The Injustice of the ATO

Gary Kurzer write about the injustices committed by the Australian Taxation Office:

Revelations outlining recent activities of the Australian Taxation Office show that this organisation is not playing fair. Seemingly, this may not be newsworthy, however, if the allegations move into “illegal behaviour” then the concerns are justly amplified.

Journalist Chris Seage has published sensational articles in Crikey which have been reprinted on the ‘SmartCompany’  website.

In one article, Seage has shown how the tax office treats its own employees, by turning the tables on internal dissension and whistleblowers within the organisation to stifle legitimate claims and the rights of its employees. Ironically, the senior ATO staff, being Australian Public Servants themselves, are transgressing the ‘Australian Public Service Values and Code of Conduct’  and threaten the beleaguered ATO employees via the same conduct breaches that they allege against their own staff.

 More sinister are the revelations that the ATO issued a “tick and flick” method to deal with objections. In essence, the ATO instructed staff to “approve 20%” of tax Objections and “reject 80%” of Objections, regardless of tax laws or merit. This must be of concern to all SMEs, and pretty much everyone else. 

If the Tax Office “rejects” a legal objection, and then demands (and ultimately collects) “tax” where there is no legal basis for the assessment, then there is the distinct possibility that the action is theft. The ATO are clearly targeted by legal commentators on their disregard of law. The Rule of Law Institute of Australia has many articles on its website that point to the failure of the ATO to follow the “Model Litigant Rules.”

These Rules raise the legal bar for the ATO’s actions, requiring them to behave in an exemplary way; but in practice, these Rules, are simply disregarded by the ATO.

Ex Attorney-General Robert McClelland declared that it is “unacceptable for federal government agencies to breach the model litigant rules” yet the ATO does so with total impunity. The ex chief executive of the Rule of Law Institute, Richard Gilbert, states that: "The government ignores legitimate judicial comment on model litigant behaviour by the Crown at its own peril."

In the case of the Queensland Court in ‘Denlay v Commissioner of Taxation’  there was an appeal for bankrupting a taxpayer who was attempting to challenge a tax assessment.

Agriculture Minister Joe Ludwig, representing ex-Attorney General Ncola Roxon, told Senator Humphries that his questions on the case “should be directed the tax office.”

Thus, when the ATO breaks the law, the government’s official position is that the matter should be referred back to the ATO.

No wonder the ATO act with bravado and confidence when they break the law: the only thing that the government is prepared to do for aggrieved taxpayers who have had their money stolen is to “appeal to the ATO.”

Gary Kurzer is a Sydney based designer/music composer who trained in architecture.

After being unwittingly dragged into a six year engagement by the ATO, he started to

discover some startling truths about how this organisation operates and was the subject of two recent ABC 730 Reports. There is a Facebook site where you can read more: www.facebook.com/ATOinjustices

Comments

[Linne]

1.

The arrogance of a bureaucracy that believes it is untouchable is monumental.

I'm all for a revolution in this country to dispose of the scum that is responsible for this type of Offensive garbage.

[John Mc]

2.

The problem with seeking justice in taxation is there are no moral principles behind taxation and it's basically let's see how much we can get out of the people before they get too upset.

As your vote is around 1 in 11 million - and that vote has to cover every federal issue - you have realistically no control over how much you will be billed. The government essentially applies the biggest taxes they think they can on whatever they think they can get away with taxing.

Before we can talk about justice with regards to taxation we need some ethical legal guidelines - and dare I say, limitations - on how much tax can be applied and on what it is applied.

While it's just basically open season on the taxpayer we can always expect taxes to increase in both quantity and type. As the southern Europeans or the American deficits prove, it's a one way street until the country is broke.

[Linne]

3.

All the more reason why there should be an open revolt against a dishonest bureaucracy.

[Nick Bury]

4.

Gary Kurzer is but one of thousands of people who have been monstered by ATO personnel (usually from their Audit and Review area)in their attempts to reach alleged revenue targets set for them. The ATO lose most of the actions that they defend in court, though they usually try and settle beforehand when having tried it on, so to speak, especially knowing that their actions in the given instance stand little prospect of surviving judicial review.