Hot Issues
spacer
Business confidence hits 5-month high: NAB
spacer
Caution advised on best interests duty with cryptocurrencies
spacer
$20,000 asset write-off renewed for another financial year.
spacer
SMSF compliance traps with bitcoin
spacer
Where Australia is at. Our leading indicators.
spacer
Foreign resident CGT withholding: early recognition of tax credit
spacer
ATO set to doorknock as 60% of cash-heavy businesses caught
spacer
New downsizing cap available
spacer
Capital Gains and Renounceable Rights
spacer
Treasury finds Australia 'increasingly uncompetitive' as US moves on tax plans
spacer
Australia's vital statistics
spacer
Our Advent calendar for 2017
spacer
SMSFs warned on ‘ticking time bomb’ with outdated deeds
spacer
Taxation ruling on commercial website deductibility
spacer
68% of SMEs ‘significantly stressed,’ 85% rely on accountants
spacer
Statutory wills are underutilised in estate planning
spacer
Small business slips on lodgement deadlines
Article archive
spacer
Quarter 4 October - December 2017
spacer
Quarter 3 July - September 2017
spacer
Quarter 2 April - June 2017
spacer
Quarter 1 January - March 2017
spacer
Quarter 4 October - December 2016
spacer
Quarter 3 July - September 2016
spacer
Quarter 2 April - June 2016
spacer
Quarter 1 January - March 2016
spacer
Quarter 4 October - December 2015
spacer
Quarter 3 July - September 2015
spacer
Quarter 2 April - June 2015
spacer
Quarter 1 January - March 2015
spacer
Quarter 4 October - December 2014
No Special Circumstances to allow Excess Super Contributions

Another case confirms that taxpayers making large superannuation contributions need to be diligent.

 

 

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal denied a taxpayers request to ignore excess contributions tax.

The taxpayer claimed that her situation and the complexity of her superannuation arrangements, meant that special circumstances should allow the Commissioner to overlook her excess contributions.

She had contributed what she thought was the maximum in year one and used the bring forward rule to contribute $450,000 in the year two.  She argued that part of the complexity was an industry fund, a defined benefit fund and her SMSF.  Having exceeded the maximum concessional contributions in year one, the bring forward rule was not available in the year two.  

The tribunal considered that her superannuation arrangements were not out of the ordinary and emphasised her failure to seek advice and disregard reports from her superannuation fund, in favour of spreadsheets prepared by her husband.

The decision is quite predictable, again emphasising great care when endeavouring to take maximum advantage of tax concessions.

 

 

AcctWeb