Phone: (03) 9563 4688

Email: office@aubreypaton.com.au

Address: 17D Chester Street, Oakleigh VIC 3166

find:
Hot Issues
Federal Budget 2018 - Overview
Your Budget
4 components of our 2018 Federal Budget
Resources to help understand and implement Single Touch Payroll (STP)
New rules capture SMSFs trading big with cryptocurrency
New passive income test for lower corporate tax rate
Tools to help you manage your financial position are available on our site.
‘A simple mistake can attract our attention’: ATO reminder about FBT slips-ups
Australia by numbers – Update
Beware residency rules if moving overseas
Meaningful tax reform in high demand
Working holidaymakers and tax returns
Single Touch Payroll – 1 April 2018 Action
Property investors on notice after ATO spots false claims
ATO issues update on cryptocurrency compliance traps
Australia's vital statistics
Accountants spy elder abuse spike as mortgage stress sets in
Tax office releases fresh guidance on SMSFs
Labor's tax plans could favour the rich, analysis shows
FBT Reminder – Odometer Reading
Our website is really our digital office.
‘Substantiation will be a key focus’: ATO drums in tax time 2018 hit list
Super changes: $1.6 million transfer balance cap and death benefit pensions
Payroll, compliance issues top dodgy practices in Aussie business
Employee travel expense deductions
The Goldilocks effect - Economic and market update 4Q 17
Tax assessments confirmed for undisclosed business income
Super returns on the up despite clients’ hesitation
Australia. All you need to know to be the expert.
Business confidence hits 5-month high: NAB
Articles archive
Quarter 1 January - March 2018
Quarter 4 October - December 2017
Quarter 3 July - September 2017
Quarter 2 April - June 2017
Quarter 1 January - March 2017
Quarter 4 October - December 2016
Quarter 3 July - September 2016
Quarter 2 April - June 2016
Quarter 1 January - March 2016
Quarter 4 October - December 2015
Quarter 3 July - September 2015
Quarter 2 April - June 2015
Quarter 1 January - March 2015
Quarter 4 October - December 2014
Quarter 3 July - September 2014
Quarter 2 April - June 2014
Quarter 1 January - March 2014
Quarter 4 October - December 2013
Quarter 3 July - September 2013
Quarter 2 April - June 2013
Quarter 1 January - March 2013
Quarter 4 October - December 2012
Quarter 3 July - September 2012
Quarter 2 April - June 2012
Quarter 1 January - March 2012
Quarter 4 October - December 2011
Quarter 3 July - September 2011
Quarter 2 April - June 2011
Quarter 1 January - March 2011
Quarter 4 October - December 2010
Quarter 3 July - September 2010
Quarter 2 April - June 2010
Quarter 1 January - March 2010
Quarter 4 October - December 2009
Quarter 3 July - September 2009
Quarter 2 April - June 2009
Quarter 1 January - March 2009
Quarter 4 October - December 2008
Quarter 3 July - September 2008
Quarter 2 April - June 2008
Quarter 1 January - March 2008
Quarter 4 October - December 2007
Quarter 3 July - September 2007
Quarter 2 April - June 2007
Quarter 1 January - March 2007
Quarter 4 October - December 2006
Quarter 3 July - September 2006
Quarter 2 April - June 2006
Quarter 1 January - March 2006
Quarter 4 October - December 2005
Quarter 3 July - September 2005
Quarter 2 April - June 2005
Quarter 1 January - March 2005
Quarter 4 October - December 2004
Quarter 3 July - September 2004
Quarter 2 April - June 2004
Quarter 1 January - March 2004
Quarter 4 October - December 2003
Quarter 3 July - September 2003
Quarter 2 April - June 2003
Quarter 1 January - March 2003
Quarter 4 October - December 2002
Quarter 3 July - September 2002
Quarter 2 April - June 2002
Quarter 1 January - March 2002
Quarter 4 October - December 2001
Quarter 4 of 2007
Articles
Bankruptcy Claw Back Amendments
Capital Gains Tax and Trust Cloning
GST and Adjustments
Restructuring Jointly Held Shares
Bankruptcy Claw Back Amendments
An increase in the claw back period is part of changes to defeat “unreasonable” activity prior to bankruptcy.

Changes that were seriously overkill have been drafted and withdrawn after lobbying by professional bodies.

These changes have been expected since a High Court case in 2003 (Cook v Benson) put significant superannuation contributions out of reach of bankruptcy trustees.  The government's action in this area has been prompted by about a small number of Sydney barristers, who avoided their massive debts to the Australian Taxation Office, by declaring bankruptcy after transferring assets to related parties and making massive superannuation contributions.

Changes to apply from 31st May 2006 that the period during which an asset transfer can be declared void, even although the transfer is in contemplation of bankruptcy and was solvent at the time, will be increase from two years to four years.  Trustees in bankruptcy can recover property transferred to related parties for less than market value and from which the bankrupt continues to benefit - e.g. the family home.

Another claw back will allow recovery of excessive voluntary superannuation contributions made.

Another provision also presumes a person to be insolvent, if they fail to keep proper books and records and the person acquiring the property may need to show that it was not reasonable to infer that the main purpose of the transfer was to defeat creditors.

The amendments:-

  1. increase the claw back period from two to four years for transfers of property by a bankrupt to a related entity for less than market value;
  2. introduce a rebuttable presumption of insolvency where a bankrupt has failed to keep proper books, accounts and records;
  3. void a transfer made to defeat creditors if it was reasonable for the transferee to infer that the bankrupt's main purpose in transferring the property was to defeat creditors;
  4. allow the trustee to recover consideration given to third parties prior to bankruptcy;
  5. empower the court to make orders in relating to property or money of natural persons, where during the period of up to five years prior to bankruptcy:

    (a) the person acquired an estate in property as a direct or indirect result of financial contributions made by the bankrupt during that period; or the value of the person's interest in particular property increased as a direct or indirect result of financial contributions made by the bankrupt during the period; and

    (b) the bankrupt used or derive (directly of indirectly_ a benefit from the property during the relevant period; and
  6. clarify that ‘consideration' for the purposes of these provisions does not include any right that the transfer has given to their bankrupt spouse to reside at the transferred property (except in the case of marital breakdown).


8th-October-2007