Skip to main content

Your shopping cart is empty

Search Journal Articles

Designed for the specialist tax professional, The Tax Specialist journal is essential reading for corporate tax advisers, accountants, lawyers and academics. Featuring in-depth analysis, opinion and argument on legislative, administrative and judicial issues it is published five times per year and is available by subscription. Also known as the Red Journal.

The Tax Specialist covers the latest issues affecting your role and your business, including:

  • consolidations
  • mergers and acquisitions
  • international tax
  • GST securitisation
  • venture capital
  • legal professional privilege
  • Part IVA
  • TOFA, and more.

Australia’s leading journal for corporate tax professionals, is now also available on iPad and Android.

The Tax Specialist App download link - Apple iPad The Tax Institute CPD Event App download link - Android


Within Australia

file_download Order form

Outside Australia

file_download Order form


Articles from the current issue:

  • Division 6C property funds: Land in the context of infrastructure

    shopping_cart Add to cart 01 Aug 2016

    Division 6C of Part III of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth) operates to tax a “public trading trust” in the same way as a company, and its unitholders as if they are shareholders. A public unit trust that carries on a business that consists wholly of an eligible investment business does not carry on a “trading business”. This paper considers the first limb of the definition of “eligible investment business”, that is “investing in land for the purpose of, or primarily for the purpose, of deriving rent” and associated provisions. The paper is principally concerned with the question “what is an investment in land” in the context of ensuring that a public unit trust avoids becoming a “public trading trust”. The key issues are what is an “investment in land”, what is “rent”, and when is an investment in land “for the purpose, or primarily for the purpose” of deriving rent.

  • The distortive effects of the capital gains tax regime

    shopping_cart Add to cart 01 Aug 2016

    Although at the cost of simplicity, the design of the capital gains tax (CGT) regime is aimed at enhancing the ideals of horizontal and vertical equity, economic efficiency and fiscal adequacy. However, with the introduction of the CGT general discount (CGT discount) in 1999, satisfaction with such tax policy criteria has proven particularly difficult, if not impossible. The broad availability of the CGT discount together with the distortive effects of a realisation based tax incidence have led to personal capital gains being taxed on a highly concessional basis.

    This article discusses the rationale for the introduction of a CGT system and considers how the CGT discount has created significant additional distortion and complexity within the tax system thereby undermining the equity foundations on which the CGT regime was built. The article considers how this distortion may be reduced with the author concluding that, while a CGT regime plays a vital role in enhancing fiscal adequacy, the CGT discount represents one of the most generous, costly and complex preferences of all.

  • MIT tax reform

    shopping_cart Add to cart 01 Aug 2016

    The Tax Laws Amendment (New Tax System for Managed Investment Trusts) Act 2016 and related measures have made extensive amendments to the managed investment trust (MIT) taxation rules, and have introduced a new attribution managed investment trust (AMIT) regime. A trust can elect to enter the AMIT regime provided it satisfies certain criteria. An election is voluntary but, once made, is irrevocable. Entry into the AMIT regime confers certain taxation benefits.

    Trustees will need to consider whether the advantages of being an AMIT will make the election worthwhile, as against the effort required to secure entry, such as amending the trust’s constitution. Other amendments to the MIT taxation rules are, however, mandatory. This article first looks at the practical implications of the amendments to the current MIT regime and then discusses the pros and cons of entering into the new AMIT regime by comparing the new AMIT regime to the alternative.

  • Practical issues with trusts: Important updates

    shopping_cart Add to cart 01 Aug 2016

    Reforming the taxation of trusts and their beneficiaries is practical, topical and important. Currently, however, there appears to be considerable inertia about the topic, and little appetite for reform. Practitioners who focus on compliance find the present state of the law frustrating and difficult, while the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) appears to take a pragmatic view of compliance. This article is therefore directed at currently topical practical matters concerning the taxation of trusts, reflecting the author’s experience dealing with issues raised in audits.

    The article considers ordinary trust distributions, streaming of capital gain and franked distributions, capital gains and non-residents, restructuring issues for trusts under the new small business restructure roll-over, the High Court decision in Fischer v Nemeske Pty Ltd, the managed investment trust regime, and current areas of ATO focus.

  • An inbound investor’s feast

    shopping_cart Add to cart 01 Aug 2016

    Foreign investors contemplating investment in Australia must consider a range of Australian taxation factors which are likely to affect any decision to invest. This article outlines four such factors. The authors first examine the availability of double taxation treaty relief for investment in land rich and non-land rich entities. Next, the article focuses on multiple entry consolidated (MEC) groups (foreign-owned groups of Australian companies which can consolidate despite not having a single Australian head company).

    The article then discusses the recently enacted withholding tax regime affecting taxable Australian property, which broadly, requires a person who acquires certain types of taxable Australian property from a foreign resident to remit 10% of the purchase price to the Commissioner, and which applies to the “acquisition” of an affected asset which occurs on or after 1 July 2016. Finally, the article addresses some common state tax considerations affecting inbound investors and the entities in which they invest. This article was written on 1 March 2016 and has not been updated to reflect any changes in law since that time.

Search All Articles
Eg. TD 2005/D52 ALL words EXACT phrase WITHOUT words Journals Date range