Taxation Law

Running head: TAXATION LAW
Taxation
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Authors Note
Course ID

1TAXATION LAW
Table of Contents
Answer to question 1:.................................................................................................................2
The main issues:.....................................................................................................................2
Background: Mary’s tax status at the time of entering Australia:.........................................2
The assessability of Mary’s receipts for 2017-18 in Australia...................................................3
The Australia-UK Double Taxation Agreement:...................................................................4
Conclusion:............................................................................................................................5
Answer to question 2:.................................................................................................................5
The Main Issue:......................................................................................................................5
Non-Cash Business Benefits:.................................................................................................5
Background: Assessability of non-cash business benfits under section 21, ITAA 1997:......6
Conclusion:............................................................................................................................7

2TAXATION LAW
Answer to question 1:
The main issues:
The present issue here is related to the determination of residency status under
“section 6 (1) of the ITAA 1997” and whether the receipts would be included for assessment
within the ordinary concepts of “section 6-5 of the ITAA 1997”.
Background: Mary’s tax status at the time of entering Australia:
The resident of Australia includes the individual that has their home in Australia,
unless the commissioner of taxation is content that the taxpayer’s permanent place of
residence is out of Australia1. The domicile Test under is used to determine the residency of a
person that have their domicile in Australia2. Domicile is obtained by choice where the
taxpayer intention is to make their home. 183 days’ test is used if a person has been in
Australia either continuously or intermittently for more than one half of the income year.
While superannuation test is implemented on the employee that are employed in the
government sector and deemed to be a tax resident of Australia.
In “Joachim’s case” the taxpayer stayed in Australia with the taxpayer’s having
permanent residency of Australia and maintained a family home in Australia3. The
commissioner held the taxpayer to be an Australian resident. As evident from the
circumstances of Mary Joseph she lived in UK before arriving in Australia under the work
permit with Lifestyle Pty Ltd for ten years. The domicile test is applied in case of Mary as
she entered Australia with the prearranged employment contracts and obtained the domicile
with the intent of making her home. She also meets the criteria of 183 days’ test as she has
been presented in Australian for more than 183 days. Citing “Joachim v FC of T (2002)”
Mary will be treated as the Australian resident within the ordinary meaning of the act because
1 “section 6 (1) of the ITAA 1997”
2 section 6 (1)(a)(i)
3 “Joachim v FC of T (2002)”