Phone: (03) 9563 4688

Email: office@aubreypaton.com.au

Address: 17D Chester Street, Oakleigh VIC 3166

Latest Accounting News
Hot Issues
Touch Payroll (STP)
‘Calm before the storm’: Government proposes 12-month SG amnesty
Government intensifies cash payments crackdown - Kelly O'Dwyer
Passive investment companies tax rate still 30%
Cryptocurrency audits tipped to increase this EOFY
Australia by numbers – Update
$2.4m lost to tax scams, ACCC reports
No GST on digital currency
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.
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 2 April - June 2007
Quarter 1 January - March 2007
Quarter 2 April - June 2006
Quarter 1 January - March 2006
Quarter 4 October - December 2005
Quarter 3 July - September 2005
Quarter 4 of 2013
Articles
Penalty for unsubstantiated work-related deduction claims
Death, divorce, relationships and complications
Buying a Property
Plumbers were full-time casuals, not contractors
Resources on our site to help you, your family and/or your business.
Merry Christmas to all our clients, your staff, family and friends.
Residency requirement for CGT home exemption failed
Residency Tested Again - Taxpayer Loses
Parent liable to CGT on half-share of townhouse
ATO information on everyday issues.
Victorian Fire Services Property Levy
Penalty for unsubstantiated work-related deduction claims

 

The AAT has recently affirmed a decision of the Tax Commissioner to impose a penalty on an individual equal to 50 per cent of the tax shortfall .....


... amount arising from deduction claims for work-related expenses that were unsubstantiated.

 

 

 


     

 

The taxpayer made claims as a car salesman for work-related expenses of $30,000 plus for several years.  The Tax Commissioner determined that most of the claims were unsubstantiated and imposed a penalty of approximately $6,000, representing 50 per cent of the tax shortfall of the 2012 year.

The individual did not dispute that the claims were unsubstantiated, but argued that the penalty was severe and that he was unable to pay all of the penalty.  The AAT noted, among other things, that the individual did not retain invoices or receipts, or provide satisfactory evidence to substantiate the claims.  The AAT was of the view that the individual's conduct was more serious than mere failure to take reasonable care, and held that the penalty imposed was appropriate.

It is not clear if the other years were also subject to penalties – if not the taxpayer may have got off lightly!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



17th-December-2013