Edited version of private advice

Authorisation Number: 1052471764879

Date of advice: 19 November 2025

Ruling

Subject: Interdependency and financial dependency

Question

Is XXX (the Beneficiary) a death benefits dependant of XXX (the Deceased) according to section 302-195 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997)?

Answer

No

This ruling applies for the following:

30 June 20XX

The scheme commence on:

The scheme commences on XX

Relevant facts and circumstances

This private ruling is based on the facts stated in the description of the scheme that is set out below. If your circumstances are different from these facts, this private ruling has no effect, and you cannot rely on it. The fact sheet has more information about relying on your private ruling.

1.     The Beneficiary is the parent of the Deceased.

2.     The Deceased died on DD MM 20XX at XXX

3.     ATO records shows the Beneficiary lived with the Deceased from May 20XX - June 20XX at XXX.

4.     You applied for a private ruling on 2 April 20XX.

5.     To support the application, the following documents were provided:

•                a Private Ruling application, dated 20 March 20XX with the below statements:

-               section 302-200(2) applies in this case as due to the Deceased's XXX, XXX and XXX, this led the Beneficiary to move out while still providing full emotional, financial and domestic support

-               the Beneficiary and the Deceased had an exceptionally close relationship which was evidence by a demonstrated and ongoing commitment to each other's well-being

-               the Deceased suffered from XXX, including XXX, XXX, XXX and XXX which impaired their work, relationship and daily functions

-               the Deceased frequently engaged in XXX, XXX and the Beneficiary was their primary emotional support assisting through XXX, XXX and XXX

-               the Deceased was a regular user of XXX which exacerbated their disability and led to XXX, XXX, XXX and XXX in which the Beneficiary provided care for and was committed to the Deceased's long term well-being

-               the Beneficiary cared for the Deceased during extended depressive episodes ensuring their needs were met by providing food and maintaining the household

-               the Deceased managed the Beneficiary's health by XXX, XXX, XXX and XXX

-               the Deceased also encouraged the Beneficiary to leave the house and interact socially

-               the Deceased and the Beneficiary lived together for most of the Deceased's life, with only XXX short periods or separation which were due to XXX and the Deceased's XXX

-               periods of cohabitation:

o        19XX - 20XX: XXX

o        20XX - 20XX: XXX

o        20XX - 20XX: XXX

o        20XX - 20XX: XXX

•                Between 20XX - 20XX, the Beneficiary temporarily moved in with their XXX to provide XXX and XXX however, they continued to provide emotional, financial and domestic support to the Deceased

•                In March and April 20XX, the Beneficiary moved out of the Deceased's apartment due to XXX, XXX and XXX however the Beneficiary continued to provide XXX which included XXX, XXX, XXX and XXX

•                The Beneficiary provided substantial and ongoing financial support which included:

-               paying for the Deceased's XXX

-               covering XXX such as XXX

-               paying XXX and XXX when they lived together

-               the Beneficiary lent the Deceased XXX regularly despite inability to repay

-               the Deceased has access to the Beneficiary's bank accounts and would transfer money as needed

-               the Beneficiary assisted the Deceased with XXX

-               the Beneficiary lent substantial amount towards the Deceased's XXX when requested and never expected repayment

•                the Beneficiary provided extensive domestic and personal care which included:

-      household maintenance including XXX, XXX, XXX, XXX, XXX

-      running of errands including XXX, XXX and XXX

-      providing care and emotional support with the Deceased's

-      cleaning of the Deceased's XXX at least XXX times per week

Table 1: XXX transaction search for 'XXX' with date range of 8 March 20XX - 7 April 20XX

•                Medication prescription for the Deceased, dated 23 November 20XX

•                XXX prescription for the Deceased, dated 23 November 20XX

•                Email chain between the Deceased and XXX

•                Referral letter to XXX (Psychiatrist) from XXX, dated 5 December 20XX

•                XXX referral letter, dated 25 July 20XX

•                XXX referral letter to XXX, dated 5 October 20XX

•                XXX Assessment, date plan completed 5 October 20XX

Table 2: Tenancy receipt from XXX:

Table 3: Tenancy receipt for XXX:

Table 4: Residential Tenancy Agreement, signed and dated 28 September 20XX

Table 5: XXX transaction search for 'XXX' with date range of 8 March 20XX - 7 April 20XX

Table 6: XXX transaction search for 'XXX' with date range of 8 March 20XX - 7 April 20XX

Table 7: XXX transaction search for 'XXX' with date range of 8 March 20XX - 7 April 20XX

Table 8: XXX transaction search for 'XXX' with date range of 8 March 20XX - 7 April 20XX

Table 9: XXX transaction search for 'XXX' with date range of 8 March 20XX - 7 April 20XX

•                Statutory declaration from XXXX, dated 16 March 20XX with the below statements:

-               the Deceased struggled with XXX throughout their life including XXX, XXX and XXX which made it difficult to live independently and relied on them for emotional, financial and domestic support

-               they lived together for most the Deceased's life

-               continued providing financial and emotional support the Deceased even when moved in with XXX

-               despite not living together in their final month, still visited regularly to clean the Deceased's XXX, XXX, XXX, XXX, XXX and stay overnight when emotional support was needed

-               made sure that the Deceased had food, kept their apartment clean and encouraged self-care when XXX occurred

-               covered rent/utility bills, additional costs and cleaned business when needed help

-               lent money towards the business with not business or financial interest in order to support the Deceased's goals

-               was committed in providing support indefinitely

-               the Deceased made sure medical appointments were attended, encouraged to stay active and helped maintain social life

Table 10: XXX transaction search for 'XXX' with date range of 8 March 20XX - 7 April 20XX

Table 11: XXX transaction search for 'XXX' with date range of 1 April 20XX - 30 April 20XX

•                XXX Policy number XXX - XXX

Table 12: Residential Tenancy Agreement

6.              In a response for further information required on 22 April 20XX, we received the below documents:

•                PAYG payment summary with the below details:

-      Payee details: XXX

-      year ending 30 June 20XX - taxed element $XXX, tax free component $XXX

Table 13: 2 x photo of XXX account

7.              On 11 September 20XX, ATO case officer XXX, made contact via email advising the below further documents were required:

•                copy of death certificate

•                copy of the deceased's last will or testament

•                further copies of bank statements that show evidence of substantial, regular and continuous finance support received by the Deceased from the Beneficiary

•                details and evidence of domestic support and personal care the beneficiary and the deceased provided each other prior to their death

•                receipts for expenses the beneficiary paid on behalf of the deceased

•                evidence to support the interdependency relationship the deceased and the beneficiary had on an ongoing basis, rather than only during specific periods or circumstances

•                any other documents that would support the statements made in the application

8.              On 15 September 20XX, contact was made by you via phone and the below was discussed:

•                there are four criteria's that all need to be met under interdependency

•                there's a potential to determine if substantial financial dependency can be met if further bank statements were provided

•                the Deceased's XXX was being taken into consideration

9.              In a response for further information required, we received the below documents via email on 3 October 20XX:

•                Statutory declaration from XXX, dated 29 September 20XX with the below statements:

-               lives were deeply integrated that it is difficult to recall individual task or instance of support as it was simply normal way of living

-               no formal plan or discussion about provided support and that XXX could rely on them for support and there was never an expectation that it would change

-               support provided included XXX, XXX, XXX, XXX and XXX

-               took full responsibility for XXX, XXX, XXX, XXX, provided regular XXX as well as lent substantial sums of money to XXX when requested

-               support provided was not limited to times of crisis or temporary arrangements, it was an unspoken, permanent part of their lives

Table 14: Tenancy receipt for XXX

-               Screenshot of payment receipt to XXX from XXX on 23/01/20XX for XXX, dated 24 January 20XX

-               Screenshot of new tenant invoice for XXX to XXX from XXX, dated 19 January 20XX

-               Screenshot of final inspection for XXX to XXX and XXX from XXX, dated 10 January 20XX

-               Death certificate for XXX with date of death stated as 23 April 20XX

Table 15: XXX transaction for XXX for statement period of 27 September 20XX - 27 March 20XXX for account ending XXX

Table 16: XXX transaction for XXX for statement period of 27 March 20XX - 29 September 20XX for account ending XXX

Table 17: XXX transaction for XXX for statement period of 29 September 20XX - 29 March 20XX for account ending XXX

Table 18: XXX transaction for XXX for statement period of 29 March 20XX - 29 September 20XX for account ending XXX

10.           ATO records confirms that the Beneficiary and the Deceased resided at XXX from 22 May 20XX - 29 June 20XX

11.           The Deceased suffered from a XXX which included XXX, XXX, XXX, XXX and XXX.

12.           The Deceased was provided with financial support from the Beneficiary even though she had her own income from XXX and later on her business which is evident from bank statements provided.

13.           The Beneficiary cared for the Deceased by providing:

a)             Financial support, including paying for XXX, XXX, XXX, XXX and XXX

b)             personal care and assistance by XXX, XXX on both the XXX and the Decease's XXX and XXX

Relevant legislative provisions

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 302-145

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 302-195

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 302-200

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 995-1

Income Tax Assessment (1997 Act) Regulations 2021 Section 302-200.01

Income Tax Assessment (1997 Act) Regulations 2021 Section 302-200.02

Reasons for decision:

These reasons for decision accompany the Notice of private ruling for The Trustee for the late XXX.

This is to explain how we reached our decision. This is not part of the private ruling.

Issue: Interdependency and financial dependency

Question:

Is XXX (the Beneficiary) a death benefits dependant of XXX (the Deceased) according to section 302-195 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997)?

Summary:

1.       An interdependency relationship as defined under section 302-200 of the ITAA 1997 did not exist between the Deceased and the Beneficiary, as all of the requirements set out in the legislation have not been satisfied in this case.

2.     Therefore, the Beneficiary is not a death benefits dependant of the Deceased as defined in section 302-195 of the ITAA 1997.

3.     Consequently, the taxable component of the superannuation lump sum death benefit paid to the Beneficiary is assessable income, taxed under section 302-145 of the ITAA 1997.

Detailed reasoning

Meaning of death benefits dependant

1.     Subsection 995-1(1) of the ITAA 1997 states that the term 'death benefits dependant' has the meaning given by section 302-195 of the ITAA 1997. Subsection 302-195(1) of the ITAA 1997 defines a death benefits dependant as follows:

A death benefits dependant, of a person who has died, is

a.              the deceased person's spouse or former spouse; or

b.              the deceased person's child, aged less than 18; or

c.              any other person with whom the deceased person had an interdependency relationship under section 302-200 just before he or she died; or

d.              any other person who was a dependant of the deceased person just before he or she died.

2.     As the Beneficiary is the parent of the Deceased, paragraphs 302-195(1)(a) and (b) of the ITAA 1997 are not applicable.

3.     The definition of death benefits dependant does not stipulate the nature or degree of dependency required to be a dependant of the deceased person in paragraph 302-195(1)(d) of the ITAA 1997. However, it is generally accepted that this paragraph refers to financial dependence.

4.     or financial dependant, in accordance with paragraph 302-195(1)(c) and 302-195(1)(d) of the ITAA 1997.

Interdependency relationship

5.     Under subsection 302-200(1) of the ITAA 1997, an interdependency relationship is defined as:

Two persons (whether or not related by family) have an interdependency relationship under this section if:

a.              they have a close personal relationship; and

b.              they live together; and

c.              one or each of them provides the other with financial support; and

d.              one or each of them provides the other with domestic support and personal care.

6.     Subsection 302-200(2) of the ITAA 1997 states:

In addition, 2 persons (whether or not related by family) also have an interdependency relationship under this section if:

i.                they have a close personal relationship; and

j.                they do not satisfy one or more of the requirements of an interdependency relationship mentioned in paragraphs (1)(b), (c) and (d); and

k.              the reason they do not satisfy those requirements is that either or both of them suffer from a physical, intellectual or psychiatric disability.

7.     To assist in determining whether two people have an interdependency relationship, paragraph 302-200(3)(a) of the ITAA 1997 provides that the regulations may specify the matters that are or are not to be taken into account.

8.     Subsection 302-200.01(2) of the Income Tax Assessment (1997 Act) Regulations 2021 (ITAR 2021) states the matters to be taken into account. These matters are all of the circumstances of the relationship between the persons, including (where relevant):

l.                the duration of the relationship

m.             the degree of mutual commitment to a shared life

n.              the care and support of children

o.              the reputation and public aspects of the relationship

p.              the degree of emotional support

q.              the extent to which the relationship is one of mere convenience

r.               any evidence that the parties intend the relationship to be permanent; and

s.              the existence of a statutory declaration signed by one of the persons to the effect that the person is, or (in the case of a statutory declaration made after the end of the relationship) was in an interdependency relationship with the other person.

9.     Paragraph 302-200(3)(b) of the ITAA 1997 states that the regulations may specify the circumstances in which two people have, or do not have an interdependency relationship.

10.  Section 302-200.02 of the ITAR 2021 sets out the circumstances in which two people have an interdependency relationship.

11.  Subsection 302-200.02(2) of the ITAR 2021 provides that an interdependency relationship exists between two people where:

t.               they satisfy the requirements of paragraphs 302-200(1)(a) to (c) of the ITAA 1997; and

u.              one or both of them provides the other with support and care of a type and quality normally provided in a close personal relationship rather than by a mere friend or flatmate, for example one person provides significant care for the other person when they are unwell or suffering emotionally.

12.  Subsections 302-200.02(3) and (4) of the ITAR 2021 provide that an interdependency relationship also exists between two people where:

v.              they have a close personal relationship; and

w.             they do not satisfy one or more of the other requirements set out in subsection 302-200(1) of the ITAA 1997 because:

                                 i.                  they are temporarily living apart, for example because one of them is temporarily working overseas or in gaol; or

                                ii.                  one (or both) of them suffers from a disability.

13.  Subsection 302-200.02(5) of the ITAR 2021 states that two persons do not have an interdependency relationship if one of them provides domestic support and personal care to the other:

x.              under an employment contract or a contract for services; or

y.              on behalf of another person or organisation such as a government agency, a body corporate or a benevolent or charitable organisation.

14.  All of the conditions in subsection 302-200(1) of the ITAA 1997, or alternatively, subsection 302-200(2) of the ITAA 1997, or one of the tests in section 302-200.02 of the ITAR 2021 must be satisfied for a person to be in an interdependency relationship with another person. We deal with each condition in turn, to establish if an interdependency relationship existed.

Close personal relationship

15.  The first requirement to be met is specified in paragraph 302-200(1)(a) of the ITAA 1997, which states that the two persons (whether or not related by family) must have a close personal relationship.

16.  This requirement is common to all of the tests specified in section 302-200 of the ITAA 1997 and section 302-200.02 of the ITAR 2021.

17.  A detailed explanation of subsection 302-200(1) of the ITAA 1997 is set out in the Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum (SEM) to the Superannuation Legislation Amendment (Choice of Superannuation Funds) Act 2004, which states:

z.              A close personal relationship will be one that involves a demonstrated and ongoing commitment to the emotional support and well-being of the two parties.

aa.           Indicators of a close personal relationship may include:

i)               the duration of the relationship;

ii)              the degree of mutual commitment to a shared life;

iii)             the reputation and public aspects of the relationship (such as whether the relationship is publicly acknowledged).

18.  The above indicators are not an exclusive list and none of them are required for a close personal relationship to exist.

19.  People who share accommodation for convenience (such as flatmates) or people who provide care as part of an employment relationship or on behalf of a charity are not intended to fall within the definition of a close personal relationship

20.  The Explanatory Statement to the Income Tax Amendment Regulations 2005 (No. 7) stated that:

bb.           Generally speaking, it is not expected that children will be in an interdependency relationship with their parents.

21.  While this statement does not preclude a child from being in an interdependency relationship with a parent, it suggests that interdependency only exists where the relationship goes beyond the usual relationship between an adult child and a parent.

22.  A close personal relationship as specified in subsection 302-200(1) of the ITAA 1997 would not normally exist between a parent and an adult child because there would not be a mutual commitment to a shared life between the two. In addition, the relationship between parents and their adult children would be expected to change significantly over time. It would be expected that the adult child would eventually move out and secure independence from their parents.

23.  However, where unusual and exceptional circumstances exist, a relationship between a parent and an adult child may be treated as an interdependency relationship for the purposes of subsection 302-200(1) of the ITAA 1997.

24.  The relationship between the Beneficiary and the Deceased was not over and above a normal family relationship between a parent and an adult child.

25.  No evidence has been provided to suggest a mutual commitment to a shared life existed between the Beneficiary and the Deceased.

26.  The matters that indicate the Beneficiary and the Deceased did not have a close personal relationship before the Deceased's death are:

cc.           Beneficiary provided significant care and support to the Beneficiary throughout their XXX, regardless of whether they were living together or separately. The Beneficiary provided the Deceased with ongoing domestic and financial support. This level of care did not exceed the care and comfort that would usually be provided by a parent to an adult child. They did not have an exceptionally close relationship that goes above and beyond that of a normal parent and child relationship.

dd.          The Beneficiary and the Deceased have lived together since the Deceased struggled with XXX. Due to their disability, the Deceased continued to be significantly dependant on the Beneficiary for ongoing care and support, for the remainder of the Deceased's life. It is difficult to ascertain if they had continued to live together if the Deceased did not struggle with their disability. They did not have a strong mutual commitment to having a shared life.

27.  Therefore, a close personal relationship did not exist between the Beneficiary and the Deceased and the first requirement specified in paragraph 302-200(1)(a) of the ITAA 1997 has not been satisfied in this case. The evidence provided indicates that the Beneficiary and the Deceased generally resided together for most of the time. However, as evidence supports periods of separation which the Beneficiary explained these periods resulted from personal choices fitting an adult child and parent relationship rather than circumstances preventing a shared life. This suggests that the arrangements did not reflect a continuing commitment to a shared life as required under section 302-200.

Living together

28.  The second requirement to be met is specified in paragraph 302-200(1)(b) of the ITAA 1997 and states that two interdependent persons (whether or not related by family) live together.

29.  The term 'live' is not defined in the ITAA 1997 or accompanying regulations. According to the Macquarie Dictionary, the term 'live' means to dwell or reside. The term 'reside' is defined as the action of dwelling in a particular place permanently or for a considerable time. In the context of paragraph 302-200(1)(b) of the ITAA 1997, the living arrangements must have some degree of permanency that is only disturbed by the death of one of the persons.

30.  Prior to the Deceased's death, the Beneficiary and the Deceased lived together as confirmed in ATO systems and documents provided.

31.  Consequently, the requirement specified in paragraph 302-200(1)(b) of the ITAA 1997 has been satisfied in this case.

Financial support

32.  The third requirement to be met is specified in paragraph 302-200(1)(c) of the ITAA 1997, which states that one or each of these two persons provides the other with financial support.

33.  Financial support under paragraph 302-200(1)(c) of the ITAA 1997 is satisfied if some level of financial support (not necessarily substantial) is being provided by one person (or each of them) to the other.

34.  However, 'financial support' does not equate with financial dependence. The level of financial support required does not have to be substantial.

35.  From bank statements that have been provided, the Beneficiary made substantial transfers to the Deceased.

36.  Therefore, the Beneficiary provided the Deceased with financial support throughout the years of the Deceased's life due to the Deceased's life struggles.

37.  Consequently, paragraph 302-200(1)(c) of the ITAA 1997 has been satisfied.

Domestic support and personal care

38.  The fourth requirement to be met is specified in paragraph 302-200(1)(d) of the ITAA 1997, which states that one or each of these two persons provides the other with domestic support and personal care. In discussing the meaning of domestic support and personal care, paragraph 2.16 of the SEM states:

a.              Domestic support and personal care will commonly be of a frequent and ongoing nature. For example, domestic support services will consist of attending to the household shopping, cleaning, laundry, and like services. Personal care services may commonly consist of assistance with mobility, personal hygiene and generally ensuring the physical and emotional comfort of a person.

39.  Statement provided by the Beneficiary contends that they provided the Deceased level of domestic support and personal care, which included XXX, XXX, XXX, XXX and XXX. However, no evidence has been provided to support this contention.

40.  No evidence has been provided to support that the Deceased provided the Beneficiary with significant emotional support and care.

41.  Therefore, the requirement in paragraph 302-200(1)(d) of the ITAA 1997 has not been satisfied.

Financial dependency

42.  According to the Macquarie Dictionary (2000 multimedia edition), one meaning of the term dependant is 'a person to whom one contributes all or a major amount of necessary financial support'.

43.  In the CCH Macquarie Concise Dictionary of Modern Law, a dependant is defined as being 'a person substantially maintained or supported financially by another'.

44.  In both dictionary definitions the emphasis is on the fact that the financial support or maintenance is substantial. In determining whether a person is a dependant it is necessary to establish the actual level of financial support that was provided to that person by the deceased. This is because dependence is assessed on the basis of the actual fact of dependence or reliance on the earnings of another for support. This is a question of fact (Aafjes v. Kearney (1976) 180 CLR 199, per Chief Justice Barwick).

45.  Senior Member Fayle of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), in Case [2000] AATA 8, in considering the definition of 'dependant' in relation to former section 27AAA of the ITAA 1936 stated:

"The Act is primarily concerned with commercial and financial matters. An Act relating to the imposition assessment and collection of tax upon incomes. As such, a question of dependency should be construed within that context. The relevant question in this sense is whether the applicants were financially dependant on their son at the relevant time."

46.  Where the level of financial support provided to a person is substantial then that person can be regarded as a dependant. A financial dependant is considered to be a person to whom another person contributes all or a major amount of necessary financial support. If the level of financial support is insignificant or minor, beyond a level of subsistence, then the person should not be characterised as a dependant in terms of paragraph 302 195(1)(d) of the ITAA 1997.

47.  In the case of Aafjes v Kearney (1976) 180 CLR at page 207 Gibbs J cited the High Court case of Kauri Timber Co (Tas) Pty Ltd v Reeman (1973) 128 CLR 77 at pages 188-189, and further clarified uncertainty concerning dependency noting:

"...but it does not follow from it that a person who in fact receives some support from one person cannot properly be said to be wholly dependant on another. It is not the mere fact of receipt of support but the dependence or reliance upon another to provide it that matters." [Emphasis added]

48.  In the Victorian Supreme Court case of Fenton v. Batten [1949] ALR 69; [1948] VLR 422, Justice Fullager made the following comments regarding dependency:

"The word dependant is, in a true sense a technical term. If the evidence established that the alleged dependant relied on or relies on another as the source wholly or in part of his or their existence, then dependence is established. Questions of scale of living do not enter into the matter in the absence of some such statutory enactment."

49.  These comments made in Fenton v. Batten when read in the context with the facts established in that case, confirm the definition of dependant contained in the CCH Macquarie Dictionary of Modern law and the meaning quoted above from the Macquarie Dictionary.

50.  In the full High Court case of Kauri Timber Co. (Tas) Pty Ltd v. Reeman (1973) 128 CLR 177, Justice Gibbs (as he then was) in speaking of previous cases on the issue of dependency stated that:

"The principle underlying these authorities is the actual fact of dependence or reliance on the earnings of another for support that is the test."

51.  Handing down the decision in Re Malek v. Commissioner of Taxation (Cth) Case [1999] AATA 678 (Malek), Senior Member Pascoe further clarified the meaning of the word dependant, stating:

"In my view, the question is not to be decided by counting up the dollars required to be spent on the necessities of life for [Mrs Malek], then calculating the proportion of those dollars provided by the [son] and regarding their as a dependant only if that proportion exceeds 50%...In my view, the relevant financial support is that required to maintain the persons normal standard of living and the question of fact to be answered is whether the alleged dependant was reliant on the regular continuous contribution of the other person to maintain that standard."

52.  In Malek, the evidence supplied by the taxpayer was able to demonstrate that the financial support received from their deceased son had been significant. The son had accepted responsibility for mortgage repayments, maintenance and other expenses of the unit in which the taxpayer lived.

53.  In Malek, Senior Member Pascoe refers to living expenses items:

"In the year ended 30 June 1992 the rate of pension was approximately $153 per week. Based on Mrs Malek's memory, cheque books and other information, her accountant estimated that her weekly expenditure in 1992 was approximately $175 per week for food, medication, rates cleaning, heat, power, telephone, hairdressing and podiatry. He further estimated that Antoine Malek contributed approximately $258 per week to Mrs Malek's living expenses for food, mortgage payments, taxi fares, medical expenses, physiotherapy, body corporate fees and insurance, heat, power and telephone."

"The respondent submitted that some of the expenditure of both Mrs Malek and her late son was overstated, that some was not for the necessities of life for Mrs Malek and that, in sharing the unit, some expenditure of the son was equally for his own benefit."

54.  That dependency involves more than the mere receipt of support, but also reliance on it, was affirmed by Hamilton J in Griffiths v Westernhagen [2008] NSWSC 851, [58]:

"For a relationship of dependency to be established, there must be more than the mere giving of money. Rather there must be a relationship where one party relies on the other for what is required for their ordinary living."

55.  The tenor of the case law noted above refers to a level of dependency to maintain the dependant's ordinary living (Griffiths v Westernhagen), normal standards of living (Malek's case) and relying on another as a means of subsistence (Kauri Timber Co (Tas) Pty Ltd).

56.  Bank statements provided confirms the financial support provided by the Beneficiary to the Deceased. There have been no bank statements provided from the Deceased to suggest that financial support was provided to the Beneficiary. While the Deceased appears to be financially dependent on the Beneficiary, section 302-195 of the ITAA 1997 states that financial support must be substantial, regular and continuous and from the Deceased to the Beneficiary. The Beneficiary must be dependent on the Deceased for ordinary living expenses (food, accommodation, transport. medical/health, clothing) to maintain normal standards of living. So therefore section 302-195 (d) has not been satisfied.

Conclusion

57.  As all of the requirements in section 302-200 of the ITAA 1997 have not been satisfied, the Deceased and Beneficiary were not in an interdependency relationship in the period just before the Deceased's death.

58.  The Beneficiary was not in an interdependency relationship with the Deceased, we looked at further supporting evidence to establish financial dependency. While financial dependency may have been present from the Beneficiary to the Deceased, there was no financial dependency from the Deceased to the Beneficiary which means, paragraph 302-195(d) of the ITAA is not satisfied, and the Beneficiary is not a death benefits dependant of the Deceased.