplier10000 Total Assesable IncomeSection 6-5 of the ITAA 1997Ordinary Income Total Assessable Receipts1037000 Allowable Deductions Purchase of Trading Stock275000Section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997General Deductions Wages paid to employees42000Section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997General Deductions Loan repayment interest21890Section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997General Deductions Rent on premises145000Section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997General Deductions Other Expenses75000Section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997General Deductions Cost of Goods Sold254900Section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997General Deductions Total Allowable Deductions813790 Total Income223210 Computation of Net Income from Business The court in“FCT v Harris”held that mere windfall gains are not treated as income. The winning from lottery by Lincoln will not be held as income because it is windfall gain (Sikka, 2017). He also received incentive for display of game console in his window. The receipt constitutes ordinary income under“section 6-5 of the ITAA 1997”because it was received during the business course.
6TAXATION LAW Answer to 4.2: ParticularsAmount ($)Amount ($) Assessable Income Profit from Business223210 Australian Sourced Dividend Income Fully Franked (Net)3780 Franking Credits16205400 Total Assessable Income228610 Allowable DeductionsNil Total Taxable Income228610 Tax on taxable Income76106.5 Medicare levy4572.2 Less: Franking Credits1620 Total tax payable79058.7 Computation of Taxable Income In the books of Lincoln For the year Ended 2016/17 ParticularsAmount ($) PAYG Installments Paid57500 Total PAYG Payments57500 PAYG Payment Balance
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
7TAXATION LAW References: Blakelock,S.,&King,P.(2017).Taxationlaw:TheadvanceofATOdata matching.Proctor, The,37(6), 18. Burton, M. (2017). A Review of Judicial References to the Dictum of Jordan CJ, Expressed in Scott v. Commissioner of Taxation, in Elaborating the Meaning of Income for the Purposes of the Australian Income Tax.J. Austl. Tax'n,19, 50. Fleurbaey, M., & Maniquet, F. (2018). Optimal income taxation theory and principles of fairness.Journal of Economic Literature,56(3), 1029-79. Miller, A., & Oats, L. (2016).Principles of international taxation. Bloomsbury Publishing. Pinto, D. (2013). State taxes. InAustralian Taxation Law(pp. 1763-1762). CCH Australia Limited. Robin, H. (2017).Australian taxation law 2017. Oxford University Press. Sikka, P. (2017, December). Accounting and taxation: Conjoined twins or separate siblings?. InAccounting forum(Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 390-405). Elsevier. Woellner, R., Barkoczy, S., Murphy, S., Evans, C., & Pinto, D. (2016). Australian Taxation Law 2016.OUP Catalogue.