logo

Taxation Law ITAA 1997 - Assignment

   

Added on  2021-06-17

11 Pages2182 Words39 Views
Political Science
 | 
 | 
 | 
Running head: TAXATION LAWTaxation LawName of the StudentName of the UniversityAuthors NoteCourse ID
Taxation Law ITAA 1997 - Assignment_1

TAXATION LAW1Answer to question 1: Issue: It is noteworthy to take into the consideration the issue that is associated with thederivation of the money from the reward for service?Laws: a.“Section 6-1 of the ITAA 1997”b.“Section 6-5 of the ITAA 1997”c.“Scott v Commissioner of Taxation (1935)”d.“section 15-2 of the ITAA 1997”e.“Brent v Federal Commissioner of Taxation ATC 4195 (1971)”f.“Housden (Inspector of Taxes) v Marshall (1958)” g.“Hobbs v Hussey (1942) 24 TC 153”Applications: The private exertion income has been defined in the “S-1 of the ITA Act 1936”. It isworth mentioning that when a taxpayer is earning income through the help of salaries orwages or earning any kind of the payment through the business which a taxpayer executeseither alone or through the partners is classified as the private exertion income (Ostry, Bergand Tsangarides 2014). Ordinary income is those income that is earned majorly earned by aperson with the help of ordinary concepts. The conceptual meaning of the ordinary income isexplained in “S-6-5 of the ITA Act 1997”. An important consideration should be paidtowards the law court decision in “FCT v Scott (1935)” (Anderson, Dickfos and Brown2016). The explanation that has been made express that a person that earns income throughthe help or ordinary means is an ordinary income under “S-6-5 of the ITA Act 1997”.
Taxation Law ITAA 1997 - Assignment_2

TAXATION LAW2It is noteworthy to denote that “S-6-1 of the ITA Act 1936” provides an explanationthat private exertion earnings should be classified as statutory or the ordinary earnings (Vann2016). It is very much important to consider that “S-15-2 of the ITA Act 1997” explains thatearnings will be held classified as chargeable earnings for the money that is obtained throughrendering of services of employment. Apparently material evidences that is gained exclusively explains that Hilary was verymuch a famous climber of mountain. As a result the Daily Terror Newspaper decided to giveHilary $10,000 and required her to write the book by incorporating the story of her life.Signifying the explanation of “S-6-5 of the ITA Act 1997” media interview money is achargeable income. It is noteworthy to give an important consideration that taxpayers areonly liable for taxation purpose if the money is paid for rendering the service (AustralianTaxation Office 2016). The explanation that has been provided by the law court in “FCT vBrent (1971)” is related to the determination of the chargeable income for the services that isprovided to the media television where the wife of robber was liable for taxation forobtaining the reward for service (Berg and Davidson 2016). Representing the elucidation of“S-6-5 of the ITA Act 1997” media interview money that is received by the taxpayer ischargeable income. The case study provides the media publications of books and receiving the money forsuch kind of publications by Hilary is a chargeable income. The explanation “FCT v Brent(1971)” can be relevantly cited in Hilary’s case and a conclusive evidence can be drawn byexplaining that $10,000 for writing the books is taxable under the “S-6-5 of the ITA Act1997” (Phillips and McKeown 2016). Referring to “S-1 of the ITA Act 1936” the sum of$10,000 is a private exertion income for Hilary.
Taxation Law ITAA 1997 - Assignment_3

TAXATION LAW3Hilary on the second instances was found to have sold the manuscripts of the booksand the photographs that was taken by her in the event of climbing the mountain. Theelucidation that was made by the law court in “Marshall v Housden (Inspector orTaxation) (1958)” provides the taxability of the income when the taxpayer made thephotographs and the cuttings of newspaper available for sale (Bajada 2017). Therefore, thecourt remained relied on the explanation of “S-6-5 of the ITA Act 1997” to stated thatmoney that is received from such sale is taxable based on ordinary perceptions.Taking into the considerations the instances where an imaginary situation of assumingthat if the books was written by Hilary for her own private purpose then the outcome of suchsale of books would have accounted as the Royalty income. Relying on the reference of the“Hussey v Hobbs (1942)”the taxpayer was held for assessment because the taxpayer soldthe rights of autobiographies for the publications purpose (Braithwaite 2017). The money thatwas gained by the taxpayer from selling the books is a chargeable income based on theordinary perceptions of “S-6-5 of the ITA Act 1997” (Doidge and Dyck 2015). Equally, forHilary these income from the autobiography sale is taxable as the Royalty. The amountshould be viewed as the assessable based on ordinary perceptions of “S-6-5 of the ITA Act1997”. Conclusion: A conclusion can be drawn by explaining that the three receipts that is earned byHilary is a private effort or private exertion income. This income would be classified aschargeable based on the ordinary perceptions of “S-6-5 of the ITA Act 1997”. Alternativelyif she chooses to write the book herself then the sale of book would result in royalties forHilary that would be held taxable.
Taxation Law ITAA 1997 - Assignment_4

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
Taxation Law: Understanding Taxable Income and Capital Gains Tax
|13
|3037
|302

(Doc) Taxation Law Solved Assignment
|10
|2037
|19

Taxation Law: Determination of Tax Outcomes for Personal Services and Interest Income
|9
|1627
|95

Taxation Law: Personal Service Income and Capital Gains Assets
|8
|1375
|335

Taxation Laws: Personal Exertion Income, Interest Income, and Capital Gains Tax
|6
|1003
|159

Taxation Law
|7
|1938
|326