Taxation Law: Residency Test and Permanent Place of Abode
Verified
Added on 2023/04/07
|7
|1415
|358
AI Summary
This article discusses the residency test and permanent place of abode in taxation law. It explores the case of Harding v Commissioner of Taxation (2018) and provides insights on the practical impacts.
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 Part 1:.....................................................................................................................................2 A summary of key legal issues:...........................................................................................2 Summary of relevant law:...................................................................................................2 The permanent place of abode test:...................................................................................2 Application of law to the given facts in case:.......................................................................3 Opinion on case’s practical impacts:...................................................................................3 Part 2:.....................................................................................................................................4 Issues:................................................................................................................................4 Laws:..................................................................................................................................4 Application:.........................................................................................................................4 Conclusion:.........................................................................................................................5 References:............................................................................................................................6
2TAXATION LAW Part 1: A summary of key legal issues: The issue raised in the question was whether Mr Harding was considered as non- resident for the year 2011. This includes whether during that year Mr Harding ceases to be residing in Australia and whether he had established a permanent place of residence out of Australia. In“Harding v Commissioner of Taxation (2018)”, the court of law held that a citizen of Australia that has been living out of Australia for some years and has established the home overseas, continued to remain an Australian resident for taxation purpose for the reason that his fully furnished home that was maintained overseas was not sufficiently permanent1. Summary of relevant law: The resides test: Whether or an individual is living in Australia is considered as the first test for the purpose of residency. An individual would be treated as resident of Australia for taxation purpose if an individual is for real living in Australia, irrespective of his nationality, citizenship or their place of perpetual home. The case laws offer the factors that need to be considered as the indicative of ascertaining whether an individual is residing in Australia. The court in “ApplegatevFCT(1979)”heldthatpermanentdoesnotsignifiesforeverandthe objectively evaluated every year. This includes the physical presence, duration of physical presence, frequency and regularity of movements and their purpose of coming to Australia or for trip to abroad2. The permanent place of abode test: An individual’s intention of staying permanently instead of staying temporary or transitory is considered vital but it is not considered as the only factor to be taken into account. These factors comprise of the intended as well as the actual length of overseas stay. It also includes whether any fixed home has been established out of Australia and the durability of an individual’s continuous connection with the place within Australia. Similarly, in “Boer v FCT [2012]”and“Sully v FCT [2012]”, the taxpayers were considered as the 1"INCOMETAXASSESSMENTACT1936",Austlii.Edu.Au(Webpage,2019) <http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/itaa1936240/> 2"INCOMETAXASSESSMENTACT1997",Austlii.Edu.Au(Webpage,2019) <http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/itaa1997240/>
3TAXATION LAW Australian resident all through their stay abroad because they did not establish a permanent place of residence out of Australia3. Application of law to the given facts in case: Ordinary concepts test: As per Justice Derrington Mr Harding did not lived in Australia based on the ordinary concepts tests during the applicable income year. Although Justice Derrington, settled with commissioner that several factors reflected that Mr Harding was an Australian Citizen under this test. This is because he returns to Australia to visit his family. Mr Harding financial affairs continued to substantially locate in Australia, together with his continues ownership of family home4. He existed on passenger cards which stated that he was the Australian resident departing temporarily. Justice Derrington with the evidence established that Mr Harding’s actual intent was to permanently leave Australia and resume living and working in the Middle East. In the appeal by the taxpayer Justice Logan held that there is an overlap among the ordinary concepts and domicile test. The appeal followed the decision where Justice Logan held that Mr Harding had the fixed place of dwelling outside Australia. Therefore, Mr Harding was not held as the Australian resident under ordinary concepts test. Domicile Test: Justice Derrington also found that Mr Harding was the Australian resident under the definition of “resident” stated in“section 6 (1), ITAA 1936”. Mr Harding argued that his intention was not live indefinitely in any specific Middle East nation and he might return Australia. Special consideration was paid by Justice Darrington regarding Mr Harding’s living. As per the judge, Mr Harding’s accommodation was temporary in nature and did not had sufficient accessories that reflected a permanent adobe. The court held that Mr Harding did not satisfied the “permanent place of abode” limb of the “Domicile Test”. Following the appeal by taxpayer Justice Logan referred to subpara (i) of the section 6 and stated that Mr Harding had the domicile in Australia for 2011. Justice Logan agreed with the decision of primary judge to determine whether the fixed place of abode is out of Australia. By applying the principles of Justice Logan, it was held that Mr Harding had the permanent place of residence out of Australia in Bahrain, therefore he was non-residentof Australia. 3Woellner, Robin H., et al.Australian Taxation Law Select: Legislation and Commentary 2016. Oxford University Press, 2016. 4Kenny, Paul,Australian Tax 2013(LexisNexis Butterworths, 2013)
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
4TAXATION LAW Opinion on case’s practical impacts: The analysis of the court regarding the maintenance of permanent home may be a matter of concern for several expatriates. Overall, the law acknowledge that it is probable that a fully furnished home to be treated as permanent place of residence. But in this case, the court noticed that impermanent intentional and original use of accommodation was serious.Expatriatesmustcarefullytakeintoaccounttheiroverseasaccommodation arrangements in respect of the degree of permanence from the first day5. Other aspects associated to accommodation together with the arrangements of mail, acquiring of furniture and utility arrangements is also critical. The decision reflects that tax residency of individuals requires changes in Australia. This reflects the vagueness, overlying and broad multi-tiered tests. Part 2: Issues: Whether the taxpayer will be treated as Australian resident under the extended definition of“section 6 (1), ITAA 1936”. Laws: Ordinary test: The reside test signifies to dwell permanently or for the considerable time period. This is reliant on the circumstances of case such as the taxpayer intention of presence6. Domicile Test: A person is held as the Australian dweller if their domicile is in Australia except when the tax officials are content that an individual’s permanent residence is out of Australia. The court in“Applegate v FCT (1979)”stated that permanent does not signifies everlasting and the same is examined every year. Similarly, in“Harding v FCT (2018)”held that an Australian citizen living out of Australia for few years and has established a home out of Australia that are not permanent will be held as Australian resident7. 183 days’ test: 5Morgan, Annette, Colleen Mortimer and Dale Pinto,A Practical Introduction To Australian Taxation Law(CCH Australia, 2013) 6Sadiq, Kerrie et al,Principles Of Taxation Law 2019 7Krever, Richard E,Australian Taxation Law Cases 2013(Thomson Reuters, 2013)
5TAXATION LAW Under this test if a person has been physically present in Australia for greater than sixmonthswillbeheldasAustralianoccupantexceptwhenitisunderstoodby commissioner that the usual residence of taxpayer is out of Australia. Application: Misha did not reside in Australia based on the ordinary concepts test. Neither Nida was physically present for more than six months of the relevant year under the 183 days test. Under the domicile test Misha has maintained her domicile in Australia when she returned following her five year overseas stay. Citing“Applegate v FCT (1979)”Misha did not dwell permanently or for considerable period of time as she moved traveling around Europe. Similarly, citing“Harding v FCT (2018)” Misha living arrangement in foreign was temporary in nature and lacked enduring quality8. Conclusion: Misha failed to pass the permanent place of residence limb of Domicile Test and she is an Australian resident under the extended definition of“section 6 (1), ITAA 1997”. 8Woellner, R. H,Australian Taxation Law Select 2013(CCH Australia, 2013)
6TAXATION LAW References: "INCOMETAXASSESSMENTACT1936",Austlii.Edu.Au(Webpage,2019) <http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/itaa1936240/> "INCOMETAXASSESSMENTACT1997",Austlii.Edu.Au(Webpage,2019) <http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/itaa1997240/> Kenny, Paul,Australian Tax 2013(LexisNexis Butterworths, 2013) Krever, Richard E,Australian Taxation Law Cases 2013(Thomson Reuters, 2013) Morgan, Annette, Colleen Mortimer and Dale Pinto,A Practical Introduction To Australian Taxation Law(CCH Australia, 2013) Sadiq, Kerrie et al,Principles Of Taxation Law 2019 Woellner, R. H,Australian Taxation Law Select 2013(CCH Australia, 2013) Woellner, Robin H., et al.Australian Taxation Law Select: Legislation and Commentary 2016. Oxford University Press, 2016.