Your shopping cart is empty

Tax residency risks: What can we learn from the Harding Case?

Published on 07 May 2019 | Took place at Online, National

Harding v Commissioner of Taxation [2019] FCAFC 29, is the first decision by the Full Court of the Federal Court since Applegate in 1979 to consider the meaning of the phrase ‘permanent place of abode’ in the definition of ‘resident of Australia’ in section 6(1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936.

In finding that Mr Harding had a permanent place of abode outside Australia, the Full Court examined:

  • the distinction between domicile and permanent place of abode
  • whether ‘permanent place of abode outside Australia’ means a country or a specific dwelling
  • the relevance of the character of the accommodation.
  • In this one-hour webinar, Murray Shume of Cooper Grace Ward Lawyers, who acted for Mr Harding during the appeal, discussed the lessons that can be taken from this decision.

Individual sessions

Tax residency risks:What can we learn for the Harding case?

Author(s):  Murray Shume

This presentation covers:

  • residency defined
  • case law prior to Harding
  • lessons from the first instance decision in Harding
  • lessons from the Full Court decision in Harding
  • practical lessons from Harding.
Materials from this session: