Volume 19, Issue 1 – Burton

A REVIEW OF JUDICIAL REFERENCES TO THE DICTUM OF JORDAN CJ, EXPRESSED IN SCOTT V COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION, IN ELABORATING THE MEANING OF ‘INCOME’ FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE AUSTRALIAN INCOME TAX By Mark Burton

Abstract
Judicial consideration of the meaning of ‘income’ (ITAA1936) and ‘ordinary income’(ITAA1997) includes reference to a dictum of Jordan CJ describing a process for discovering the meaning of ‘income’ for the purposes of the then New South Wales income tax. Over the past eighty years the import of this dictum has been described in various ways in case decisions. This paper identifies these different judicial descriptions of the dictum’s meaning and considers the significance of this diversity when describing the process by which the meaning of ‘ordinary income’ ought to be ascertained.

DOWNLOAD THE ARTICLE

Volume 19, Issue 2 – Marriott

Abstract
A frequent claim in popular media is that the wealthy pay the most tax. As an absolute measure of tax collected this is correct, as the rich earn the most income. However, perhaps a more insightful perspective is a relative measure incorporating not only who pays the most income tax, but a measure that incorporates other taxes such as indirect taxes and duties.
Indirect taxes and duties collect over one-third of tax revenue in New Zealand and present as a not insignificant tax burden, particularly for lower income taxpayers. This study has three objectives. First it provides an insight into indirect taxes and duties paid by decile group in New Zealand in order to highlight the impact of non-income taxes on different income groups. Second, it challenges the rhetoric associated with claims that no groups would be disadvantaged by the last income and consumption tax changes made in New Zealand. Third, it argues that there is a need for greater transparency on the impact of tax changes and, in particular, there is a role for the government agency responsible for collecting statistical information to engage in more analysis of tax data when that data is not readily accessible for academics.

DOWNLOAD THE FULL ARTICLE

JAT Volume 19 Issue 3 – Killaly

Sometimes as an editor you receive a contribution that challenges you and the way you see the world. Jim Killaly’s ‘Fair Game’ does that. It is a ground-breaking work, distilled from 40 years of administering and thinking about the tax system and the deeper drivers that underpin the very human actions and interactions in this area.

Killaly spent 46 years in the Australian Tax Office. He was a well-respected and, for some taxpayers and non-taxpayers, a feared Deputy Commissioner. It is the lived experience of tax administration that has inspired Jim to write this analysis. As a tax researcher, the search for deeper meaning and understanding is one I am familiar with
too and there is so much in this work that provokes and challenges the old ways of viewing tax and thinking about it.

Killaly uses a systemic framework analysis to give a deeper level of understanding, from the big picture down to specific cases. This framework is made up of the “Iceberg Model”, mapping of the economic value chains of multinational groups, economic functional analysis and productivity analysis. His aim, as he says in the overview, is ‘… to show that for each of these levels and contexts the framework enables policymakers, tax administrators and tax professionals to better understand and manage the complexity of issues that are arising.’ Killaly concentrates on companies and tax, in particular cross-border situations, to explore the complexity of arrangements and potential resolution of the problems that arise. The identification of underlying movements coming out of this more systemic approach gives us the basic tools to do that. As he says:

The proposed methodology includes a distillation of the patterns and trends in the stocks and flows
of transactions and events (and the patterns and trends in relation to the absence of desirable
transactions, stocks, flows and events) for deeper analysis of the underlying causes and their
impacts.

The approach involves understanding that tax is part of a wider system that includes competitive markets, the global economy, the Australian economy and its performance, the growing oligopolisation of capital, the impact of companies as groups both within Australia and across the globe, and how the Australian company tax system operates both on paper and in practice. Part of Killaly’s work involves applying his framework in specific situations such as corporate financing and transfer pricing. Not only that but the former Deputy Commissioner uses the framework to examine and judge the ATO’s administration of the 1,400 major economic groups. As to determining appropriate policy, administration or other actions in an ever changing world, Killaly says:

The analysis takes for granted that Australia will need to be responsive to emerging strategic issues
on an ongoing basis. However, it explores whether the use of the systemic analysis tools in
policymaking and tax administration might allow Australia to complement this responsiveness with a
forward-looking approach that makes public policy more effective and sustainable.

I strongly recommend ‘Fair Game’ to all our readers.

John Passant, co-editor, the Journal of Australian Taxation, and former ATO colleague of Jim Killaly.

DOWNLOAD THE FULL ARTICLE