The Tax Specialist
Designed for the specialist tax professional, The Tax Specialist journal is essential reading for corporate tax advisers, accountants, lawyers and academics. Featuring in-depth analysis, opinion and argument on legislative, administrative and judicial issues it is published five times per year and is available by subscription. Also known as the Red Journal.
The Tax Specialist covers topics such as:
- mergers and acquisitions
- international tax
- GST securitisation
- venture capital
- legal professional privilege
- Part IVA
- TOFA, and more.
Articles from the current issue:
01 Jun 2014
Intragroup financing within multinational groups can generate tax risk, and that tax risk has increased in recent years. One factor is the tendency on the part of revenue authorities to view intragroup debt funding as a means by which corporations can shift their tax exposure. This article considers transfer pricing issues and observations as they impact on intragroup debt. The article also touches on thin capitalisation.
The article considers quantum and pricing of debt, including the role of thin capitalisation, comparable transactions, the case law on key transfer pricing questions, pricing guarantees between parents and subsidiaries, the role of credit ratings, and how the Commissioner could apply the arm’s length principle embodied in Australian tax law to intragroup debt finance practices. Finally, the article considers how Australia’s domestic transfer pricing rules interact with the associated enterprises article contained in Australia’s double tax agreements.
01 Jun 2014
Capital management, including raising and returning capital, carries with it a range of taxation implications, some of which exhibit a degree of uncertainty. Much of that uncertainty arises from the practice of the ATO and the discretions afforded the Commissioner of Taxation under a number of specific integrity measures. This article is intended to provide an update on the key Australian income tax issues, ATO administrative practice, and current tax reviews for corporates and their shareholders, in relation to undertaking capital management initiatives.
The article is, broadly, in two parts. The first part considers capital raisings by non-financial corporates through the use of hybrid securities and rights issues that use so-called retail premiums. The second part deals with returning capital to shareholders, including share buy-backs, returns of capital, and tainting of the share capital account.
01 Jun 2014
Non-Australian resident taxpayers are taxed only on their Australian-sourced income. The taxation of capital gains is an area that has been subject to much change over the last 10 years and continues to be an area focused on by governments which are seeking to address structural budget deficits and decreasing tax revenues, and yet are trying to make Australia an attractive place for investment. This article primarily considers the taxation of capital gains derived by non-residents.
The article reviews the basic domestic taxing regime for capital gains for non-residents as it is affected by Australia’s tax treaty network. As part of this review, the article addresses some of the concerns and issues that have come to light recently in this area and provides a brief examination of the government’s latest proposal to impose a capital gains tax withholding tax on non-residents.
01 Jun 2014
A tax assessment made by the Commissioner of Taxation may be argued to be invalid for any of a number of reasons, for example, because it is said to be tentative, provisional or made in bad faith or as a result of conscious maladministration. Whether, in proceedings under Pt IVC of the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth), a court or tribunal has jurisdiction to determine the validity of an assessment is a question that has elicited seemingly divergent views among judges. In particular, there appears to be an inconsistency between the proposition stated by the Full Court of the Federal Court in the 2013 Gashi decision and Taylor J’s statement in the High Court decision in McAndrew in 1956 on whether invalidity may be raised in proceedings under Pt IVC. In this article, however, it is argued that there is no inconsistency when one has regard to the particular species of invalidity that is asserted.