Your shopping cart is empty

MEMBER 210 writes:

"Member 207 has my total sympathy and I can feel his/her frustration - see 2011 TAXVINE No 45 (18 November 2011).

However, just as a point of interest, I was at a seminar recently run by the ATO and the presenter actually brought up this matter. He asked how many people in the audience had been affected by this problem and several put up their hands. He then sneeringly mentioned TAXVINE and the number of tax agents writing in and whingeing about the delays. He claimed that more than 70% of the returns held back contained problems and had to be corrected. I would like some proof of this as most of those that I have heard about, including those lodged by the people in the audience at this seminar, were eventually processed with no changes. Can the ATO provide some definite proof that this whole debacle is actually disclosing some deliberate attempts at cheating by taxpayers?

As another point of interest, of all the agents in the audience who had had returns affected by this audit procedure, the majority of them were for taxpayers working for one large organisation. The presenter said that this meant there was a problem with the records of the employer but my question is why on earth do the employees have to wait for their money because the employer's records are not correct or not lodged on time?

Thank God for TAXVINE - it keeps us relatively sane for most of the time at least."

MEMBER 211 writes:

"I am curious, but without the time to check through the decision and relevant sections of the Acts, as to whether the decision in the Multiflex case requiring the Commissioner to pay a GST refund "within a reasonable period" could be used to speed up the resolution of the delayed returns (or at least the refunds). Perhaps someone who has a little breathing space can help us with an opinion?"

Media Release Search
Eg. TD 2005/D52 ALL words EXACT phrase WITHOUT words Date range
From To