0% found this document useful (0 votes)
73 views2 pages

Taxation: Income & Deductions

1. General deductions must satisfy the positive limbs of section 8-1 by having a sufficient connection to earning assessable income. Expenses must also not be excluded by the negative limbs. 2. Losses and expenses can be deductible even if they arise due to misconduct, illegal activities, or are incurred in a different year than the associated income, if there is still a sufficient connection to earning income. 3. Capital expenditures that produce benefits or advantages of a lasting nature are not deductible, whereas operational expenses can be. Self-education expenses must directly result in earning income from your current job to be deductible.

Uploaded by

Han Ny Pham
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
73 views2 pages

Taxation: Income & Deductions

1. General deductions must satisfy the positive limbs of section 8-1 by having a sufficient connection to earning assessable income. Expenses must also not be excluded by the negative limbs. 2. Losses and expenses can be deductible even if they arise due to misconduct, illegal activities, or are incurred in a different year than the associated income, if there is still a sufficient connection to earning income. 3. Capital expenditures that produce benefits or advantages of a lasting nature are not deductible, whereas operational expenses can be. Self-education expenses must directly result in earning income from your current job to be deductible.

Uploaded by

Han Ny Pham
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

LEC6: INCOME FROM PROPERTY

Myer (1987): lump sum amount was OI as it replaces the periodic payment of interest
McCauley (1944): payment was for recover of timber from the land & the amount of
payment dependant on how much timber recovered from the land
=> Ordinary royalty as amount of payment varies by extent of right exercised

Is it ordinary income?
Is it capital gain under statutory income s102-5(1)?
Is there a CGT event?
Is there a CGT asset?
Is it pre-capital gain (acquired before 20/9/1985)?
Is it collectible or personal use asset? (check cost, gain/loss may be disregarded)
Does an exemption apply?
Is there a roll-over relief?

LEC 7,8: GENERAL DEDUCTIONS


Consider specific deduction first => general deduction (nexus w AI, business)
***Loss related to AI:
Charles Moore (1956): loss from robbery: 1. banking the day's income is part of taxpayer’s 
daily business operations => loss arose in the course of earning AI
=> positive limbs of a s8-1 satisfied
2. it is loss outgoing (involuntary) => even not choose to incur expense
=> still claimable for deductions under s8-1
W Nevil (1937): compensation for fire director: overall approach => expense improve the
Business (better mgmt) & improve AI => positive limbs satisfied
***Misconduct related to AI
Herald & Weekly Times (1932): pay damages for libel claims => deductible as libel purpose
is of increase sales & so AI; libel is a common incident for newspaper business
Snowden & Wilson (1958): incur legal & ad expenses as investigations & complaints
=> deductible as purpose is defend company reputation
=> sufficiently connected to earning AI
La Rosa (2003): drug dealer, robbed income: illegality is irrelevant => $ stolen is deductible
=> s26-54: deny deduction for expense of illegal business (income assessable)
***Misconduct unrelated to AI
Magna Alloys (1980): legal expense for director criminal proceedings
=> director misconduct not company misconduct, but protect reputation &
interest of director also protect company’s => business purpose
=> positive limbs satisfied
Day (2008): officer charged for failure duties under Public Service Act (1922) & incur legal E
=> Legal E deductible as the charges brought under the Public Services Act
were only brought because of his job as an officer. (Occasion of E approach)
***Expense yr ≠ AI yr
Steele (1999): incur interest on loan to buy land to use for business in future but end up
can’t earn AI => deductible if can show E is to earn AI
Placer Pacific (1995): E for previous manufacture operations => deductible
***Capital E: Add to structure of business vs operational E
Sun Newspapers (1938): pay for rival to shut down rival for 3yrs => strengthen business
=> not deductible as enduring/lasting benefit => capital E
***Private/domestic:
Cooper: rugby player needs to eat more than usual for purpose of earn AI
=> positive limbs s8-1 not satisfied
=> not deductible as negative limbs as food is living E
***Quantum
Ronpibon Tin: continue domestic & stop oversea but both have expense (dual purpose E)
=> partial deductions for E incurred for domestic operations
***Self-education E
Hatchett (1971): self-education E need to result in your income from your job
=> Teacher deductible for high certificate in teaching not art degree
Studdert (1991): Flying lesson result in increase of income in current job => deductible
Finn (1961): travel in LSL to study architecture design
Has evidence that the trip increased his chance of promotion;
Maintain records of his study. => Deductible
Peter Lenten (2008): history teacher went on holiday with wife to a historical sight
=> Allow deduction for some of the expenses as he did get promotion
Carlos Sanchez (2008): travel agent went on holiday, claim that is sight research
=> Allow deduction for some of the expenses as he show sales increase
Anstis (2010): youth allowances: OI, Condition for receive allowance is to make satisfactory
progress in degree => self-education E is deductible as E is in earning AI,
not put her in position of earning AI
=> But not applied anymore because s26-19 (Rebatable deductions)
But if have other assessable income (scholarship, internship) with condition
of satisfactory progress => can claim under Anstis case
***Clothing expenses
Edwards (1994): assistance for wife of governor, require wearing high quality clothes &
change many outfits during the day => deductible for addition clothes E
Mansfield (1995): air stewardess => deductible for stockings, shoes, moisturizers, lipstick as
caused by work environment (dry air & cabin pressure)
=> non-deductible for cosmetics & hair dressing: not because work conditions
Morris (2002): sun & rain protection items are deductible as work outdoor
***Repairs:
Lindsay (1960): If what being replaced is capable of independent use => it a whole asset
=> not deductible as it is capital
***Bad debt
Point (1970): TP agreed to write-off BD in 1yr but actually write-off in later yr
=> no BD deductions as already agreed to write-off in previous yr so there’s no debt
***EI reduces amount of your losses while NANE not reduce amount of losses

You might also like