Practice Update October 2018

Ian Campbell • 3 October 2018
Cash economy under fire: ATO directly contacting taxpayers

 

Increased scrutiny of home office claims

Last year, 6.7 million taxpayers claimed a record $7.9 billion in deductions for ‘other work-related expenses’, which includes home office expenses.

Reportedly, due to a high number of mistakes, errors and questionable claims for home office expenses, the ATO has recently advised that it will be increasing attention, scrutiny and education on these claims this tax time.

In particular, the ATO has flagged their concerns relating to taxpayers who are claiming:

q        expenses they never paid for;

q        expenses that their employer has reimbursed them for;

q        private expenses; and

q        expenses with no supporting records.

Whilst additional costs incurred as a direct result of working from home can be claimed, care must be taken not to claim private expenses as well.

The ATO has indicated that one of the biggest issues they face is people claiming the entire amount of expenses (e.g., their internet or mobile phone), rather than just the extra portion relating to work.

Provided the taxpayer is able to demonstrate that they have incurred additional costs of running expenses (e.g., electricity for heating, cooling and lighting), then these are generally deductible.

In contrast, employees are generally not able to claim any portion of occupancy-related expenses (e.g., rent, mortgage repayments, property insurance, land taxes and rates).

Taxpayers are warned that the ATO may contact their employers to verify expenses claimed for working from home.

In addition, the ATO expects to disallow a lot of claims where the taxpayer has not kept adequate records to prove that they have legitimately incurred the relevant expense and that the expense was related to their work.

As with the claiming of deductions in general, supporting records must be kept when claiming work-from-home expenses, which may include receipts, diary entries and itemised phone bills.  

Importantly, only the additional work-related portion of the relevant expense is deductible.

Advancement in technology has allowed the ATO to deploy sophisticated systems and analytics to spot claims that do not ‘add up’ and claims that are out of the ordinary compared to others in similar occupations, earning similar income.

Finally, the ATO has reminded taxpayers of the ‘ three golden rules ’ to follow when claiming work-from-home deductions, being:

q                   the taxpayer must have spent the money themselves and have not been reimbursed;

q        it must be directly related to earning the taxpayer’s income, not a personal expense; and

q        the taxpayer must have a record to prove the expense.

 

More help for drought-affected farmers

As part of the next phase of its drought assistance policy (which includes various other measures), the Government announced that farmers will be able to immediately deduct the cost of fodder storage assets .  

Previously, these types of assets (such as silos and hay sheds used to store grain and other animal feed storage) were required to be depreciated over three years.  

This measure is designed to make it easier for farmers to invest in more infrastructure to stockpile fodder during the drought.

This measure is available for fodder storage assets first used, or installed ready for use, from 19 August 2018 (being the date of the announcement), and complements the $20,000 instant write-off already available to small business entities.

Editor: The relevant legislation giving effect to this announcement was fast-tracked through Parliament to provide certainty for these drought-stricken farmers, passing both Houses on 20 September 2018.

 

Increase in Private Health Insurance excesses

Legislation has been passed by Parliament to implement the Private Health Insurance (‘PHI’) reforms announced by the Government in October 2017.

The measures are designed to simplify PHI and make it more affordable for consumers by improving the value of PHI either in the form of lower premiums and/or improved cover for certain benefits.

Of particular interest from a tax perspective is the increase in the maximum voluntary excess levels for products providing individuals with an exemption from the Medicare levy surcharge.

The increased levels of voluntary excesses that insurers can apply are:

q        $750 (up from $500) in any 12-month period for singles; or

q        $1,500 (up from $1,000) in any 12-month period for couples/families.

These increases will apply from the 2019 income year, with private health insurers permitted to offer products with the new higher excesses from 1 April 2019.

Editor:   This is a positive change, as the excess levels have not changed since 2000.   Whilst there is no requirement for consumers to move to products with higher excesses, it is expected that more affordable PHI will encourage more people to take out cover.


Legislation to combat illegal phoenix activity

The Government has announced a package of reforms to tackle illegal phoenix behaviour.  

By way of background, phoenixing occurs when the controllers of a company strip the company's assets and transfer them to another company, to avoid paying the original company's debts.  

The proposed measures will deter and disrupt the core behaviours of phoenix operators by:

q        creating new criminal and civil offences, attaching the highest penalties available under the law, to target those who engage in and facilitate illegal phoenix transactions;

q        preventing directors from backdating their resignations to avoid personal liability;

q        preventing sole directors from resigning and leaving a company as an empty corporate shell with no directors;

q        restricting the voting rights of related creditors of the phoenix company at meetings regarding the appointment or removal and replacement of a liquidator;

q        making directors personally liable for GST liabilities, as part of extended director penalty provisions; and

q        extending the ATO's existing power to retain refunds where there are outstanding tax lodgments.

A new Phoenix Hotline is also being established, which will make it easier to report suspected phoenix behaviour.  

Editor: According to the Government, the proposed measures are tightly targeted at those who misuse the corporate form, while minimising any unintended impacts on legitimate business restructuring.   Whether they will be able to achieve this goal or not is yet to be seen…

 

 

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.

2 September 2025
Land tax in Australia: exemptions, tips and lessons Land tax is one of those quiet state-based taxes that does not grab headlines like income tax or GST, but impacts property owners once thresholds are crossed. It applies when the unimproved value of land exceeds a certain amount, which differs from state to state. Principal places of residence are usually exempt, but investment properties, commercial holdings, and certain rural blocks may be subject to taxation. For individuals and small businesses, land tax is worth paying attention to because exemptions can make the difference between a manageable annual bill and a nasty surprise. A recent case in New South Wales (Zonadi case ) has sharpened the focus on when land used for cultivation qualifies for the primary production exemption. The lessons are timely for farmers, winegrowers and anyone with mixed-use rural land. The basics of land tax Each state and territory (except the Northern Territory) imposes land tax. Key features include: Assessment date : Usually determined at midnight on 31 December of the preceding year (for example, the 2026 assessment is based on ownership and use as at 31 December 2025). Thresholds : Vary across jurisdictions. For example, in 2025, the NSW threshold is $1,075,000, while in Victoria it is $300,000. Exemptions : Principal place of residence, primary production land, land owned by charities and specific concessional categories. Rates : Progressive, with higher landholdings paying higher rates. Unlike council rates, which fund local services, land tax is a revenue measure for states. It is payable annually and calculated on the total taxable value of landholdings. Primary production exemption Most states exempt land used for primary production from land tax. The policy aim is precise: farmers should not be burdened with land tax when using their land to produce food, fibre or similar goods. However, the details of what constitutes primary production vary. Qualifying uses generally include: cultivation (growing crops or horticulture) maintaining animals (grazing, dairying, poultry, etc.) commercial fishing and aquaculture beekeeping Sounds straightforward, but the catch is in how the land is used and for what purpose. Lessons from the Zonadi case The Zonadi case involved an 11-hectare vineyard in the Hunter Valley. The land was used for: 4.2ha of vines producing wine grapes a cellar door and wine storage area a residence and tourist accommodation some trees, paddocks and access ways During five land tax years in dispute, the taxpayer sold some grapes directly but used most of the crop to make wine off-site, which was then sold through the cellar door. Income was derived from grape sales, wine sales and tourist accommodation. The NSW Tribunal had to decide whether the land’s dominant use was cultivation for the purpose of selling the produce of that cultivation (a requirement under section 10AA of the NSW Land Tax Management Act). The outcome was a blow for the taxpayer. The Tribunal said: Growing grapes was indeed a form of cultivation and amounted to primary production. But cultivation for the purpose of making wine did not qualify, because the exemption only applies where the produce is sold in its natural state. Wine is a converted product, not the product of cultivation. Although some grapes were sold directly, the bulk of the financial gain came from wine sales. Therefore, the dominant use of the land was cultivation to make and sell wine, which is not exempt. The exemption was denied, and the taxpayer was left with a land tax bill. Why this matters For small businesses, especially those that combine farming with value-adding activities such as processing or tourism, the case serves as a warning. The line between primary production and secondary production can determine whether a land tax exemption applies. If most income comes from a cellar door, farmstay, or product manufacturing, the exemption may be at risk, even though cultivation is occurring on the land. Different rules in Victoria Victoria takes a broader view. It defines primary production to include cultivation for the purpose of selling the produce in a natural, processed or converted state. In other words, grapes sold for wine production would still be considered primary production. The only further hurdle is the “use test”, which depends on location: outside Greater Melbourne: land must be used primarily for primary production within urban zones: land must be used solely or mainly for the business of primary production Had Zonadi been in Victoria, the outcome could have been very different. The vineyard would likely have been exempt from this requirement. State-based comparisons Here’s a snapshot of how land tax treatment differs across states when it comes to cultivation and primary production:
by Ian Campbell 10 July 2025
Shila is taking the leap
by Ian Campbell 10 July 2025
Key concerns when selling a business in: A strategic guide for business owners