• Responding to our challenges

    In our 2009-10 annual report we identified areas where we could improve our performance in 2010-11.

    Identified areas for improvement in 2009-10

    How did we go in 2010-11?

    Service standards
    In 2009-10, we met or exceeded our commitment to the community on 15 of 27 service standards, but failed to meet the remaining 12.

    We met our performance commitment benchmarks to the community on 22 of 27 service standards.

    Complaints
    As a consequence of the dip in our service standards, complaints increased markedly and we plateaued in terms of community, business and tax practitioner satisfaction rates.

    In March 2011 we returned to our benchmark performance level for both our complaints service standards (for the first time since September 2008). However there was a significant decline in tax practitioner satisfaction rates.

    Relationships
    While we believe we have a sound relationship with tax agents, we will need to focus on that relationship given concerns they raised during the transition to our new integrated core processing system. The same can be said of large business and their advisers with whom we generally have a good relationship but tensions arise when we need to differentiate between high-risk and low-risk taxpayers.

    We worked hard this year to re-establish sound relationships with tax agents. We expect Tax Time 2011 to improve tax agent perceptions.

    Our new risk differentiation framework promotes greater transparency. This should benefit large business, but more work is required to enhance the current relationship.

    Collectable debt
    While we expected the escalation of collectable debt, we will need to carefully manage the situation, differentiating between viable and non-viable businesses.

    Debt collection continued to be challenging as the community experienced difficult economic times and a series of natural disasters. We continued to balance our support for taxpayers facing short term difficulties while taking firmer action where taxpayers chose not to work with us or who were not viable.

    We achieved a reduction of 4.2% in the value of collectable debt on hand.

      Last modified: 31 Oct 2011QC 28036