Please Help with a Study Tax Write-off

[not a sheep]

Afternoon all,

I will be starting a Financial Planning course at the Securities Institute shortly.

The Cost is $600 Per Subject with 2 subjects per semester usually undertaken.

I work for NAB, but in I.T. - (Within the Mortgage Brokerage Section)

Any Ideas on how I could present a case to both my Accountant and the ATO to get a Tax Break on the cost?

My Initial thought was that I will be utilising the course to generate future income, However I think this may be knocked out if push came to shove.

Other wise I though i could use leverage at the bank as a requirement -
i need to undertake the course to move to a different section - but this i think gets knocked out as it is not a requirement of my current role.

Any thoughts of manipulation greatly appreciated

Regards,

NAS

;)

[duncan_m]

I dont see much chance of you personally using this course as a deduction on your personal income, there has to be a direct link between CURRENT income producing activities and the training.

However, if you had a Trust and then you, as the Trustee, were sent along to this course then the cost of this course could easily be deducted from other profits the trust makes.. of course I suspect you dont have a trust, and if you did it may not be making a profit.. no problem; the loss you make within the trust can be carried forward until such time as you did manage to make some profit within the trust.

[geoffw]

I agree with Duncan on the first point (fwiw).

On the second point- I agree with the theory, but I suspect that it would be difficult in the future to link income from what you have learnt to the trust. You will be presumably get your income from NAB as a salary earner- so it may take some time for a trust to show a profit

(unless you were able to get your trust to invest in some other profitable activity)

[not a sheep]

Duncan & Geoff,

Guys thanks for the feedback.

I suspected as much :(

I am in the process of going down the trust path in the future, but for the moment it looks like I will have to wear the cost.

I am sure the course will provide insight non the less and remain to be a worthwhile exercise.

Kind Regards,

NAS

[duncan_m]

On the second point- I agree with the theory, but I suspect that it would be difficult in the future to link income from what you have learnt to the trust. You will be presumably get your income from NAB as a salary earner- so it may take some time for a trust to show a profit

(unless you were able to get your trust to invest in some other profitable activity)


Hi Geoff,

A good point.

I might be wrong, but I believe that the onus on a Trust proving a link to Income to justify expenditure on Training is not as great as the onus on an Individual.

If the Trustee expects that at some point the Trust is going to invest in a Bilby Farm then it would be a legitimate expense for the Trust to train up the Trustee on various aspects of Bilby Husbandry.

Sure, it's dependent on the trust at some future point having a profit that the carried over loss can be applied to.

Maybe Dale or Corsa are around to offer some thoughts too?

[DaleGG]

Hi Geoff,

A good point.

I might be wrong, but I believe that the onus on a Trust proving a link to Income to justify expenditure on Training is not as great as the onus on an Individual.

If the Trustee expects that at some point the Trust is going to invest in a Bilby Farm then it would be a legitimate expense for the Trust to train up the Trustee on various aspects of Bilby Husbandry.

Sure, it's dependent on the trust at some future point having a profit that the carried over loss can be applied to.

Maybe Dale or Corsa are around to offer some thoughts too?

Hi

There is a difference in the onus of proof for a trust and an individual. The individual must, as has been explained already, have the cost relate to their current employment and income. A trust does not. It must show that the income relates to its businesses - present, past or future.

Dale

[geoffw]

Hi Geoff,

A good point.

I might be wrong, but I believe that the onus on a Trust proving a link to Income to justify expenditure on Training is not as great as the onus on an Individual.

If the Trustee expects that at some point the Trust is going to invest in a Bilby Farm then it would be a legitimate expense for the Trust to train up the Trustee on various aspects of Bilby Husbandry.

Sure, it's dependent on the trust at some future point having a profit that the carried over loss can be applied to.

Maybe Dale or Corsa are around to offer some thoughts too?It's not just the onus of proof which is an issue- although that is an issue (it may be difficult for the trust to prove that it will earn an income from Financial Planning courses).

The other problem is that a trust claiming a loss must earn a profit for that loss to be offset. The loss may be carried forward- but that dilutes the benefit- and the trust does need to find some way to earn a profit.