Legislative determination on correcting GST errors, decision impact statement on Private Tutor case, ATO IDs on emission units

On Friday a range of things issued in relation to GST.

GST and correcting errors

Legislative determination GSTE 2013/1 was published by the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation. The determination specifies the circumstances in which you may, in working out your net amount for a tax period, correct errors that were made in working out your net amount for an earlier tax period. The Commissioner has published a guide on the application of the determination, which can be accessed here.

The determination  applies to errors relating to an amount of GST, input tax credit or adjustments. However, the determination does not apply if the error relates to a matter which is the subject of compliance activity by the ATO  or if the error was made in a tax period which  is the subject of compliance activity.  The determination also does not apply if the error was the result of recklessness or intentional disregard of a GST law and if the amount of the error exceeds the value limit. The value limit is tied to the GST turnover of the entity. For example, an entity with a turnover of less than 20 million  has a value limit of $10,000 and an entity with a turnover of $1 billion or more has a value limit of $450,000.

Decision Impact Statement on The Private Tutor and Commissioner of Taxation

The Commissioner has released a decision impact statement for the decision of the Tribunal in The Private Tutor and Commissioner of Taxation [2013] AATA 136 the Tribunal accepted that taxpayer’s contention that he was carrying on an enterprise of tutoring but the Tribunal found that it was not satisfied that the taxpayer was entitled to any of the input tax credits claimed. My post discussing that decision can be accessed here.

In my post I noted the Tribunal’s adverse comments on the Commissioner’s conduct in issuing assessments to the taxpayer for a positive net amount in an attempt to “claw back” GST while maintaining that the  taxpayer was not entitled to be registered for GST. Notwithstanding these adverse comments, the Commissioner “respectfully maintains his view” that he is entitled to rely on s 105-65 to retain refunds in such circumstances. The Commissioner also notes that the Tribunal has reserved a decision dealing with this question in another case and he will review his position generally once the Tribunal hands down its decision in that matter.

The Commissioner also notes that the draft legislation introducing division 142 into the GST Act  (and repealing section 105 – 65) would likely remove any uncertainty as to the correct approach in cases like this one.


The Commissioner has issued the following IDs dealing with the supply of options over GST-free eligible emission units:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s