Source: Taxation In Australia Journal Article
Published Date: 1 Sep 2016
In Millar v FCT (4 July 2016), the Full Court of the Federal Court found that a loan transaction was a sham. The result was that tax had been avoided through fraud or evasion, and the taxpayers were liable to pay an administrative penalty for intentional disregard of the tax law. The decision addresses two substantive legal issues. The first is the meaning of the term sham as used in Australian law and the elements comprising that concept. The second is whether interest that has been capitalised can be considered paid for withholding tax purposes. In addition, the court was required to consider the manner in which a taxpayer can discharge the onus of proof in taxation litigation and the statutory interpretation principles that apply when construing legislative provisions that have been rewritten. This article considers the decision and its implications in detail.
Everett assignments and the Commissioner's professional practice guidelines - Presentation 17 Jul 2018
Everett assignments and the Commissioner's withdrawn guidelines - Paper 17 Jul 2018
Effective disclaimers - Journal 01 Feb 2018
The US tax adviser's privilege: Insights for Australia - Journal 01 Oct 2010
The SBT and agency law " is tax law an island? - Journal 01 Dec 2008
FCT v Citylink Melbourne Ltd - When is expenditure incurred? - Journal 01 Oct 2006
Black hole expenditure - Journal 01 Jul 2006
The structural approach to tax avoidance in Australia - Journal 01 Jun 2006
TR 2005/23 - capital and revenue gains for listed investment companies - Journal 01 Mar 2006
Trust vesting: What happens? - Paper 28 Nov 2019
Trust vesting: What happens? - Presentation 28 Nov 2019
Residency - Corporate - Paper 08 Aug 2019
Residency - Corporate - Presentation 08 Aug 2019
All you wanted to know about trusts but were afraid to ask - Paper 28 Feb 2019
All you wanted to know about trusts but were afraid to ask - Presentation 28 Feb 2019
Updates for corporates - Presentation 11 Oct 2018
Updates for Corporates - Paper 11 Oct 2018
The material is copyright. Apart any fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research criticism or review, as permitted under the copyright Act, no part may be reproduced by any process without written permission from The Tax Institute.
Unless expressly stated, opinions are not that of The Tax Institute, which accepts no responsibility for the accuracy of any of the information contained within it.
The Tax Institute
(ABN 45 008 392 372 (PRV14016))
The Tax Institute is a Recognised Tax Agent Association (RTAA) under the Tax Agent Services Regulations 2009.
All materials provided on this site are protected by copyright and are owned by or licensed to TTI.
Except as expressly permitted by TTI or the copyright owner, any person or company who uses this site must not use, reproduce, redistribute, retransmit, publish or otherwise transfer, or commercially exploit, the materials or any information, software or other content, in whole or in part, which is available through this site.