Practice Update May 2018

Ian Campbell • 7 May 2018

P r a c t i c e U p d a t e

May 2018

 

Legislation has been passed to “clamp down” on GST evasion in the property development sector.

From 1 July 2018, purchasers of new residential premises and new residential subdivisions will generally be required to withhold the GST on the purchase price at settlement and pay it directly to the ATO.

Property developers will also need to give written notification to purchasers regarding whether or not they need to withhold.

The new obligations are primarily aimed at ending the practice of some developers collecting GST on new properties before dissolving their business prior to remitting such tax to the ATO.

 

Continued ATO focus on holiday home rentals

The ATO has recently advised that they are “setting their sights on the large number of mistakes, errors and false claims made by rental property owners who use their own property for personal holidays”.

While it confirms that the private use of holiday homes by friends and family is entirely legitimate, the ATO states that such use reduces a taxpayer’s ability to earn income from the property, and therefore impacts on (i.e., reduces) the amount of claimable deductions.

As a result, the ATO has reminded holiday home owners that:

q They can only claim deductions for a holiday home with respect to periods it is genuinely available for rent.

q They cannot place unreasonable conditions on prospective tenants/renters, set rental rates above market value, or fail to advertise a holiday home in a manner that targets people who would be interested in it and still claim that the property was genuinely available for rent.

q Where a property is rented to friends or relatives at ‘mates rates’, they can only claim deductions for expenses up to the amount of the income received.

q Property owners whose claims are disproportionate to the income received can expect greater scrutiny from the ATO.

 

 

Get ready for Single Touch Payroll

Single Touch Payroll (or 'STP') is mandatory for 'substantial employers' (being those with 20 or more employees) from 1 July 2018.

All employers are required to count the number of employees on their payroll on 1 April 2018 to find out if they are a substantial employer (note that this can be done after 1 April, but they need to count the employees who were on their payroll on 1 April).

They must count each employee (not the full time equivalent), including full-time, part-time and casual employees, as well as those employees based overseas or absent or on leave (paid or unpaid).

Employers that are part of a company group must include the total number of employees employed by all member companies of the wholly-owned group.

However, employers don't have to include the following in the headcount:

n any employees who ceased work before 1 April;

n casual employees who did not work in March;

n independent contractors;

n staff provided by a third-party labour hire organisation;

n company directors or office holders; or

n religious practitioners.

Note that, although directors, office holders and religious practitioners are not included in the headcount, if the employer starts reporting through STP, the payment information of these individuals will need to be reported (because the payments are subject to withholding and are currently reported in the Individual non-business payment summary ).

Employers don't need to send the ATO the headcount information, but they may want to keep a copy for their own records.

Once an employer becomes a substantial employer, they will need to continue reporting through STP even if their employee numbers drop to 19 or less (unless they apply for and are granted an exemption).

Editor: Please contact our office if you need any assistance regarding the new STP regime.

 

Employee denied deductions for work-related expenses

An employee photographer has been denied deductions for travel expenses (when travelling with his family), and other purported work related expenses.

The AAT held that the travel expenses were primarily incurred for the purposes of a family trip or holiday and were therefore non-deductible, as they were private and domestic in nature.

Also, in relation to the taxpayer's reliance on bank statements in the absence of invoices and receipts, the AAT observed that “evidence of the mere transfer of funds, be it by way of bank transfer or by any other means, is not sufficiently informative of the actual character of an expense", so the other disputed expenses could not be claimed as allowable deductions.

 

 

New FBT rates for the 2018/19 FBT year

Editor: The ATO has released Taxation Determinations setting out the following rates for the FBT year commencing on 1 April 2018.

 

FBT: Benchmark interest rate

The benchmark interest rate for the 2018/19 FBT year is 5.20% p.a., which is used to calculate the taxable value of:

u a loan fringe benefit; and

u a car fringe benefit where an employer chooses to value the benefit using the operating cost method.

Example

On 1 April 2018, an employer lends an employee $50,000 for five years at an interest rate of 5% p.a., with interest being charged and paid 6 monthly, and no principal repaid until the end of the loan.

The actual interest payable by the employee for the current year is $2,500 ($50,000 × 5%). The notional interest, with a 5.20% benchmark rate, is $2,600.

Therefore, the taxable value of the loan fringe benefit is $100 (i.e., $2,600 – $2,500).

FBT: Cents per kilometre basis

The rates to be applied where the cents per kilometre basis is used for the 2018/19 FBT year in respect of the private use of a vehicle ( other than a car ) are:

Engine capacity Rate per kilometre
0 – 2,500cc 54 cents
Over 2,500cc 65 cents
Motorcycles 16 cents

 

FBT: Record keeping exemption threshold

The small business record keeping exemption threshold for the 2018/19 FBT year is $8,552.

Editor: The ATO has also released Taxation Determinations setting out the indexation factors to value non-remote housing, and the amounts the ATO considers reasonable for food and drink expenses incurred by employees receiving a living-away-from-home allowance (LAFHA) fringe benefit, for the FBT year commencing on 1 April 2018.

 

Please Note: Many of the comments in this publication are general in nature and anyone intending to apply the information to practical circumstances should seek professional advice to independently verify their interpretation and the information’s applicability to their particular circumstances.

 

20 January 2026
A real-world case study on trust distributions Mark and Lisa had what most people would describe as a “pretty standard” setup. They ran a successful family business through a discretionary trust. The trust had been in place for years, established when the business was small and cash was tight. Over time, the business grew, profits improved, and the trust started distributing decent amounts of income each year. The tax returns were lodged. Nobody had ever had a problem with the ATO. So naturally, they assumed everything was fine. This is where the story starts to get interesting. Year one: the harmless decision In a good year, the business made about $280,000. It was suggested that some income be distributed to Mark and Lisa’s two adult children, Josh and Emily. Both were over 18, both were studying, and neither earned much income. On paper, it made sense. Josh received $40,000. Emily received $40,000. The rest was split between Mark, Lisa, and a company beneficiary. The tax bill went down. Everyone was happy. But here’s the first quiet detail that mattered later. Josh and Emily never actually received the money. No bank transfer. No separate accounts. No conversations about what they wanted to do with it. The trust kept the funds in its main business account and used them to pay suppliers and reduce debt. At the time, nobody thought twice. “It’s still family money.” “They can access it if they need it.” “We’ll square it up later.” These are very common thoughts. And this is exactly where risk quietly begins. Year two: things get a little more complicated The next year was even better. They used a bucket company to cap tax at the company rate. Again, a common and legitimate strategy when used properly. So the trust distributed $200,000 to the company. No cash moved. It was recorded as an unpaid present entitlement. The idea was that the company would get paid later, when cash flow allowed. Meanwhile, the trust needed funds to buy new equipment and cover a short-term cash squeeze. The trust borrowed money from the company. There was a loan agreement. Interest was charged. Everything looked tidy on paper. From the outside, it all seemed sensible. But economically, nothing really changed. The trust made money. The trust kept using the money. The same people controlled everything. The bucket company never actually used the funds for its own business or investments. This detail becomes important later. Year three: circular money without anyone realising By year three, things had become routine. Distributions were made to the kids again. The bucket company received another entitlement. Loans were adjusted at year-end through journal entries. What is really happening is a circular flow. Money was being allocated to beneficiaries, then effectively coming back to the trust, either because it was never paid out or because it was loaned back almost immediately. No one was trying to hide anything. No one thought they were doing the wrong thing. They were just following what they’d always done. This is how section 100A issues usually arise. Slowly, quietly, and without any single dramatic mistake.
3 December 2025
Rental deductions maximisation strategies
28 October 2025
A Practical Guide to Running Your Family Business in Australia