| Disclaimer This edited version has been archived due to the length of time since original publication. It should not be regarded as indicative of the ATO's current views. The law may have changed since original publication, and views in the edited version may also be affected by subsequent precedents and new approaches to the application of the law. You cannot rely on this record in your tax affairs. It is not binding and provides you with no protection (including from any underpaid tax, penalty or interest). In addition, this record is not an authority for the purposes of establishing a reasonably arguable position for you to apply to your own circumstances. For more information on the status of edited versions of private advice and reasons we publish them, see PS LA 2008/4. |
Edited version of your private ruling
Authorisation Number: 1012166797259
This edited version of your ruling will be published in the public register of private binding rulings after 28 days from the issue date of the ruling. The attached private rulings fact sheet has more information.
Please check this edited version to be sure that there are no details remaining that you think may allow you to be identified. If you have any concerns about this ruling you wish to discuss, you will find our contact details in the fact sheet.
Ruling
Subject: Legal expenses
Question
Are you entitled to a deduction for the legal expenses incurred to challenge the decision to not grant you a fellowship?
Answer
No.
This ruling applies for the following periods:
Year ended 30 June 2012
Year ended 30 June 2013
Year ended 30 June 2014
Year ended 30 June 2015
Year ended 30 June 2016
The scheme commenced on:
1 February 2012
Relevant facts and circumstances
You applied for a future fellowship to fund your research.
Your application was unsuccessful.
You have filed an application to challenge the decision.
You have incurred legal expenses in challenging the decision.
Relevant legislative provisions
Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 8-1
Reasons for decision
Section 8-1 of the Income Tax Assessment Act (ITAA 1997) allows a deduction for expenses incurred in earning assessable income unless those expenses are capital or capital in nature.
Paragraph 13 of TR 93/7 states the following:
13. The critical factor in determining the essential character of an outgoing is the character of the advantage sought by the making of the expenditure (Sun Newspapers Ltd. v. FC of T (1938) 61 CLR 337 at 363 per Dixon J). Whether an outgoing is capital or revenue in nature "depends on what the expenditure is calculated to effect from a practical and business point of view" (Hallstroms Pty. Ltd. v. FC of T (1946) 72 CLR 634 at 648 per Dixon J).
Therefore, in determining whether a deduction for legal expenses is allowed under section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997, the nature of the expenditure must be considered (Hallstroms Pty Ltd v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1946) 72 CLR 634, (1946) 3 AITR 436; (1946) 8 ATD 190). The nature or character of the legal expenses follows the advantage that is sought to be gained by incurring the expenses. If the advantage to be gained is of a capital nature, then the expenses incurred in gaining the advantage will also be of a capital nature.
The courts, on a number of occasions, have determined legal expenses to be an allowable deduction if the expenses arise out of the day to day activities of the taxpayer's business (Magna Alloys & Research Pty Ltd v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation 80 ATC 4542; (1980) 11 ATR 276). The action out of which the legal expenses arise has to have more than a peripheral connection to the taxpayer's income earning activities.
However if the expenses were incurred in protecting the underlying profit yielding structure they are considered to be capital in nature and will not be deductible.
In your case, the legal expenses you incur do not arise as a result of your performance in your day to day activities, or in the course of maintaining the fellowship. Rather, they are incurred to enable you to obtain the fellowship which will create a profit-yielding structure. Legal expenses incurred in defending the profit-yielding subject are capital in nature. You are therefore not entitled to a deduction for the legal expenses incurred.