Tax Deductions and Expenditure Analysis
VerifiedAdded on  2020/02/18
|14
|3073
|31
AI Summary
This assignment analyzes a case study concerning permissible tax deductions in Australia, specifically focusing on the deductibility of mobile phone expenses for business purposes. It examines relevant legislation, precedents, and regulations to determine the allowable deduction amount. The analysis includes a detailed calculation example to illustrate the process and demonstrates how expenditure can be considered incidental to income generation. Legal references from prominent Australian tax cases are incorporated to support the arguments.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.

Running head: TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
Taxation law of Australia
University Name
Student Name
Authors’ Note
Taxation law of Australia
University Name
Student Name
Authors’ Note
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.

2
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
Table of Contents
Answer to Question 1:................................................................................................................2
Answer to Question (i):..............................................................................................................2
Answer to Question (ii):.............................................................................................................3
Answer to Question (iv):............................................................................................................4
Answer to Question (v):.............................................................................................................4
Answer to Question (vii):...........................................................................................................5
Answer to Question (viii):..........................................................................................................6
Answer to Question (ix):............................................................................................................7
Answer to Question (x):.............................................................................................................7
Answer to Question 2:................................................................................................................7
References................................................................................................................................11
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
Table of Contents
Answer to Question 1:................................................................................................................2
Answer to Question (i):..............................................................................................................2
Answer to Question (ii):.............................................................................................................3
Answer to Question (iv):............................................................................................................4
Answer to Question (v):.............................................................................................................4
Answer to Question (vii):...........................................................................................................5
Answer to Question (viii):..........................................................................................................6
Answer to Question (ix):............................................................................................................7
Answer to Question (x):.............................................................................................................7
Answer to Question 2:................................................................................................................7
References................................................................................................................................11

3
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
Answer to Question 1:
Answer to Question (i):
The reliable clientele of airline companies is properly rewarded with specific Flight Point as
well as Reward by aviation companies that is essentially under the stipulations mentioned
rulings specified in TR 1999/6 (Lam & Whitney, 2016). The directives of TR 1999/6
mention that reward points or incentives that are accepted by different clientele from
organizations functioning in the airline segment are normally not taken into consideration
under taxation as a specific type of earning (Barkoczy, 2016). Particularly, this regulation
establishes the tax implications of different flight rewards that are accepted from specific
customer loyalty programs. Again, rewards barring the flight rewards are essentially not
taken into consideration in this specific ruling. In essence, for this specific ruling, a specific
flight reward has different characteristics that are mentioned as below:
- The reward necessarily comprises of a free flight, a flight upgrading or else free hotel
space or hiring of car that might be attached to such kinds of flights or else paid
flights (Braithwaite, 2017).
- Flight reward can be considered by a specific member or a particular member of
immediate family (Wu, 2015).
- Flight reward is essentially not transferrable against cash
- Flight reward is also not exchangeable for cash
Nonetheless, fringe benefits also might probably be implemented on particular points as well
as incentive in case of occurrence of below mentioned situations:
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
Answer to Question 1:
Answer to Question (i):
The reliable clientele of airline companies is properly rewarded with specific Flight Point as
well as Reward by aviation companies that is essentially under the stipulations mentioned
rulings specified in TR 1999/6 (Lam & Whitney, 2016). The directives of TR 1999/6
mention that reward points or incentives that are accepted by different clientele from
organizations functioning in the airline segment are normally not taken into consideration
under taxation as a specific type of earning (Barkoczy, 2016). Particularly, this regulation
establishes the tax implications of different flight rewards that are accepted from specific
customer loyalty programs. Again, rewards barring the flight rewards are essentially not
taken into consideration in this specific ruling. In essence, for this specific ruling, a specific
flight reward has different characteristics that are mentioned as below:
- The reward necessarily comprises of a free flight, a flight upgrading or else free hotel
space or hiring of car that might be attached to such kinds of flights or else paid
flights (Braithwaite, 2017).
- Flight reward can be considered by a specific member or a particular member of
immediate family (Wu, 2015).
- Flight reward is essentially not transferrable against cash
- Flight reward is also not exchangeable for cash
Nonetheless, fringe benefits also might probably be implemented on particular points as well
as incentive in case of occurrence of below mentioned situations:

4
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
- There remains a particular association between both the employer and workers. In
addition to this, the points or else incentives received from the flight are in fact
received by workers bearing in mind different employment proviso (Wu, 2015).
- Flight points or else rewards are delivered to the workforce based on a specific
business deal
The periodic flier compensation accepted by the workers of Web jet for carrying out work
related travel need to be taxed neither as Fringe Benefit nor as taxable income.
Answer to Question (ii):
Individuals from among the consumers receive a payment for damage of the capital asset
specifically during offering service to customer (Davis et al., 2015). However, in this specific
case, the total amount accepted as recompense for diverse harms caused cannot be analysed
under policies of taxation (Braithwaite, 2017). Nevertheless, this can be said to be taxable
under the receiver. The important factors that need to be considered in this regard are as
presented below:
- The resources or in other words the assets can be considered as capital and can be
vigorously utilized in the business functions of the recipient (Miller & Oats, 2016).
- The assets or in other words the resources of the firm have the need to be depreciable
asset. In this case, the estimated depreciation can be assessed for the specific assets
presented in the documentation (Pearce & Pinto, 2015).
- The payment received can be utilized for refurbishing parts of firm’s assets that get
damaged (Pearson, 2017).
A specific amount of funds is received for the damage caused by Crane Hire from the
customers. Essentially, this cannot be taken into account under definite cases of taxation and
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
- There remains a particular association between both the employer and workers. In
addition to this, the points or else incentives received from the flight are in fact
received by workers bearing in mind different employment proviso (Wu, 2015).
- Flight points or else rewards are delivered to the workforce based on a specific
business deal
The periodic flier compensation accepted by the workers of Web jet for carrying out work
related travel need to be taxed neither as Fringe Benefit nor as taxable income.
Answer to Question (ii):
Individuals from among the consumers receive a payment for damage of the capital asset
specifically during offering service to customer (Davis et al., 2015). However, in this specific
case, the total amount accepted as recompense for diverse harms caused cannot be analysed
under policies of taxation (Braithwaite, 2017). Nevertheless, this can be said to be taxable
under the receiver. The important factors that need to be considered in this regard are as
presented below:
- The resources or in other words the assets can be considered as capital and can be
vigorously utilized in the business functions of the recipient (Miller & Oats, 2016).
- The assets or in other words the resources of the firm have the need to be depreciable
asset. In this case, the estimated depreciation can be assessed for the specific assets
presented in the documentation (Pearce & Pinto, 2015).
- The payment received can be utilized for refurbishing parts of firm’s assets that get
damaged (Pearson, 2017).
A specific amount of funds is received for the damage caused by Crane Hire from the
customers. Essentially, this cannot be taken into account under definite cases of taxation and
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.

5
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
this is necessarily not a taxable income of the company given the fact that the above
mentioned circumstances are met (Mitchell et al., 2016).
Answer to Question (iii):
As per the Australian Taxation Office, gifts accepted either in cash or else in kind can be
received by a specific individual but this necessarily cannot be regarded as a constituent of
income (Coxon, 2016). Essentially, small gifts can be treated as a specific class of gift that is
eradicated during period of calculation of income tax of specific individual. On the other
hand, in a specific case where huge amount of gifts are received that again can be converted
into money, the specific amount can be considered for the procedure of evaluation by
receiver (Mitchell et al., 2016).
However, in this specific case, alcohol supplier has offered package of holiday in a foreign
country for free and this is inevitably received by the night club executive. Nevertheless, this
can be regarded as income tax enumeration procedure of executive of the particular night
club (Pearson, 2017).
Answer to Question (iv):
The total amount of funds obtained by the Canoe Club for buying additional canoes was
necessarily discovered to be extra funds collected (Miller & Oats, 2016). Nevertheless, this
was essentially returned to different affiliates of Canoe Club. Again, the supplementary fund
that was collected cannot be considered during the calculation of income tax. By itself, this
cannot be regarded while registering earnings. Fundamentally, this is due to the fact that this
fund cannot be necessarily presented as earning in the alternative supplementary fund that is
given by diverse members (Barkoczy, 2016).
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
this is necessarily not a taxable income of the company given the fact that the above
mentioned circumstances are met (Mitchell et al., 2016).
Answer to Question (iii):
As per the Australian Taxation Office, gifts accepted either in cash or else in kind can be
received by a specific individual but this necessarily cannot be regarded as a constituent of
income (Coxon, 2016). Essentially, small gifts can be treated as a specific class of gift that is
eradicated during period of calculation of income tax of specific individual. On the other
hand, in a specific case where huge amount of gifts are received that again can be converted
into money, the specific amount can be considered for the procedure of evaluation by
receiver (Mitchell et al., 2016).
However, in this specific case, alcohol supplier has offered package of holiday in a foreign
country for free and this is inevitably received by the night club executive. Nevertheless, this
can be regarded as income tax enumeration procedure of executive of the particular night
club (Pearson, 2017).
Answer to Question (iv):
The total amount of funds obtained by the Canoe Club for buying additional canoes was
necessarily discovered to be extra funds collected (Miller & Oats, 2016). Nevertheless, this
was essentially returned to different affiliates of Canoe Club. Again, the supplementary fund
that was collected cannot be considered during the calculation of income tax. By itself, this
cannot be regarded while registering earnings. Fundamentally, this is due to the fact that this
fund cannot be necessarily presented as earning in the alternative supplementary fund that is
given by diverse members (Barkoczy, 2016).

6
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
Answer to Question (v):
Profits or gains that are acquired by sports person can be considered under the Taxation
stipulations mentioned under TR 1999/17 (Lam & Whitney, 2016). Nonetheless, as per the
stipulations stated under this directive, gains of any type or a specific sum of money received
by a particular sport person can be regarded as an earning that is necessarily taxable. In
addition to this, cumulative receipts also become a particular fraction of the earnings that is
put through taxation (Pearce & Pinto, 2015). Nevertheless, in the current state of affairs, the
overall amount that is received by the football player of Australia from the television
marketing corporation can be regarded as an earning that is taxable as per the general concept
(Pearson, 2017).
Answer to Question (vi):
Basically, reimbursement along with the allowance for different construction workers can be
stated under the guidelines declared under TR 95/22 (Davis et al., 2015). In essence, as per
the rulings stated under the TR 95/22, workers operating for diverse construction together
with building business are inevitably comprised of different facets as mentioned below:
- Workforce employed for the purpose of development of building.
- Project manager is occupied for construction together with development of particular
building and many other associated things (Miller & Oats, 2016).
- Beginner, carpenter along with apprentice
- Particular places that include construction sites in which different supervisors carry
out their tasks (Mitchell et al., 2016).
In essence, expenditure that is essentially incurred with regard to aptitude for
development of building is clearly explained as the compensation of the labourers
operating in the segment of construction as well as building development (Pearson, 2017).
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
Answer to Question (v):
Profits or gains that are acquired by sports person can be considered under the Taxation
stipulations mentioned under TR 1999/17 (Lam & Whitney, 2016). Nonetheless, as per the
stipulations stated under this directive, gains of any type or a specific sum of money received
by a particular sport person can be regarded as an earning that is necessarily taxable. In
addition to this, cumulative receipts also become a particular fraction of the earnings that is
put through taxation (Pearce & Pinto, 2015). Nevertheless, in the current state of affairs, the
overall amount that is received by the football player of Australia from the television
marketing corporation can be regarded as an earning that is taxable as per the general concept
(Pearson, 2017).
Answer to Question (vi):
Basically, reimbursement along with the allowance for different construction workers can be
stated under the guidelines declared under TR 95/22 (Davis et al., 2015). In essence, as per
the rulings stated under the TR 95/22, workers operating for diverse construction together
with building business are inevitably comprised of different facets as mentioned below:
- Workforce employed for the purpose of development of building.
- Project manager is occupied for construction together with development of particular
building and many other associated things (Miller & Oats, 2016).
- Beginner, carpenter along with apprentice
- Particular places that include construction sites in which different supervisors carry
out their tasks (Mitchell et al., 2016).
In essence, expenditure that is essentially incurred with regard to aptitude for
development of building is clearly explained as the compensation of the labourers
operating in the segment of construction as well as building development (Pearson, 2017).

7
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
Answer to Question (vii):
Particularly, during the period of tax calculation, specific disbursement for short time period
considered from the perspective of an artiste necessarily can be authorized with the following
deductions:-
- Education of unit along with software (Bauer, 2016).
- Course fee for a specific term that is inevitably for short term period for subject such
as art (Braithwaite, 2017).
- Proposed meals for a particular amount of expenditure
- Travelling cost that is driven for the particular course
Nevertheless, expenditure mentioned above can be regarded for cases of deductions. This can
also be permitted only if the expenditures are connected to administration of arts course.
However, this can be taken into account for a very short period of time. Furthermore,
disbursements that occur but necessarily do not correlate proportionately to management of
art cannot be approved for tax deduction (Dowling, 2014). Thus, disbursements in the current
condition can be considered for deductions after taking into account art management course
for a short period. In this case, expenditure essentially lies within the specific range.
Answer to Question (viii):
As per the taxation regulations, disbursement for dresses delivered by the employer is not
regarded under taxation arrangement. As mentioned by the Taxation Office of Australia,
presentation of art by different artists can be regarded as allowable deduction under taxation
regulation (Gallemore & Labro, 2015). According to the directives of taxation and acceptable
grant by specifically the Taxation Office of Australia, performing artists can be considered as
the ones mentioned below:
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
Answer to Question (vii):
Particularly, during the period of tax calculation, specific disbursement for short time period
considered from the perspective of an artiste necessarily can be authorized with the following
deductions:-
- Education of unit along with software (Bauer, 2016).
- Course fee for a specific term that is inevitably for short term period for subject such
as art (Braithwaite, 2017).
- Proposed meals for a particular amount of expenditure
- Travelling cost that is driven for the particular course
Nevertheless, expenditure mentioned above can be regarded for cases of deductions. This can
also be permitted only if the expenditures are connected to administration of arts course.
However, this can be taken into account for a very short period of time. Furthermore,
disbursements that occur but necessarily do not correlate proportionately to management of
art cannot be approved for tax deduction (Dowling, 2014). Thus, disbursements in the current
condition can be considered for deductions after taking into account art management course
for a short period. In this case, expenditure essentially lies within the specific range.
Answer to Question (viii):
As per the taxation regulations, disbursement for dresses delivered by the employer is not
regarded under taxation arrangement. As mentioned by the Taxation Office of Australia,
presentation of art by different artists can be regarded as allowable deduction under taxation
regulation (Gallemore & Labro, 2015). According to the directives of taxation and acceptable
grant by specifically the Taxation Office of Australia, performing artists can be considered as
the ones mentioned below:
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser

8
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
-Performing artists indicate towards musicians
-Performing artists can indicate towards an actor (Guenther et al., 2016).
-Performing artists can be a singer
-Performing artists indicate towards different other classification of artists
-Performing artists also indicate towards performers at circus along with dancers (McGuire et
al., 2014).
Fundamentally, in the current situation, disbursements can be associated to dresses and
cosmetics of diverse performing artiste. Again, specific expenditure can be allowed as a
deduction in the process of shaping the overall earnings that are necessarily taxable for
performing artists.
Answer to Question (ix):
Basically, travelling and drifting between home and workplace can be regarded as travel for
specifically travelling purposes. However, there are specific provisions that allow for
deductions and the particular ones that are permitted declare about the travelling expenditure.
Furthermore, there are certain cases where travelling can also be carried out for official
purpose alone and again there can be cases when travelling can be carried out partially for
official purpose and partially for private purposes (Dowling, 2014). Essentially, in the current
state affairs, it might be hereby stated that travelling can be undertaken only for purposes of
work. In addition to this, disbursements carried out can be declared for deductions of tax and
determination of tax.
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
-Performing artists indicate towards musicians
-Performing artists can indicate towards an actor (Guenther et al., 2016).
-Performing artists can be a singer
-Performing artists indicate towards different other classification of artists
-Performing artists also indicate towards performers at circus along with dancers (McGuire et
al., 2014).
Fundamentally, in the current situation, disbursements can be associated to dresses and
cosmetics of diverse performing artiste. Again, specific expenditure can be allowed as a
deduction in the process of shaping the overall earnings that are necessarily taxable for
performing artists.
Answer to Question (ix):
Basically, travelling and drifting between home and workplace can be regarded as travel for
specifically travelling purposes. However, there are specific provisions that allow for
deductions and the particular ones that are permitted declare about the travelling expenditure.
Furthermore, there are certain cases where travelling can also be carried out for official
purpose alone and again there can be cases when travelling can be carried out partially for
official purpose and partially for private purposes (Dowling, 2014). Essentially, in the current
state affairs, it might be hereby stated that travelling can be undertaken only for purposes of
work. In addition to this, disbursements carried out can be declared for deductions of tax and
determination of tax.

9
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
Answer to Question (x):
Fundamentally, disbursements can be associated to travelling between places of yet another
owner/employer and the particular employer. Nevertheless, in the current conditions, costs
borne for travelling between two different employers can be considered as allowable
deduction (Bauer, 2016). Over and above this, this is primarily owing to the fact that claims
for deductions cannot be asserted for travelling between diverse employers.
Answer to Question 2:
For the purpose of verifying the overall tax liability of a particular individual, it is
indispensable to settle on whether particular individual is a resident otherwise a foreign
resident for taxation (Mitchell et al., 2016). In essence, law proviso states that a specific
overseas student belonging and who has necessarily registered in this nation Australia for
over a period of more than six months can be considered as a resident for taxation reason. In
particular, in the current scenario, it can be hereby witnessed that Manpreet can be regarded
as a resident of Australia for the purpose of taxation as the student is listed for a specific
course for a period of more than six months in any of the Australian University (Barkoczy,
2016). In addition to this, this specific individual also functions in a particular office on a part
time base and accepts a recompense of approximately $54000. However, this specific
individual also had to incur expenditure for diverse educational reasons and this is essentially
not allowed as deduction. Again, expenditure on self-education that is approximately $18000
cannot be allowed as deduction. Above all, the law states that a specific individual can claim
expenditure related to self education. Essentially, this can happen only in case if the specific
study is connected to work otherwise in case if the specific individual has received erudition
of bond that is essentially taxable according to laws. Intrinsically, the course adopted for self
education needs to have desirable advantage and interest with the current employment.
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
Answer to Question (x):
Fundamentally, disbursements can be associated to travelling between places of yet another
owner/employer and the particular employer. Nevertheless, in the current conditions, costs
borne for travelling between two different employers can be considered as allowable
deduction (Bauer, 2016). Over and above this, this is primarily owing to the fact that claims
for deductions cannot be asserted for travelling between diverse employers.
Answer to Question 2:
For the purpose of verifying the overall tax liability of a particular individual, it is
indispensable to settle on whether particular individual is a resident otherwise a foreign
resident for taxation (Mitchell et al., 2016). In essence, law proviso states that a specific
overseas student belonging and who has necessarily registered in this nation Australia for
over a period of more than six months can be considered as a resident for taxation reason. In
particular, in the current scenario, it can be hereby witnessed that Manpreet can be regarded
as a resident of Australia for the purpose of taxation as the student is listed for a specific
course for a period of more than six months in any of the Australian University (Barkoczy,
2016). In addition to this, this specific individual also functions in a particular office on a part
time base and accepts a recompense of approximately $54000. However, this specific
individual also had to incur expenditure for diverse educational reasons and this is essentially
not allowed as deduction. Again, expenditure on self-education that is approximately $18000
cannot be allowed as deduction. Above all, the law states that a specific individual can claim
expenditure related to self education. Essentially, this can happen only in case if the specific
study is connected to work otherwise in case if the specific individual has received erudition
of bond that is essentially taxable according to laws. Intrinsically, the course adopted for self
education needs to have desirable advantage and interest with the current employment.

10
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
However, in this specific case, it can be hereby mentioned that the particular course has the
need to assure the following conditions:-
-Augment the required skills that is required by a particular individual in the current
workplace
-This specific course can aid in the overall process of enhancing the entire level of earnings
from the current employment
Therefore, it can be stated that a specific individual do not have the requirement to claim for
diverse expenditure related to self-education. This does not have any kind of relation with the
current employment condition.
According to the regulations mentioned under the section that is 8-1 specifically under the
Income Tax Assessment expresses that a specific expenditure is deductible if there is
passable association between actions generating expenditure and earning. In addition to this,
expenditures/disbursements that are private or in other words domestic is not acceptable as
deduction. Moreover, a specific case reflected by the case Ronpibon Tin NL v. FC
mentioned under T (1949) supports specific stance. However, this essentially asserts that a
specific outgoing can only be allowed as tax deduction only in case where outgoing leads to
generation of taxable income. Again, there also remains expenditure that is incurred for self-
education purpose and hereby cannot be allowed for deduction for tax.
Fundamentally, there are disbursements that are essentially maintained by Manpreet on
specifically computers along with printers. In addition to this, there disbursements for mobile
phones that are subsequently utilized for work related matters. Furthermore, expenditures are
generally deductible when there remains nexus between expenditure and income generating
capability. Moreover, expenditure can also be regarded as incidental otherwise relevant for
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
However, in this specific case, it can be hereby mentioned that the particular course has the
need to assure the following conditions:-
-Augment the required skills that is required by a particular individual in the current
workplace
-This specific course can aid in the overall process of enhancing the entire level of earnings
from the current employment
Therefore, it can be stated that a specific individual do not have the requirement to claim for
diverse expenditure related to self-education. This does not have any kind of relation with the
current employment condition.
According to the regulations mentioned under the section that is 8-1 specifically under the
Income Tax Assessment expresses that a specific expenditure is deductible if there is
passable association between actions generating expenditure and earning. In addition to this,
expenditures/disbursements that are private or in other words domestic is not acceptable as
deduction. Moreover, a specific case reflected by the case Ronpibon Tin NL v. FC
mentioned under T (1949) supports specific stance. However, this essentially asserts that a
specific outgoing can only be allowed as tax deduction only in case where outgoing leads to
generation of taxable income. Again, there also remains expenditure that is incurred for self-
education purpose and hereby cannot be allowed for deduction for tax.
Fundamentally, there are disbursements that are essentially maintained by Manpreet on
specifically computers along with printers. In addition to this, there disbursements for mobile
phones that are subsequently utilized for work related matters. Furthermore, expenditures are
generally deductible when there remains nexus between expenditure and income generating
capability. Moreover, expenditure can also be regarded as incidental otherwise relevant for
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.

11
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
income generation. The case of FC of T v. M I Roberts 92 ATC 4787 mentions that the
court has approved nine manager to deduct expenditure related to MBA as per
standard/regulation stated therein. Therefore, it can be hereby mentioned that he can affirm
regarding permissible subtraction for mainly the mobile phone. Calculation for tax is hereby
stated below:
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
income generation. The case of FC of T v. M I Roberts 92 ATC 4787 mentions that the
court has approved nine manager to deduct expenditure related to MBA as per
standard/regulation stated therein. Therefore, it can be hereby mentioned that he can affirm
regarding permissible subtraction for mainly the mobile phone. Calculation for tax is hereby
stated below:

12
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
References
Barkoczy, S. (2016). Foundations of Taxation Law 2016. OUP Catalogue.
Bauer, A. M. (2016). Tax avoidance and the implications of weak internal
controls. Contemporary Accounting Research, 33(2), 449-486.
Braithwaite, V. (Ed.). (2017). Taxing democracy: Understanding tax avoidance and evasion.
Routledge.
Braithwaite, V. (Ed.). (2017). Taxing democracy: Understanding tax avoidance and evasion.
Routledge.
Coxon, H. (2016). Australian Official Publications: Guides to Official Publications. Elsevier.
Davis, A. K., Guenther, D. A., Krull, L. K., & Williams, B. M. (2015). Do socially
responsible firms pay more taxes?. The Accounting Review, 91(1), 47-68.
Dowling, G. R. (2014). The curious case of corporate tax avoidance: Is it socially
irresponsible?. Journal of Business Ethics, 124(1), 173-184.
Gallemore, J., & Labro, E. (2015). The importance of the internal information environment
for tax avoidance. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 60(1), 149-167.
Guenther, D. A., Matsunaga, S. R., & Williams, B. M. (2016). Is tax avoidance related to
firm risk?. The Accounting Review, 92(1), 115-136.
Lam, D., & Whitney, A. (2016). Taxation and property: Practical aspects of the new foreign
resident CGT witholding tax. LSJ: Law Society of NSW Journal, (21), 84.
McGuire, S. T., Wang, D., & Wilson, R. J. (2014). Dual class ownership and tax
avoidance. The Accounting Review, 89(4), 1487-1516.
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
References
Barkoczy, S. (2016). Foundations of Taxation Law 2016. OUP Catalogue.
Bauer, A. M. (2016). Tax avoidance and the implications of weak internal
controls. Contemporary Accounting Research, 33(2), 449-486.
Braithwaite, V. (Ed.). (2017). Taxing democracy: Understanding tax avoidance and evasion.
Routledge.
Braithwaite, V. (Ed.). (2017). Taxing democracy: Understanding tax avoidance and evasion.
Routledge.
Coxon, H. (2016). Australian Official Publications: Guides to Official Publications. Elsevier.
Davis, A. K., Guenther, D. A., Krull, L. K., & Williams, B. M. (2015). Do socially
responsible firms pay more taxes?. The Accounting Review, 91(1), 47-68.
Dowling, G. R. (2014). The curious case of corporate tax avoidance: Is it socially
irresponsible?. Journal of Business Ethics, 124(1), 173-184.
Gallemore, J., & Labro, E. (2015). The importance of the internal information environment
for tax avoidance. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 60(1), 149-167.
Guenther, D. A., Matsunaga, S. R., & Williams, B. M. (2016). Is tax avoidance related to
firm risk?. The Accounting Review, 92(1), 115-136.
Lam, D., & Whitney, A. (2016). Taxation and property: Practical aspects of the new foreign
resident CGT witholding tax. LSJ: Law Society of NSW Journal, (21), 84.
McGuire, S. T., Wang, D., & Wilson, R. J. (2014). Dual class ownership and tax
avoidance. The Accounting Review, 89(4), 1487-1516.

13
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
Miller, A., & Oats, L. (2016). Principles of international taxation. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Mitchell, R., O'Donnell, A., Marshall, S., & Ramsay, I. (2016). Law, corporate governance
and partnerships at work: a study of australian regulatory style and business
practice. Routledge.
Pearce, P., & Pinto, D. (2015). An evaluation of the case for a congestion tax in
Australia. The Tax Specialist, 18(4), 146-153.
Pearson, G. (2017). Further challenges for Australian consumer law. In Consumer Law and
Socioeconomic Development (pp. 287-305). Springer, Cham.
Wu, Y. (2015). Evasion of Interest Withholding Tax: Evidence from Trading Volumes in
Australian Government Bonds. J. Austl. Tax'n, 17, 251.
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
Miller, A., & Oats, L. (2016). Principles of international taxation. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Mitchell, R., O'Donnell, A., Marshall, S., & Ramsay, I. (2016). Law, corporate governance
and partnerships at work: a study of australian regulatory style and business
practice. Routledge.
Pearce, P., & Pinto, D. (2015). An evaluation of the case for a congestion tax in
Australia. The Tax Specialist, 18(4), 146-153.
Pearson, G. (2017). Further challenges for Australian consumer law. In Consumer Law and
Socioeconomic Development (pp. 287-305). Springer, Cham.
Wu, Y. (2015). Evasion of Interest Withholding Tax: Evidence from Trading Volumes in
Australian Government Bonds. J. Austl. Tax'n, 17, 251.
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser

14
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
TAXATION LAW OF AUSTRALIA
1 out of 14
Related Documents
![[object Object]](/_next/image/?url=%2F_next%2Fstatic%2Fmedia%2Flogo.6d15ce61.png&w=640&q=75)
Your All-in-One AI-Powered Toolkit for Academic Success.
 +13062052269
info@desklib.com
Available 24*7 on WhatsApp / Email
Unlock your academic potential
© 2024  |  Zucol Services PVT LTD  |  All rights reserved.