Welcome Nathan Burgess

[Dazz]

Sure, but people also come here to ask tax / legal / financing questions. If those questions were answered by a professional with qualifications and experience in that particular field, then surely that's a good thing.

Many accountants and mortgage brokers here already post their business details in their signature.

Absolutely dan c. Agree fully.

But this post is about ATO officials, wearing their ATO officials hat, making posts on a public forum.....with all of the added credibility and weight of opinion that their official title brings to bear.

Reading something on this forum from the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation carries a bit more weight than something from the anonymous poster "Froggy2".

Unfortunately, it is clear that that credibility and reliability sought from forum members cannot be offered by whomever puts their hand up from the ATO.....for yet again, the very essence that cripples most actions nowadays.....the dreaded fear of litigation.

A casual little chit-chat that no-one can rely upon, no problem. A definitive "yes, you are standing on solid ground.....you are well within your legal rights to proceed with your nominated course of action", big problem.

The trouble with this is, that definitive credibility is the only thing these ATO officials have to sell. If they are gagged from comment due to fear of litigation, they bring nothing to the forum that is of value to the investing members. No ??

 

[redwing]

im curious

if a ATO rep comes onto the forum, gives out wrong info,

ie you can claim this for that, (lets assume its significant say $10k)

and then you get audited years down the track,

who is liable?

Remembering that the ATO can make retrospective changes (even on private rulings) and many have been caught out on these and have faced harsh penalties and interest

 

[dan c]

Absolutely dan c. Agree fully.

But this post is about ATO officials, wearing their ATO officials hat, making posts on a public forum.....with all of the added credibility and weight of opinion that their official title brings to bear.

Reading something on this forum from the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation carries a bit more weight than something from the anonymous poster "Froggy2".

...The trouble with this is, that definitive credibility is the only thing these ATO officials have to sell. If they are gagged from comment due to fear of litigation, they bring nothing to the forum that is of value to the investing members. No ??

I read the initial post differently. I read it as current Somersoft members offering advice in certain areas posting their credentials, not an ATO employee posting.

Re-reading the post, and the bolded quote, I agree with you about what 'role' an ATO poster would play.

It's hard enough to get an ATO employee to tell me when their tax agent website will be fixed, because they fear that if they tell me it will be fixed at 4pm, I'll be on the phone at 4.01 complaining that it is still not fixed, and 'you told me...'

The ATO's postings on a public forum would be either so heavily 'legalled' the post would become worthless, or so vague it would be useless.

 

[Terry_w]

maybe, how do you know if you dont the posters net worth?

My net worth is about $5000. I am impercunious.

 

[Terry_w]

I'd rather not post qualifications or licence details as this will be misleading. I am a solicitor and licensed to give legal advice but I am only interested in certain areas of law and know didly squat about most areas of law. So if someone asked a question about defamation, for example, and I replied someone reading that may think I may know what I am talking about - which I don't. They may then rely on things I had written.

Also there have been many instances where someone who may be qualfied in one area has responded to a post about another subject which they are not qualfied to advise on - such as law - and this information has been incorrect. Just because they have one qualification then readers may think this person is qualified to give advice and that their response in correct.

I think it best to remain relatively annonymous and then posters will gradually work out whether a person knows what they are talking about.

 

[Rob G.]

Remembering that the ATO can make retrospective changes (even on private rulings) and many have been caught out on these and have faced harsh penalties and interest

The Commissioner is bound to administer the law according to a ruling if it applies to the taxpayer and that taxpayer has relied upon it, s. 357-60(1) Sch1 TAA.

Reasons why a taxpayer may not rely on a ruling include:

1) They did not make a full disclosure for a private ruling

2) A ruling does not apply to their particular circumstances

3) They did not actually rely on the ruling as evidenced by their conduct

4) A product ruling was implemented in a materially different manner by a scheme promoter (and exposes the participants to penalties)

5) A part IVA opinion was not sought as part of the ruling such that only legal technicality is addressed

If the law changes or it turns out that a ruling is incorrect then the taxpayer is still protected for the time prior to withdrawal of the ruling or the change in law.

If it turns out that the ruling is incorrect, the Commissioner has discretion to apply the correct law if it is to the taxpayer's advantage.

Penalties depend upon the level of care taken in making statements to the Commissioner. Scheme penalties require a higher level of care.

I have to write this because of the other thread about how myths can perpetuate on public forums.

 

[datto]

SS is a forum where ideas are exchanged. Follow up with a professional is then necessary.

There is no need to put tickets on ouselves lol

Anyway, what the heck would the ATO know. The discussions on this forum are so broad that you would need the whole ATO to figure out a decision (and then it might be wrong lol)

Nah, no tickets thanks, just keep it simple, exchange ideas then do your own follow ups. And for chr#st sake keep the ATO at arms length lol

 

[dex]

1/ the ATO can only monitor these sites to get a gist of what's happening and what people are advising each other but it's only friendly banter because no-one here is giving licensed advice.
2/ the ATO cannot take action against individuals who post on here because they don't know who you are, where you live or what your tax file number is.
3/ the ATO are more interested in companies and high net worth individuals who are evading tax. Mum and dad investors with a few investments who post messages on public forums don't register a bleep on their radar.
4/ people could post their qualifications but who will verify they're real and not fake? Do we send the administrator of this website a notarized copy of our transcripts and certificates so he can verify we're legit? And then he can give us a gold star if our IP address continuously matches our username

Agree with datto... this is one of several thousand internet forums where ideas are shared and strangers dish out opinions. You'd be a fool if you were to take anyone's advice on here without seeking professional advice or checking information.

 

[impala67]

...Anyway, what the heck would the ATO know...you would need the whole ATO to figure out a decision (and then it might be wrong lol)...

Truer words were never spoken ...from a previous ATO experience.

lol