Question 10
At Question 10 of the Supplementary annual GST return 2025, you must confirm if you have completed the GST analytical tool (GAT) reconciliation or a similar reconciliation, to understand the variance between your audited financial statements and GST reported on your business activity statements for the period the return covers.
If you answer Yes, continue to Question 11.
If you answer No, continue to Question 13.
Question 11
If you answered 'Yes' at Question 10, you must provide the following rates for the year under this reconciliation to 2 decimal places:
- effective GST rate on sales
- effective GST rate on expenses
- net effective GST rate.
Continue to Question 12.
Question 12
If you answered 'Yes' at Question 10, you must also provide any comments on the remaining variance between the outcomes of your reconciliation and business activity statements.
Note that we do not expect a full reconciliation and accept there may be some unreconciled differences. This question is asking whether the taxpayer has any comments on the differences that remain after the reconciliation (including a qualitative explanation, such as foreign exchange differences, timing differences, or variances that could only be resolved through transactional-level analysis).
You do not need to explain the adjustments that you made to reach the reconciliation figures (adjusted revenue and expense figures) in this response.
Continue to Section E: Question 14.
Question 13
If you answered 'No' at Question 10, you must provide a response as to why you didn't complete the GAT or a similar reconciliation for the period the return covers (for example, if your business is predominantly input-taxed).
Continue to Section E: Question 14.
Resources to help you answer this question
The best resources to help you answer this question will be:
- the approach used in conducting the reconciliation in your most recent GST assurance review (where relevant)
- our guidance such as the
In responding, note that:
- you should provide your effective GST rate on sales and expenses and your net effective GST rate to 2 decimal places.
- under Managerial-level control (MLC) 7: Procedures to explain significant differences, our existing expectation is that large corporate taxpayers will implement documented procedures for an annual reconciliation process, as per the ATO's GST governance, data testing and transaction testing guide.
- we do not expect a full reconciliation of the activity statements to the accounts, and there is no predetermined set variance for the percentage differences or dollar values (or both) in assessing GAT outcomes that we expect. We do not expect a transaction-level analysis to be undertaken. Taxpayers should apply their judgment and provide a reasonable response that considers their circumstances.
- you should keep objective evidence to support your response, such as the workings for your derived effective GST rate on sales, effective GST rate on expenses and net effective GST rate, including for all adjustments made to arrive at that number.
- it's generally not expected that your net effective GST rate will be precisely 10%, as some level of variance is generally to be expected.
Example 1: 'Yes' at Question 10
Siu Metals is a Top 1,000 taxpayer. The GAT was conducted in Siu Metals' first combined assurance review.
Siu Metals uses its documented procedures to undertake the GAT for the 2024–25 financial year to understand variances between its financial statements and GST reporting. There have been no substantial changes to Siu Metals' business, and the same assumptions can be used in undertaking the GAT as during the combined assurance review.
Siu Metals:
- answers 'Yes' at Question 10, as it has conducted the GAT to understand the variance between its financial statements and activity statements for the period the return covers
- includes at Question 11 that under the reconciliation for the year its
- effective GST rate on sales was 9.43%
- effective GST rate on expenses was 9.79%
- net effective GST rate was 9.87%
- At Question 12, it provides comments that the remaining variance can likely be explained by foreign exchange differences as a result of different functional currencies being used, which would represent the majority of the sales and expenses variance.
Siu Metals retains evidence of the methodology (including the assumptions) and calculation, and evidence to support the conclusion that unreconciled amounts can be explained, to support its responses in Section D.
End of example
Example 2: 'No' at Question 10
Spurge Bank is a Top 100 taxpayer. In its GST assurance report, the GAT was not undertaken because it is a business with predominantly input-taxed supplies.
In providing its response to Question 10, Spurge Bank disclosed that it hasn't conducted a reconciliation between its audited financial statements and activity statements for the period the return covers. At Question 13, it provides brief comments that this is because it is a predominantly input-taxed business.
Spurge Bank does not need to complete Question 11 or Question 12.
End of exampleContinue to Section E: Question 14.
Return to Instructions to complete the Supplementary annual GST return 2025.