Skip to content

  • Home
  • COVID-19 Guide
  • Podcast library
  • Client results
  • Expertise
  • News & Insights
  • People
  • Our DNA
  • Inclusion and Diversity
  • Join us
  • Contact Us
Home / NEWS & INSIGHTS / Insight / Following the Australian Taxation Office’s latest draft rulings on trust distributions, is it fair to ask: why would we trust the ATO?
Insight 1 March 2022

Following the Australian Taxation Office’s latest draft rulings on trust distributions, is it fair to ask: why would we trust the ATO?

On Wednesday, the Commissioner finally released his long promised position on section 100A: draft Tax Ruling (TR 2022/D1). Section 100A is over 50 years old and was introduced to combat bottom-of-the harbour era tax avoidance comprising a scheme referred to as trust stripping. The Commissioner has completely repurposed this provision and in doing so, seeks to attack trust distributions that are ordinary family dealings in apparent defiance of a clear and recent decision of the Federal Court.

In accordance with the Commissioner’s current approach to engaging with the taxpaying community, the draft Tax Ruling is accompanied by a draft Practical Compliance Guideline (PCG 2022/D1) and a Taxpayer Alert (TA 2022/1), complete with the now de rigueur traffic light system, which provides taxpayers with the faint comfort of trying to understand what compliance resources the Commissioner will devote to reviews and audits.

The ATO’s position was generally expected, if not welcomed by taxpayers:

  • the application of section 100A is expanded, largely through the limitation of arrangements that are excluded as ordinary family or commercial dealings;
  • the PCG outlines something akin to a traffic light system to categorise conduct and arrangements, including a low risk white zone and green zone (to which compliance resources will not be dedicated), medium risk blue zone (with respect to which the ATO may ask questions), and high risk red zone (to which the ATO will dedicate compliance resources); and
  • the alert details the Commissioner’s concern with the arrangements involving a distribution from a family trust to an adult child, where the parents have the economic benefit of that distribution.

The issue of this material however, both the timing and content, cannot be described as anything other than surprising.

As outlined in our recent article, in December 2021 Justice Logan gave his judgement in the matter of Guardian ([2021] FCA 1619) and specifically addressed each element involved in the application of section 100A, including the exclusion for arrangements in the course of ordinary family or commercial dealings. 

It is therefore interesting that in his draft ruling, the Commissioner has remained dogged in his approach to the ordinary family or commercial dealings exclusion, on which he has fixated for several years.

This includes, for example, the Commissioner’s statement that

“[a] dealing is not an ordinary family or commercial dealing merely because it is commonplace or involves no artificiality” 

versus Justice Logan’s finding that

“…the adjective “ordinary” in “ordinary family or commercial dealing” has particular work to do. It is used in contradistinction to “extraordinary”. It refers to a dealing which contains no element of artificiality.”

The fact that the Commissioner has appealed Justice Logan’s judgment in Guardian does not in any way excuse the Commissioner’s actions in stating a position on the law that is completely inconsistent with the finding of a Justice of the Federal Court. Unless and until, the Full Court of the Federal Court give a judgment that overturns Justice Logan’s findings (or 50-year-old legislation is amended), his judgment is a statement of the law.

It will be particularly interesting to follow the development of the Commissioner’s material. 

To further demonstrate the Commissioner’s changing positions, on the same day, the Commissioner also released an updated draft division 7A ruling which effectively overturns his own 2010 position on the use of corporate beneficiaries of discretionary trusts (and was itself controversial).

We will provide further analysis of the detail of the ruling, PCG and taxpayer alert shortly.

This publication covers legal and technical issues in a general way. It is not designed to express opinions on specific cases. It is intended for information purposes only and should not be regarded as legal advice. Further advice should be obtained before taking action on any issue dealt with in this publication.

About the authors

  • Melinda Peters

    Partner
  • David Hughes

    Partner
  • Adria Askin

    Lawyer

In other news

Branding on trend: Certification of Australian Fashion

10 May 2022Insight

Verification of identity: a refresher

10 May 2022Insight

Categorising land for rating purposes used for both permanent residential and temporary tourist accommodation

4 May 2022Insight

Court of Appeal decision brings welcome relief to local councils

4 May 2022Insight

VIEW ALL NEWS & INSIGHTS

BRISBANE

Level 11, 66 Eagle Street
Brisbane QLD 4000
GPO Box 1855
Brisbane QLD 4001
Tel +61 7 3233 8888
Fax +61 7 3229 9949

 

GET IN TOUCH

    Contact form

    We handle your personal information in accordance with our privacy policy.

    Please do not send us any confidential information. By submitting this form, you agree that our review of the information you submit will not create a lawyer-client relationship between you and our firm (or any lawyer in our firm) and it will not prevent us from representing a party in any matter where the information you submit is relevant, even if that information could be used against you.

    sydney

    Level 32, MLC Centre
    19 Martin Place
    Sydney NSW 2000
    GPO Box 462
    Sydney NSW 2001

    Tel +61 2 8241 5600
    Fax +61 2 8241 5699

     

    GET IN TOUCH

      Contact form


      We handle your personal information in accordance with our privacy policy.

      Please do not send us any confidential information. By submitting this form, you agree that our review of the information you submit will not create a lawyer-client relationship between you and our firm (or any lawyer in our firm) and it will not prevent us from representing a party in any matter where the information you submit is relevant, even if that information could be used against you.

      melbourne

      Level 27, 101 Collins Street
      Melbourne VIC 3000
      GPO Box 2924
      Melbourne VIC 3001

      Tel +61 3 9067 3100
      Fax +61 3 9067 3199

       

      GET IN TOUCH

        Contact form

        We handle your personal information in accordance with our privacy policy.

        Please do not send us any confidential information. By submitting this form, you agree that our review of the information you submit will not create a lawyer-client relationship between you and our firm (or any lawyer in our firm) and it will not prevent us from representing a party in any matter where the information you submit is relevant, even if that information could be used against you.

        follow us

        CLIENT LOGIN

        newcastle

        92 Young Street
        Carrington NSW 2294
        PO Box 394
        Newcastle NSW 2300

        Tel +61 2 4914 6900
        Fax +61 2 4914 6999

         

        GET IN TOUCH

          Contact form


          We handle your personal information in accordance with our privacy policy.

          Please do not send us any confidential information. By submitting this form, you agree that our review of the information you submit will not create a lawyer-client relationship between you and our firm (or any lawyer in our firm) and it will not prevent us from representing a party in any matter where the information you submit is relevant, even if that information could be used against you.

          canberra

          Level 9, 2 Phillip Law Street
          Canberra ACT 2601

          Tel +61 2 6243 3669
          Fax +61 2 8241 5699

           

          GET IN TOUCH

            Contact form


            We handle your personal information in accordance with our privacy policy.

            Please do not send us any confidential information. By submitting this form, you agree that our review of the information you submit will not create a lawyer-client relationship between you and our firm (or any lawyer in our firm) and it will not prevent us from representing a party in any matter where the information you submit is relevant, even if that information could be used against you.

            © 2017 McCullough Robertson. Site map Disclaimer Privacy Policy Statement of Business Ethics Credit Reporting Policy

            X