TD 2009/17: Income tax:
is interest on a loan fully deductible under section 8-1 of the
Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 when the borrowed moneys are
settled by the borrower on trust to benefit the borrower and
others?
|
|
Please note that the PDF version is the authorised
version of this ruling. |
| |
|
|
There is a Compendium for this document. TD
2009/17EC |
FOI status: may be released
Preamble
|
This
publication provides you with the following level of
protection:
This publication (excluding appendixes) is a public
ruling for the purposes of the Taxation
Administration Act 1953.
A public ruling is an expression of the Commissioner's
opinion about the way in which a relevant provision
applies, or would apply, to entities generally or to a
class of entities in relation to a particular scheme or
a class of schemes.
If you rely on this ruling, the Commissioner must apply
the law to you in the way set out in the ruling (unless
the Commissioner is satisfied that the ruling is
incorrect and disadvantages you, in which case the law
may be applied to you in a way that is more favourable
for you - provided the Commissioner is not prevented
from doing so by a time limit imposed by the law). You
will be protected from having to pay any underpaid tax,
penalty or interest in respect of the matters covered by
this ruling if it turns out that it does not correctly
state how the relevant provision applies to you. |
Ruling
1. No. Interest on a loan used to settle moneys on trust to
benefit the borrower and others cannot be deducted in full under
section 8-1 of the Income
Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA
1997).
2. The taxpayer's interest expense can only be deducted to the
extent to which the taxpayer has used the borrowed moneys to
gain or produce assessable income of
the taxpayer. The
interest will not be deductible to the extent that the taxpayer
has used the borrowed moneys for the purpose of benefiting
persons other than the taxpayer.
3. The conclusion that the taxpayer has used the borrowed moneys
to benefit others will usually follow objectively from the terms
of the trust. This will be the case, whether the moneys are
settled on the trust upon its creation or at a later time.
4. Likewise, the terms of the trust will usually provide an
objective basis for characterising whether the taxpayer has used
the borrowed moneys for the purpose of gaining or producing
their assessable income.
5. Where the terms of the trust indicate that the borrowed
moneys have been used to benefit both the taxpayer and others,
an apportionment calculation will be required to determine the
taxpayer's interest deduction.
6. The interest expense is not deductible at all where the terms
of the trust are such that no connection is perceived between
the interest outgoing and the taxpayer's assessable income, or
where section 51AAA of the Income
Tax Assessment Act 1936 (ITAA
1936) applies.
Date of effect
7. This Determination applies to years of income commencing both
before and after its date of issue. However, this Determination
will not apply to taxpayers to the extent that it conflicts with
the terms of a settlement of a dispute agreed to before the date
of issue of this Determination (see paragraphs 75 and 76 of
Taxation Ruling TR 2006/10).
Example 1
8. Paul
arranges for his accountant to set up a trust for himself and
his family. Paul and his wife control the corporate trustee.
9. Paul
borrows $1 million from a bank, in his own name, and settles it
on the trust. The trustee issues 500,000 units to Paul and
500,000 units to Paul's wife. The trustee uses the $1 million to
purchase a rental property.
10. The
trust deed provides that unit holders are entitled to a
proportionate share of the income of the trust based on their
unit holdings.
11. The
units Paul and his wife acquire are redeemable at the trustee's
discretion. The units are redeemable for an amount equal to each
unit holder's proportionate share of the trust fund, calculated
by reference to the net asset value of the fund as at the date
of redemption.
12. Only
50% of Paul's interest expense is deductible (see paragraph 44
of this Determination). The terms of the trust indicate that
Paul has used the borrowed money, in part, to benefit his wife
and, in part, to acquire an interest in the trust which is
likely to be productive of assessable income.
Example 2
13. Paul
arranges for his accountant to set up a trust for himself and
his family. Paul and his wife control the corporate trustee.
14. Paul
borrows $1 million from a bank, in his own name, and settles it
on the trust. The trustee issues 1 million units to Paul. Paul's
wife and children are also beneficiaries of the trust. The
trustee uses the $1 million to purchase a rental property.
15. The
trust deed provides that where there is income of the trust
available for distribution at the end of an accounting period,
the trustee is to hold an amount of income for the benefit of
unit holders, in proportion to their unit holding, equal to the
lesser of :
-
(a)
-
the
total income of the trust that is available for
distribution (the (a) amount); and
-
(b)
-
the
unit holder's interest expense plus a nominal amount
(the (b) amount).
16. Any
excess of the (b) amount over the (a) amount is carried forward
for the purposes of determining the unit holder's income
entitlement in the following accounting period. The unit
holder's entitlement to an amount of income equal to the (b)
amount is therefore cumulative.
17. Any
excess of the (a) amount over the (b) amount is distributable
amongst the trust's other beneficiaries at the trustee's
discretion.
18. The
units Paul acquires are redeemable at the trustee's discretion.
The units are redeemable for an amount equal to the sum Paul
settled on the trust. Any remaining trust capital is held for
the benefit of the other beneficiaries.
19. Paul's
interest expense is not deductible in full. The terms of the
trust indicate that Paul has used the borrowed money, in part,
to create a fund for the benefit of his family. Accordingly,
some of Paul's interest expense will not be incurred in gaining
or producing his assessable income. It does not matter that
Paul's income entitlement is calculated in a way which may lead
to his total income from the units exceeding his total interest
cost.
20. Because
Paul has also used the borrowed money to acquire income
producing units for himself, part of the interest expense will
be deductible. An apportionment calculation is therefore
required (see paragraph 45 of this Determination).
Example 3
21. Paul
arranges for his accountant to set up a trust for himself and
his family. Paul and his wife control the corporate trustee.
22. Paul
borrows $1 million from a bank, in his own name, and settles it
on the trust. The trustee issues 1 million units to Paul. Paul's
wife and children are also beneficiaries of the trust. The
trustee uses the $1 million to purchase a rental property.
23. The
trust deed provides that the trustee holds the income of the
trust for the benefit of the unit holders at the end of the
accounting period. The deed also provides the trustee with a
discretion to appoint realised capital gains amongst Paul, his
wife and his children.
24. The
units Paul acquires are redeemable at the trustee's discretion.
The units are redeemable for an amount equal to the sum Paul
settled on the trust. Any remaining trust capital is held for
the benefit of the other beneficiaries.
25. Paul's
interest expense is not deductible in full. The terms of the
trust indicate that Paul has used the borrowed money, in part,
to create a fund for the benefit of his family. Accordingly,
some of Paul's interest expense will not be incurred in gaining
or producing his assessable income.
26. Because
Paul has also used the borrowed money to acquire income
producing units for himself, part of the interest expense will
be deductible. An apportionment calculation
is therefore required (see paragraph 45 of this Determination).
Example 4
27. Paul
arranges for his accountant to set up a trust for himself and
his family. Paul and his wife control the corporate trustee.
28. Paul
borrows $1 million from a bank, in his own name, and settles it
on the trust. The trustee issues 1 million units to Paul. Paul's
wife and children are also beneficiaries of the trust. The
trustee uses the $1 million to purchase a rental property.
29. The
trust deed provides the trustee with a discretion to appoint the
income of the trust to Paul, his wife, or his children. Absent
such an appointment, no beneficiary is presently entitled to
income. Unit holders are, however, entitled to share in amounts
which are attributable to realised capital gains of the trust,
in proportion to their unit holdings.
30. The
units Paul acquires are redeemable at the trustee's discretion.
The units are redeemable for an amount equal to the sum Paul
settled on the trust. Any remaining trust capital is held for
the benefit of the other beneficiaries.
31. Paul's
interest expense is not deductible at all. The terms of the
trust indicate that Paul has used the borrowed money in part to
create a fund for the benefit of his family. The interest will
not be deductible to that extent. Nor can a connection be
perceived between the incurring of the interest and the
production of Paul's assessable income (other than net capital
gains : see
section 51AAA of the ITAA 1936). Such a connection cannot be
found merely because it is possible that the trustee might make
a gift of income to Paul in a future income year (see paragraph
46 of this Determination).
Commissioner of Taxation
15 July 2009
Appendix 1 - Explanation
|
This
Appendix is provided as information to help you
understand how the Commissioner's view has been reached.
It does not form part of the binding public ruling. |
Arrangements with which this Determination is concerned
32. This Determination concerns the deductibility of interest
expense on borrowed moneys which are settled on trust to benefit
the borrower and others. The arrangements addressed by this
Determination include the uncommercial trust arrangements
described in Taxpayer Alert TA 2008/3. Arrangements of that kind
typically display some or all of the following features:
-
(a)
-
The taxpayer arranges for the
establishment of a trust. The trustee of the trust is
either the taxpayer, or is controlled by the taxpayer
and/or associates of the taxpayer.
-
(b)
-
The beneficiaries of the trust are the
taxpayer and his or her associates (the other
beneficiaries). The other beneficiaries are members of
the taxpayer's family, and/or entities which the
taxpayer and/or the taxpayer's associates control; they
do not usually contribute any capital to the trust, nor
do they provide money or property to the taxpayer.
-
(c)
-
The taxpayer borrows money at interest
and settles it on the trust. The trustee issues units to
the taxpayer. The units provide the taxpayer with
particular rights to trust income and/or capital.
-
(d)
-
The trustee uses the money in
subparagraph 32(c) of this Determination to purchase one
or more income-producing assets. Typically, the assets
comprise real estate or shares.
-
(e)
-
The trust deed, and/or the trustee acting
under authority of the trust deed, determines how much
of the income of the trust is available for distribution
to beneficiaries.
-
(f)
-
The taxpayer's units do not give the
taxpayer an entitlement to all of the benefits which may
reasonably be expected to be produced by the asset(s) in
subparagraph 32(d) of this Determination. Alternatively,
an objective implication to be drawn from the trust deed
is that the taxpayer cannot reasonably expect to receive
all such benefits.
-
(g)
-
For example, the taxpayer's units:
-
(i)
-
may carry no entitlement to share
in realised capital gains of the trust;
-
(ii)
-
may carry no entitlement to share
in anything other than realised capital gains of
the trust;
-
(iii)
-
may carry an entitlement to share
in only part of the income of the trust; or
-
(iv)
-
may be redeemable, at the
trustee's discretion, for an amount which fails
to reflect the taxpayer's contribution to the
trust (for example the cost of the units or
their market value, where such value reflects
the limited nature of the rights which the units
carry).
-
(h)
-
For a number of income years, the amounts
included in the taxpayer's assessable income because of
his or her unit holding are significantly less than the
interest expense on the borrowing. The taxpayer claims
that the interest expense is deductible in full under
section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997.
General characterisation principles
33. Section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997 provides a taxpayer with a
deduction for a loss or outgoing to the extent to which it is
incurred in gaining or producing the taxpayer's assessable
income. A loss or outgoing is not deductible to the extent that
it is of a private or domestic nature.1
34. A loss or outgoing is not deductible where it is incurred to
gain or produce benefits for other persons. This proposition was
illustrated in Federal
Commissioner of Taxation v. Munro (1926)
38 CLR 153; [1926] HCA 58; (1926) 32 ALR 339 ( Munro's
Case ), where a
taxpayer subscribed borrowed funds for shares in a company, 90%
of which were issued to his sons. The borrowed funds were
clearly spent to benefit other people, and the taxpayer's
mortgage interest was not deductible.2
35. For the purposes of section 8-1, the essential character3 of
interest expense is derived from the purpose of the borrowing
and the application or the use of the borrowed funds.4 The
laying out of the borrowed money for the purpose of gaining
assessable income 'furnishes the required connection between the
interest paid upon it by the taxpayer and the income derived by
him from its use'.5 Accordingly,
interest expense is not deductible to the extent that the
borrowed money has been used to benefit others.
Use of borrowed money to provide benefits to others
36. In arrangements of the kind discussed in this Determination,
the objective facts indicate that borrowed money has been used
for the purpose of benefiting both the taxpayer and other
persons. To the extent that it is used to benefit others, it has
the characteristics of a gift. A transfer of property may bear
'all the marks of a family settlement' even though it is done
under an arrangement which may produce assessable income for the
taxpayer.6 As
such, a portion of the interest payable on the borrowed money is
not incurred in gaining or producing the taxpayer's assessable
income7 or
has a private or domestic nature.8 That
portion of the interest is not deductible.
37. The conclusion that borrowed money is being used to benefit
entities other than the taxpayer follows logically from the
connection between the money spent and the rights the taxpayer
and the others obtain. The terms of trust indicate that the
taxpayer will not enjoy, or cannot reasonably expect to enjoy,
all of the benefits flowing from the trust capital which he or
she has funded with the borrowed money. A consequence of this is
that the borrowed moneys the taxpayer settles on the trust are
disproportionate9 to
the benefits which might reasonably be expected to pass to the
taxpayer under the trust deed. To that extent, the expenditure
lacks an obvious commercial explanation10 but
has an obvious private or domestic explanation.
Dual character despite profit expectation
38. The use of borrowed money to benefit others affects the
characterisation of the taxpayer's interest expense,
notwithstanding it may be applied in the expectation that it
might produce an amount of assessable income for the taxpayer
which will exceed the interest expense.
39. The position of the taxpayer in these circumstances is
similar to the position of the taxpayer in Munro's Case; refer
to paragraph 34 of this Determination. A father who uses
borrowed money to purchase shares for himself and his sons
cannot obtain a full deduction for his interest expense on the
basis that he expects to recoup that expense from dividends
payable on the shares that he holds. The clear relationship
between the use of the borrowed funds to establish (or
contribute to) a fund for the taxpayers own benefit and the
benefit of other persons indicates that the interest outlaid is,
in a real sense, a cost of providing the benefits to the other
persons, just as it is a cost of obtaining benefits for the
taxpayer. In these cases the interest expense will be
apportionable.11
Purpose to benefit others not merely incidental
40. In arrangements of the kind discussed in this Determination,
the use of borrowed money to benefit persons other than the
taxpayer is not relevant to the production of the taxpayer's
assessable income, nor is it merely incidental to the production
of such income.
41. The non-incidental nature of the taxpayer's purpose of
benefiting others is highlighted by the trust deed, which
establishes a mechanism for sharing benefits from the trust
property with persons other than the taxpayer. In arranging for
this structure to be established, or contributing to that
structure by way of a settlement of further capital, the
taxpayer provides an objective indication that the provision of
particular benefits to others is an 'independent pursuit'12 of
the expenditure.
42. In this regard, the arrangements discussed in this
Determination can be contrasted with cases in which a taxpayer
uses borrowed money to purchase a single asset which produces
assessable income and which may also result in a capital gain or
loss on disposal of the asset. If the possibility of the
taxpayer making a capital gain on the disposal of the asset is
simply an incident of the acquisition and holding of the asset
for the purpose of producing assessable income then the
essential character of the interest expense will be for the
gaining of assessable income rather than the capital gain.13
Apportionment
43. If apportionment is required, what will be appropriate will
be essentially a question of fact, to be determined in each
case.14 There
must be 'a fair apportionment to each object of the... actual
expenditure'.15
44. Where the borrowing is used to fund trust entitlements with
distinct and severable parts, the deduction can be determined on
a proportionate basis (see Example 1 at paragraphs 8 to 12 of
this Determination).16
45. In other cases, the expenditure may serve several objectives
indifferently and may not be capable of arithmetical or rateable
division.17 In
these cases the result will depend to an even greater degree
upon a finding of fact as to the extent to which the expenditure
is incurred in gaining or producing assessable income. If income
production appears to be a minor object of the taxpayer in
borrowing the money upon which interest is incurred (and the
benefiting of other persons a main or prevailing purpose) only a
small part of the interest will be fairly and reasonably
attributable to gaining the assessable income of the taxpayer:
as a rule of thumb, generally no more than the assessable income
derived by the taxpayer in a particular year18 and
in some cases less.
Perceived connection
46. In some cases no relationship will be seen between the
incurring of interest expense and the production of assessable
income for the taxpayer. The existence of a sufficient nexus
between an outgoing and the production of assessable income is
essentially a question of fact. However, no perceived connection19 will
be found merely because it is possible that a trustee, in the
independent exercise of fiduciary power, might appoint income in
a future year of income to the taxpayer. In such a case, the
income arises by reason of the exercise of the trustee's
discretion; and therefore lacks a sufficient relationship to the
outgoing (see Example 4 at paragraphs 27 to 31 of this
Determination).20
Part IVA
47. In the Commissioner's view, the taxpayer's interest expense
is not deductible in full under section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997 in
arrangements of the kind discussed in this Determination. To
that extent, therefore, the arrangements would not give rise to
tax benefits within the meaning of section 177C of the ITAA
1936.
48. However, if a taxpayer was entitled to an unapportioned
deduction, the Commissioner may consider whether Part IVA of the
ITAA 1936 applies. If the Commissioner concluded, based upon the
facts of a particular case, that there was a scheme entered into
for the sole or dominant purpose of obtaining a tax benefit, the
Commissioner may determine that the whole or part of the
deduction is not allowable to the taxpayer.
Footnotes
[1]
Paragraph 8-1(2)(b) of the ITAA 1997.
[2]
Munro's Case was
decided on the basis of the Income
Tax Assessment Act 1922 (ITAA
1922). The ITAA 1922 provided for the deduction of 'interest
actually incurred in gaining or producing the assessable income'
(paragraph 23(1)(a) of the ITAA 1922). It also contained an
express prohibition against any deduction in respect of 'money
not wholly and exclusively laid out or expended for the
production of assessable income' (paragraph 25(e) of the ITAA 1922).
In contrast, section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997 calls for
apportionment.
[3]
Refer Lunney
v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation; Hayley v. Federal
Commissioner of Taxation (1958)
100 CLR 478; [1958] HCA 5; Charles
Moore & Co (WA) Pty Ltd v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1956)
95 CLR 344; [1956] HCA 77.
[4]
Federal Commissioner of Taxation
v. Roberts & Smith (1992)
37 FCR 246; 92 ATC 4380 at 4388; (1992) 23 ATR 494 at 504; Kidston
Goldmines Ltd v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1991)
30 FCR 77; 91 ATC 4538 at 4546; (1991) 22 ATR 168 at 177; Hayden
v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1996)
68 FCR 19; 96 ATC 4797 at 4801; (1996) 33 ATR 352 at 356.
[5]
Ure v. Federal Commissioner of
Taxation (1981)
50 FLR 219; 81 ATC 4100 at 4104; (1981) 11 ATR 484 at 488.
[6]
Egerton-Warburton v. Deputy
Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1934]
HCA 40; (1934) 51 CLR 568 at 574.
[7]
Paragraph 8-1(1)(a) of the ITAA 1997. Federal
Commissioner of Taxation v. Isherwood & Dreyfus Pty Ltd (1979)
46 FLR 1; 79 ATC 4031 at 4032; (1979) 9 ATR 473 at 474.
[8]
Paragraph 8-1(2)(b) of the ITAA 1997.
[9]
Robert G Nall Ltd v. Federal
Commissioner of Taxation (1936)
57 CLR 695 at 706; (1936) 4 ATD 335 at 338, 340 and 342-343; WD
& HO Wills (Australia) Pty Ltd v. Federal Commissioner of
Taxation (1996)
65 FCR 298; 96 ATC 4223 at 4248; (1996) 32 ATR 168 at 193.
[10]
Ure v. Federal Commissioner of
Taxation (1981)
50 FLR 219; 81 ATC 4100; (1981) 11 ATR 484; Taxation Ruling IT
2684, paragraph 9.
[11]
See for example, Kidston
Goldmines Ltd v. FC of T 91
ATC 4538 at 4546; (1991) 22 ATR 168 at 177. Refer also to Munro's
Case decided on
the basis of the ITAA 1922. The ITAA 1922 provided for the
deduction of 'interest actually incurred in gaining or producing
the assessable income' (paragraph 23(1)(a) of the ITAA 1922). It
also contained an express prohibition against any deduction in
respect of 'money not wholly and exclusively laid out or
expended for the production of assessable income' (paragraph
25(e) of the ITAA 1922). In contrast, section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997
calls for apportionment.
[12]
Fletcher v. Federal Commissioner
of Taxation (1991)
173 CLR 1; [1991] HCA 42; 91 ATC 4950 at 4958; (1991) 22 ATR 613
at 623 .
[13]
See In
Re a Taxpayer (NSW No. 1) (1932)
2 ATD 210.
[14]
Ronpibon Tin NL & Tongkah
Compound NL v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1949]
HCA 15; (1949) 78 CLR 47 at 59; Fletcher
v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1991]
HCA 42; (1991) 173 CLR 1; 91 ATC 4950 at 4957; (1991) 22 ATR 613
at 621.
[15]
Ronpibon Tin NL & Tongkah
Compound NL v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1949)
78 CLR 47 at 60.
[16]
Ronpibon Tin NL & Tongkah
Compound NL v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1949)
78 CLR 47 at 59.
[17]
Ronpibon Tin NL & Tongkah
Compound NL v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1949)
78 CLR 47 at 59.
[18]
See Fletcher
v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1991]
HCA 42; (1991) 173 CLR 1; (1991) 22 ATR 613; 91 ATC 4950 and Ure
v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1981)
50 FLR 219; 81 ATC 4100; (1981) 11 ATR 484.
[19]
Federal Commissioner of Taxation
v. Hatchett (1971)
125 CLR 494; 71 ATC 4184 at 4187; (1971) 2 ATR 557 at 560.
[20]
See also Taxation
Ruling IT 2385; Case
V109 88 ATC 697
at 698; AAT
Case 4487 (1988)
19 ATR 3695 at 3696.
TD 2008/D16
References
ATO references:
NO 2008/10212
ISSN: 1038-8982
Related Rulings/Determinations:
IT 2385
IT 2684
TR 2006/10
Subject References:
allowable deductions
apportionment
hybrid trusts
interest deductions
trusts
uncommercial trusts
Legislative References:
ITAA 1936 51AAA
ITAA 1936 Pt IVA
ITAA 1936 177C
ITAA 1997 8-1
ITAA 1997 8-1(1)(a)
ITAA 1997 8-1(2)(b)
ITAA 1922
ITAA 1922 23(1)(a)
ITAA 1922 25(e)
Case References:
Case V109
88 ATC 697
AAT Case 4487
AAT Case 4487
Charles Moore & Co (WA) Pty Ltd
v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation
(1956) 95 CLR 344
[1956] HCA 77
Egerton-Warburton v. Deputy
Federal Commissioner of Taxation
(1934) 51 CLR 568
(1934) 8 ALJ 233
(1934) 3 ATD 40
(1934) ALR 380
[1934] HCA 40
Federal Commissioner of Taxation
v. Hatchett
(1971) 125 CLR 494
71 ATC 4184
(1971) 2 ATR 557
[1971] HCA 47
Federal Commissioner of Taxation
v. Isherwood & Dreyfus Pty Ltd
(1979) 46 FLR 1
79 ATC 4031
(1979) 9 ATR 473
Federal Commissioner of Taxation
v. Munro
(1926) 38 CLR 153
(1926) 32 ALR 339
[1926] HCA 58
Federal Commissioner of Taxation
v. Roberts & Smith
(1992) 37 FCR 246
92 ATC 4380
(1992) 23 ATR 494
Fletcher v. Federal Commissioner
of Taxation
(1991) 173 CLR 1
[1991] HCA 42
(1991) 22 ATR 613
91 ATC 4950
Hayden v. Federal Commissioner
of Taxation
(1996) 68 FCR 19
96 ATC 4797
(1996) 33 ATR 352
Hayley v. Federal Commissioner
of Taxation
(1958) 100 CLR 478
[1958] HCA 5
In Re a Taxpayer (NSW No 1)
(1932) 2 ATD 210
Kidston Goldmines Ltd v. Federal
Commissioner of Taxation
(1991) 30 FCR 77
91 ATC 4538
(1991) 22 ATR 168
Lunney v. Federal Commissioner
of Taxation; Hayley v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation
(1958) 100 CLR 478
[1958] HCA 5
Robert G Nall Ltd v. Federal
Commissioner of Taxation
(1936) 57 CLR 695
(1936) 4 ATD 335
(1936) 11 ALJ 204
[1937] HCA 88
Ronpibon Tin NL & Tongkah
Compound NL v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation
(1949) 78 CLR 47
(1949) 8 ATD 431
(1949) 23 ALJ 139
[1949] HCA 15
Ure v. Federal Commissioner of
Taxation
(1981) 50 FLR 219
81 ATC 4100
(1981) 11 ATR 484
WD & HO Wills (Australia) Pty
Ltd v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation
(1996) 65 FCR 298
96 ATC 4223
(1996) 32 ATR 168
Other References
Taxpayer Alert TA 2008/3
|