Source: Taxation In Australia Journal Article
Published Date: 1 Sep 2020
Principles of tax residency can be notoriously difficult to apply in practice, sometimes even in quite simple cases. The recent decision in FCT v Addy demonstrates that. In Addy, the Full Federal Court unanimously reversed the decision of the single bench in relation to whether a taxpayer was a resident according to ordinary concepts and how the 183-day test should apply. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Australians living overseas have returned in droves, often temporarily, without necessarily considering the tax implications. Many are waiting out the pandemic in Australia. What does this mean for their income tax residence and how might practitioners advise on the complex issues that can arise? Given the inherent uncertainty in how tax residency laws apply, even in simple cases, the Commissioner should issue a practice statement clarifying how he would look to apply Australia's tax residency laws in a global pandemic.
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.