Level 4, 20 Grenfell Street,
Adelaide SA  5000

Phone: 08 8231 1888
Fax: 08 8231 3888

Email: admin@crase.com.au





 
Latest News
Hot Issues
Capital Gains and Renounceable Rights
Treasury finds Australia 'increasingly uncompetitive' as US moves on tax plans
Australia's vital statistics
Our Advent calendar for 2017
SMSFs warned on ‘ticking time bomb’ with outdated deeds
Taxation ruling on commercial website deductibility
68% of SMEs ‘significantly stressed,’ 85% rely on accountants
Statutory wills are underutilised in estate planning
Small business slips on lodgement deadlines
300,000 SMEs utilising $20K write-off, says ATO
‘A bad thing times 10’: ATO set for new SMSF blitz
Capital Gains and Renounceable Rights
Paperwork bungles lead to $38k in payments
Australian Dietary Guidelines and healthy eating chart (PDF)
Former director liable for company’s unpaid tax liabilities
Resources on our site to help you, your family and your friends.
Super for housing measures enter Senate
No Special Circumstances to allow Excess Super Contributions
Housing tax measures progress to Parliament
Articles archive
Quarter 4 October - December 2017
Quarter 3 July - September 2017
Quarter 2 April - June 2017
Quarter 1 January - March 2017
Quarter 4 October - December 2016
Quarter 3 July - September 2016
Quarter 2 April - June 2016
Quarter 1 January - March 2016
Quarter 4 October - December 2015
Quarter 3 July - September 2015
Quarter 2 April - June 2015
Quarter 1 January - March 2015
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




26th-October-2017
      Site By AcctWeb