Published on 01 Jun 10
by "TAXATION IN AUSTRALIA" JOURNAL ARTICLE
The Commissioner's argument to lift the corporate veil to treat a holding company as carrying on the business conducted by its subsidiary is dismissed as perverse. The tests for determining when an entity is carrying on a business of lending money is confirmed and the relevance of letters of comfort to an assessment of whether a debt is bad is considered. Division 243 and whether debt is non-recourse are also discussed.
Ann-Maree is a Lawyer with Clayton Utz. Current at 01 June 2010
Sue Williamson CTA-Life
Sue leads EY's Melbourne Tax Controversy practice. She has acted in various AAT, Federal Court, High Court and Supreme Court cases relating to various Commonwealth and state taxes, and has advised clients on a broad range of taxation issues including income tax, GST and PRRT. Sue is also an accredited mediator and has assisted clients in resolving disputes using various alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. Sue is a member of the ATO Dispute Resolution Committee and is a former president of The Tax Institute. Current at 23 June 2016
Click here to expand/collapse more articles by Sue WILLIAMSON.