2 million self-employed
Their interests are our interest
It's your contract: Take control of it!
We say you should control your contract. Here's how. Check for clauses that are:
Red for Stop
Amber for Caution
Green for Go
You can also make use of our Contract Template to design your contract.

Matrixes and template are available here (ICA members only). Not a member? Join here for as little as $55.
You and Your Contract
Charter of Contractual Fairness.

Debate: Suck it up?

Contract problems?
Fixing business disputes
There's lots happening for new dispute resolution services for small business people. The Small Business Commissioner (SBC) model is being rolled out across Australia. Explanation of developments.
Watching: The new world of work
We track and discuss what's happening with work.
The new Cuban revolution.
Watching: The coordinated attack against self-employed in Australia
Do unions hate the self-employed?
Federal tax attack
Sham contracting small problem
Watching: New Technology
Opportunities and new threats for self-employed people
Left versus right: the great debate
Ken Phillips (ICA) and Peter Strong (COSBOA) debate "The Future (or Death) of Employment". Vids are here.
Our Campaigning
We need unfair contract protections
Defend contractor tax laws
Watching: Your Super
We're monitoring superannuation
Watching: Work Safety Laws
Harmonised laws have big problems.
Watching: Government Contracts
Military Aircraft (JSF)

National Broadband Network
Watching: Fair Work Act
We're watching

What the AIG wants
Handy ATO Links
Filing your tax return:
A member's problem
ATO advice

Handy ATO tax links:
ATO debt collection: overview
ATO debt collection: 'Products'
Guide to managing your debt
Not-for-profit tax guide
Lodge your BAS online
PAYG withholding tax tables
New tax form: Taxpayer Statement of Account
New tax form: Notice of Assessment
Mortgage scams
Small business support
Payment arrangement calculator
Want an ATO visit?
ATO Help for small business
ABN eligibility rules
Self managing your tax debt

Handy Super links:
ATO SMSF compliance
ATO free seminars.
SMSF Admin advice
New Super clearing house
Tax on SMSF loans
Watching Global Economies
Watching Global Economies
Watching the USA
Watching China
Central Banks on Debt
Watching Housing Bubbles
Ken Phillips on the debt equation
Important Federal Court decision
ATO, PSI, Results test for companies and trusts

December 2007


Public information: The analysis below gives an overview of the test case and its implications.

ICA Members: Click here for a description of the case, link to the case, and an important ATO opinion (May 2008).

PSI Tax summary: For ICA's PSI summary, 'Confused about your Tax?', click here (ICA members)

Overview
Whether independent contractors can split income with a spouse and claim business-like tax deductions has been an ongoing tax debate in Australia for many years. A Federal Court decision on 5 December last year (2007) has brought more clarity to the issues.

The Federal Court has upheld the position of the Australian Taxation Office that two independent contractors---one working through his own company and the other working through his discretionary family trust---did not pass the results test under the Personal Services Income tax laws. This means that all income earned by the two independent contractors will be taxed as if it were their personal income. They will not be able to split their incomes with their spouses or claim business-like tax deductions.

Some will claim that this is a disaster for independent contractors and for the status of independent contractors. ICA does not share this view. In fact, the Federal Court's decision is strongly consistent with the position that the ATO has taken for a long time. Those who predict tax 'disaster' for independent contractors are making comment based on outdated views of the tax laws---laws which have been changed under the PSI rules.

In fact, the Court's decision does not change access to business tax deduction for most independent contractors, nor does it alter the capacity to split income legitimately with a spouse for many independent contractors, depending on their circumstances.

The following points are relevant:
  • Many tax lawyers and accountants have often argued that income can be split with a spouse by working through a company or discretionary trust structure. The ATO has always been wary of such arrangements and has made it clear that such arrangements could be subject to investigation and possible rejection.
  • Tax structuring through companies and trusts has been the basis of allegations in the past that some independent contractors access tax deductions to which they would not ordinarily be entitled. These allegations were investigated by the Ralph Review around 2000.
  • The Personal Services Income tax laws were introduced to address this allegation and to create some clarity for independent contractors. (see ICA 'Confused about your Tax?' for a summary. ICA members)
  • The PSI rules were largely successful in creating clarity with one exception. That exception was for company and trust structures.
  • In 2006, the ATO released a ruling which stated that it would normally accept income-splitting for independent contractors structured through partnerships. It stated sensible reasons for this. (Click here for more info: ICA members)
  • In 2003, the ATO announced that it would conduct a test case programme through the courts in relation to company and trust arrangements. ICA supported this test case programme. The December 2007 Federal Court decision is the first outcome of the test case programme of which ICA is aware.
ICA's conclusions:
  • Individuals: The case doesn't affect independent contractors who operate on an individual basis.
  • Partnerships: Independent contractors who work through a partnership are unaffected and should normally be able to split income with their spouses---subject, of course, to the Part IVA (general anti-avoidance rules). (See ICA explanation: ICA members)
  • Companies/trusts: Independent contractors who work through companies or trusts need to be careful about splitting income, retaining profit and claiming many business-type tax deductions. They need to make sure that they pass the results test.