ATO Interpretative Decision
ATO ID 2001/45 (Withdrawn)
Income Tax
Spouse rebate: Part Year Employment of Taxpayer's SpouseFOI status: may be released
-
This ATO ID is withdrawn as the interpretative issue is covered in IT 2453.This document incorporates revisions made since original publication. View its history and amending notices, if applicable.
This ATOID provides you with the following level of protection:
If you reasonably apply this decision in good faith to your own circumstances (which are not materially different from those described in the decision), and the decision is later found to be incorrect you will not be liable to pay any penalty or interest. However, you will be required to pay any underpaid tax (or repay any over-claimed credit, grant or benefit), provided the time limits under the law allow it. If you do intend to apply this decision to your own circumstances, you will need to ensure that the relevant provisions referred to in the decision have not been amended or repealed. You may wish to obtain further advice from the Tax Office or from a professional adviser.
Issue
Is a taxpayer entitled to a partial spouse rebate under subsection 159J(3) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 where the taxpayer's spouse was employed for only part of the year?
Decision
The taxpayer is not entitled to a partial spouse rebate under subsection 159J(3) the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936.
Facts
The spouse of the taxpayer (the spouse) is employed in shiftwork for the first few months of the financial year. During this period, the spouse earns considerably more than $5,246 (the relevant separate net income threshold for the 1995-96 income year). During the rest of the financial year the spouse is unemployed and earns no income. The taxpayer and the spouse live together for the whole financial year.
Reasons For Decision
Subsection 159J(1) the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 provides for a rebate where during the year of income the taxpayer contributes to the maintenance of a dependant who is an Australian resident.
As the taxpayer and the spouse resided together during the whole of the year of income, subsection 159J(5) the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 deems the taxpayer to have contributed to the maintenance of the spouse for the whole of the year of income unless the contrary is established to the satisfaction of the Commissioner. The Commissioner will generally not be satisfied that the taxpayer did not contribute to the maintenance of the spouse during a period unless the taxpayer can show that the spouse was entirely self-supporting during the period. That in fact the taxpayer contributed in no way to the spouse's maintenance during the period (Taxation Ruling IT 2453).
That the spouse earnt a substantial amount of money during the first few months of the income year sufficient to provide some standard of self-support does not mean that the taxpayer did not contribute in any way whatever to the spouse's maintenance during this period. Furthermore, the fact that the spouse worked shift work while the taxpayer worked a normal day job does not provide evidence that the taxpayer did not contribute to the spouse's maintenance during the period the spouse was employed.
As the taxpayer is deemed to have maintained the spouse for the whole of the income year, subsection 159J(3) the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 which allows a taxpayer to claim a partial spouse rebate where the taxpayer contributed to the maintenance of the spouse during part of the year only, has no operation.
As the spouse's separate net income for the 1995-96 year of income exceeds $5246, the taxpayer is not entitled to claim any spouse rebate.
Date of decision: 3 December 1996
Legislative References:
Income Tax Assessment Act 1936
subsections 159J(1)
subsections 159J(3)
subsections 159J(4)
subsections 159J(5)
Related Public Rulings (including Determinations)
IT 2453
Keywords
Dependant rebates
Part year rebates
Rebates
Separate net income of dependants
Spouse rebates
ISSN: 1445-2782
| Date: | Version: | |
| 3 December 1996 | Original statement | |
| You are here | 28 October 2005 | Archived |