Your shopping cart is empty

Contemporary tax fraud regulation: Part 2 – Concurrent regulation and taxpayer risks


Increasingly, Australian regulators are invoking the criminal process, contemporaneously with more traditional civil recovery methods, in order to regulate tax evasion. Project Wickenby is a prime example of the increasing tendency of regulators to proceed by way of criminal prosecution. In this article, which is published in two parts, the author considers issues arising out of modern concurrent tax fraud regulation.

Part 1, which was published in the previous issue of this journal, identified and analysed modern indictable offences which may be alleged in a classic tax fraud context. Part 2, by reference to the criminal exposure identified in Part 1, identifies and analyses the potential interference that concurrent tax fraud regulation may have on the criminal process in a defended matter. Part 2 also addresses possible ways in which any prejudice flowing from this interference may be mitigated.

Author profile

Mathew Leighton-Daly
Mathew is a Barrister practising from 16th Floor Wardell Chambers (Head of Chambers: the Hon. R Ellicott, QC). He has an eclectic tax-related practice encompassing administrative, civil and criminal matters (both opinion and court/tribunal work) with particular experience acting for taxpayers in matters involving alleged tax evasion. He is a part-time Lecturer in Law with the Australian Graduate School of Policing and Security, CSU and is regularly published in leading professional and scholarly tax journals. Mathew is a tax law PhD Scholar with UNSW Australia and was awarded the ATAX research scholarship. - Current at 02 June 2015
Click here to expand/collapse more articles by Mathew Leighton-Daly.


Copyright Statement
click to expand/collapse