The individual circumstances described below are those of actual applicants. The specific circumstances provided here should not be seen as limiting the issues you may wish to address.
A remission of interest to 4.72% for the period prior to the issue of the relevant amended assessment was granted to an applicant for the following combination of reasons:
a. their adviser informed them that the Tax Office had previously issued favourable advice on the particular type of arrangement the applicant was considering entering and he had a copy of that advice. The applicant entered into the arrangement relying on that advice;
b. all their activity statements and returns were up to date;
c. they had no outstanding debt; and
d. the applicant had not been involved in a tax avoidance scheme.
The applicant was not granted a remission based on criterion 1 of the Guidelines for the following combination of reasons:
a. the promoter of the arrangement informed the applicant that the Tax Office had previously issued favourable advice on the particular type of arrangement the applicant was considering entering,
b. and that the promoter had a copy of that advice;
c. the applicant entered into the arrangement relying on that advice, and
d. the applicant had also previously been involved in a tax avoidance scheme (in this instance a mass marketed investment scheme).
An applicant in a similar situation to example 3 above was not granted further remission of penalty as their penalty had already been reduced to 10% through a settlement agreement and there were no additional circumstances to warrant a further reduction of the penalty.
After considering the following timeline of events the applicant was granted a further remission of interest due to a period of unreasonable delay for the following reasons:
a. in May 2002 they provided all necessary information to the Tax Office concerning the EBA;
b. the 1999 and 2000 amended assessments were issued in January 2004, with interest calculated to 14 October 2003 the date the audit was finalised; and
c. unreasonable delay is considered to exist where, having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tax Office took longer to complete and audit than could reasonably have been expected.
The applicant was granted a remission of interest for unreasonable delay for the period of September 2002 (being 3 months after the Tax Office had all the necessary information) to October 2003.
After preparing a timeline of events it was determined that the applicant was not eligible for a remission of interest due to unreasonable Tax Office delay for the following reasons:
a. the applicant had already received an 8 months remission of GIC to nil between the period of finalisation of the audit and the issue of assessments; and
b. all other periods of possible unreasonable delays were as a result of failure of the applicant to respond to requests for information.
The applicant was not granted a remission based on criterion 3b of the Guidelines for the following reasons:
a. when considering the applicant’s submission the Tax Office could find no evidence that the taxpayer attempted to pay their liability;
b. the Tax Office then requested further information; and
c. the applicant failed to provide this and also failed to provide any evidence in their submission as to why they could not reasonably meet repayment of their liability.
The applicant had both income tax and fringe benefit tax assessments and after considering the following information they were granted a remission of interest to 4.72% for both the pre and post amendment period for the following reasons:
a. in December 2004 the tax agent for the company wrote to Tax Office proposing a payment arrangement for their income tax liabilities arising from their 1997,1998, 2000, and 2001;
b. the Tax Office responded requesting further information, stating financial circumstances including a profit and loss statement, balance sheet, cash flow statement, details of major creditors and debtors, copies of bank statements and details of mortgages and charges; and
c. the tax agent responded providing bank statements, profit and loss statement, balance sheet as at 30/06/05 and other financial information. Also provided, was an application to pay by instalments.
The applicant was granted a remission under criterion 3(a) of the Guidelines.
Subscribe
The individual circumstances described below are those of actual applicants. The specific circumstances provided here should not be seen as limiting the issues you may wish to address.