31 May 1313 More on Client Update (CU) forms
MEMBER 107 writes, in response to Member 105's comments about the futility of lodging CU forms in last week's TAXVINE - see 2013 TAXVINE No 19 (24 May 2013):
"Further to Member 105's comments, I too have sent CU forms to the ATO and found they have not been processed. Does this now affect our 85% of clients whom we need to lodge? Of course it would not be necessary to lodge CU forms if the Portal worked properly and we could process the information on the Portal. I seem to be able to do some but certainly not all CU forms on the Portal."
MEMBER 108 writes:
"I refer to Member 105's comments about the CU Forms - we have about 30 client update forms that were lodged several months ago, with the 'return not necessary' box ticked and with validation reports, that are still showing as unlodged on our agent list. The ATO's advice was that come 15th May, all CUs would be processed and their status updated on the Portal/agents list. This didn't happen. Their advice on 23 May 2013 states that this is a known issue, the ATO cannot manually do anything to change them from being recorded as unlodged, and yes, our lodgment performance percentage is going to be affected because these clients will still count as unlodged. The only suggestion the ATO can make is to remove these clients from our agent's list, and add them back when they return for 2013.
By the way, lodging CUs via the Portal doesn't work consistently either, some clients still show up as unlodged or cannot be updated, with a message saying to contact the ATO. The other issue is any newly created entities (eg companies/super funds) added since 1 July 2012 are also unlodged for 2011/12, although they didn't exist - this is also a known issue but, yes, it will affect lodgment percentages.
These 'known issues' are going to reduce our on time lodgments by 5%.
Is anything being done about this? I'm happy to abide by the 85% lodgment rule, but I strongly object when the ATO's data is clearly incorrect, they have been advised that it is incorrect, and their attitude is that we need to fix the problem by deleting clients who are still clients!"