When is a gift not a gift?

Clarke McEwan Accountants

When is a gift not a gift?

The Tax Commissioner has successfully argued that more than $1.6m deposited in a couple’s bank account was assessable income, not a gift or a loan from friends.

The case of Rusanova and Commissioner of Taxation is enough for a telemovie. The plot features an Australian resident Russian couple ‘gifted’ over $1.6m in unexplained bank deposits, over $67,000 in interest, the Russian father-in-law seafood exporter, a series of Australian companies, and the generous friend loaning money in $20,000 tranches.

The crux of the case before the Federal Court is whether you can prove to the Australian Tax Office (ATO) that unexplained deposits should be treated as gifts or loans and what happens when the Tax Commissioner thinks otherwise? If the Commissioner suspects the deposits are income, he can issue a default tax assessment and decide what tax should be paid. The burden of proof is then on the taxpayer to prove the Tax Commissioner wrong.

The unexplained deposits

Between 2012 and 2016, an Australian resident husband and wife had an estimated $1,636,000 deposited into their bank accounts. The ATO became curious when neither spouse had lodged tax returns in the mistaken belief that they had not earned any income.

The money deposited, they said, was a gift from the wife’s father and therefore not assessable income. Curiously, there were no records produced to support the deposits and not a single text or email notifying that money had been remitted, or acknowledging its receipt.

In addition, a friend of the couple deposited money into the husband’s account including a series of $20,000 transactions over about a week. These, the friend said, were interest-free loans with no agreed terms but an expectation that they would be repaid. The friend could not remember how he was requested to make the loans and there were no loan documents, emails, or texts disclosed to support the loans. Around the same time as the loans were being advanced, there was evidence of the husband ‘repaying’ amounts in excess of what had been lent. In addition, documents show the husband transferred a Porsche Cayenne to his friend in Russia, said to be repayment of the loan.

Compounding the issue were the four directorships of Australian companies held by the husband, none of which had lodged tax returns. One of the companies was a seafood wholesaler, distributing the product of his father-in-law’s American registered Russian export company. The dedicated son-in-law stated that he was merely trying to develop his father-in-law’s business during 2010 and 2016, without remuneration.

Contesting the Tax Commissioner

In 2017, a covert tax audit utilised entries in the couple’s bank accounts to assess their income tax liability and the ATO issued a default assessment based on the unexplained deposits and expenses. The couple objected to the assessment and this objection was partly allowed. A second assessment was then issued to which the couple again objected before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) on the grounds that the assessment was excessive.

Can the Tax Commissioner really decide how much tax you should pay?

The Tax Commissioner has the power to issue a ‘default assessment’ for the amount he believes is owing from overdue tax returns or activity statements. The assessment is the amount the ATO believes is owing, not what has been declared.

The problem with a default assessment is not just the Tax Commissioner deciding how much tax you should pay, it is the potential addition of an administrative penalty of 75% of the tax-related liability for each default assessment issued. This penalty may be increased to 95% of the tax-related liability in certain circumstances for taxpayers who have a pattern of non-compliance.

But, here is the problem for the couple. While genuine gifts of money are not taxable, the burden is on the taxpayer to prove that the gift is truly a gift, if the ATO asks. The AAT held that, “absent any reliable evidence..., there is no proper basis to make any findings as to whether the deposits constitute part of the applicants’ taxable income or not.”

The Tax Commissioner can rely on a “deficiency of proof”.

The couple’s stance that the deposits were either gifts from the father or loans from a friend were rejected by the AAT. This is despite an affidavit and evidence from the wife’s father stating that the amounts transferred to them were gifts. The couple did not demonstrate what their income actually was to prove the Tax Commissioner’s assessment was unreasonable, and they could not substantiate that the gifts were indeed gifts from a very generous father.

The Federal Court dismissed the couple’s appeal with costs, leaving the Tax Commissioner’s default tax assessment and penalties in place.

Avoiding the gift tax trap

A gift of money or assets from an individual is generally not taxed if the gift is given voluntarily, nothing is expected in return, and the gift giver does not materially benefit.

However, there are some circumstances where tax might apply.

Gifts from a foreign trust

If you are a tax resident of Australia and the beneficiary of a foreign trust, it’s possible that at least some of the amounts paid to you (or applied for your benefit) will need to be declared in your tax return. This applies even if you were not the direct beneficiary of the foreign trust, for example, a family member received money from a foreign trust and then gifted it to you. This applies to cash, loans, land, shares, etc.

Inheritances

Money or property you inherit from a deceased estate is often not taxed. However, there are circumstances where capital gain tax (CGT) might apply when you dispose of an asset you inherited. For example, if you inherit your parents’ house, CGT generally does not apply if:

The property was their main residence; and
Your parents are Australian residents for tax purposes; and
You sell the property within 2 years.

However, CGT is likely to apply if for example:

You sell your parents former main residence more than 2 years after you inherit it; or
The property you inherit was not your parents’ main residence; or
Your parents were not Australian tax residents at the time of their death.

Managing the tax consequences of an inheritance can become complex quickly. Please contact us for assistance when planning your estate to maximise the outcome for your beneficiaries, or managing the tax implications of an inheritance. These issues are often not taken into account if you are drafting or updating a will.

Gifting an asset does not avoid tax

Donating or gifting an asset does not avoid CGT. If you receive nothing or less than the market value of the asset, the market value substitution rule might come into play. The market value substitution rule can treat you as having received the market value of the asset you donated or gifted when calculating any CGT liability.

For example, if Mum & Dad buy a block of land then eventually gift the block of land to their daughter, the ATO will look at the value of the land at the point they gifted it. If the market value of the land is higher than the amount that Mum & Dad paid for it, then this would normally trigger a CGT liability. It does not matter that Mum & Dad did not receive any money for the land. Mum & Dad might have a CGT bill for land they gifted with nothing in return.

Donations of cryptocurrency might also trigger CGT. If you donate cryptocurrency to a charity, you are likely to be assessed on the market value of the crypto at the point you donated it. You can only claim a tax deduction for the donation if the charity is a deductible gift recipient and the charity is set up to accept cryptocurrency.

< Older Post

Newer Post >

Save your business time and money using cloud accounting

By Clarke McEwan • October 28, 2025

Accounting tasks don’t have to eat into your business time. With the right cloud accounting software and setup, you can save time and money – while also getting tighter control over your finances. #accounting #software #finance

Trust Resolutions – Why Timing and Evidence Matter

By Clarke McEwan • October 10, 2025

As the trustee believed the income was classified as interest (this was challenged successfully by the ATO), the trustee assumed that the income would be subject to a final Australian tax at 10%, under the non-resident withholding rules. This was clearly more favourable than having the income taxed in the hands of Australian resident beneficiaries at higher marginal rates. However, the ATO argued that the distribution resolutions were invalid and the Tribunal agreed. Why? The main reason was a lack of evidence to prove that the distribution decisions were made before the end of the relevant financial years. While there were some documents that were purportedly dated and signed “30 June”, the Tribunal wasn’t convinced that the decisions were actually made before year-end and it was more likely that these documents were prepared on a retrospective basis. The evidence suggested the decisions were probably made many months after year-end, once the accountant had finalised the financial statements. The outcome was that default beneficiaries (all Australian residents) were taxed on the income at higher rates. Timing of trust resolution decisions is critical For a trust distribution to be effective for tax purposes, trustees must reach a decision on how income will be allocated by 30 June each year (or sometimes earlier, depending on the trust deed). It might be OK to prepare the formal paperwork later, but those documents must reflect a genuine decision made before year-end. For example, let’s say a trust has a corporate trustee with multiple directors. The directors meet at a particular location on 29 June and make formal decisions about how the income of the trust will be appointed to beneficiaries for that year. Someone keeps handwritten notes of the meeting and the decisions that are made. On 5 July the minutes are typed up and signed. The ATO indicates that this will normally be acceptable, but subject to any specific requirements in the trust deed. If the ATO believes the decision was made after 30 June (or documents were backdated), the resolution can be declared invalid. In that case, you might find that one or more default beneficiaries are taxed on the taxable income of the trust or the trustee is taxed at penalty rates. This could be an unexpected and costly tax outcome and could also lead to other problems in terms of who is really entitled to the cash. Broader lessons – it’s not just about trust distributions The timing issue is not confined just to trust distribution situations. Other areas of the tax system also turn on when a decision or agreement is actually made, not just when it is eventually recorded. For example, if a private company makes a loan to a shareholder in a given year, that loan must be repaid in full or placed under a complying Division 7A loan agreement by the earlier of the due date or lodgement date of the company’s tax return for the year of the loan. If not, a deemed unfranked dividend can be triggered for tax purposes. If a complying loan agreement is put in place then minimum annual repayments normally need to be made to avoid deemed dividends being recognised for tax purposes. A common way to deal with loan repayments is by using a set-off arrangement involving dividends that have been declared by the company. However, in order for the set-off arrangement to be valid there are a number of steps that need to be followed before the relevant deadline. The ATO will typically want to see evidence which proves: · When the dividend was declared; and · When the parties agreed to set-off the dividend against the loan balance. If there isn’t sufficient evidence to prove that these steps were taken by the relevant deadline then you might find that there is a taxable unfranked deemed dividend that needs to be recognised by the borrower in their tax return. Documenting decisions before year-end The key lesson from cases like Goldenville is that documentation shouldn’t be an afterthought — lack of contemporaneous documentation can fundamentally change the tax outcome. What normally matters most is when the relevant decision is actually made, not when the paperwork is drafted. In practice, this often means: · Check relevant deadlines and what needs to occur before that deadline. · If a decision needs to be made before the deadline, ensure that a formal process is followed to do this. For example, determine whether certain individuals need to hold a meeting or whether a circular resolution could be used. · Produce contemporaneous evidence of the fact that the decision has been made. You might consider sending a brief email to your accountant or lawyer explaining the decision that has been made before the relevant deadline , basically providing a time-stamped record of the decision. · Finalise paperwork: formal minutes of meetings can sometimes be prepared after year-end, but they must accurately reflect the earlier decision. Thinking carefully about timing — and building a habit of producing clear evidence of decisions as they are made — is often the difference between a tax planning strategy working as intended and an expensive dispute with the ATO.

Accessing superannuation funds for medical treatment or financial hardship

By Clarke McEwan • October 10, 2025

Superannuation is one of the largest assets for many Australians and offers significant tax advantages, however, strict rules apply to when it can be accessed. While super is most commonly accessed at retirement, death or disability, there are limited situations where earlier access may be possible. Early access is generally available in two situations: · Financial hardship – where you are receiving a qualifying Centrelink/DVA payment for a minimum period and cannot meet immediate living expenses. · Compassionate grounds – Funding for certain specific scenarios which include preventing a mortgage foreclosure or meeting medical expenses for a life-threatening injury or illness or to alleviate severe chronic pain. Compassionate grounds access requires an application to be made to the ATO which needs to be accompanied by relevant medical certificates or mortgage information. If approved the ATO will provide instructions to the individual’s superannuation fund to release an amount to cover the expense. We have included some ATO links with more detailed information on compassionate grounds and financial hardship below. When accessing superannuation under compassionate grounds you would usually collect the relevant supporting documentation and personally make the application for approval using your MyGov account. It has come to the ATO’s attention that there may be medical and dental providers exploiting this access and assisting super fund members to access amounts for cosmetic reasons (you may have even seen advertisements pop up on your social media showing people with a new sparkling smile – and a lower super balance). The ATO’s concerns are discussed in Separating fact from fiction on accessing your super early. Superannuation fund members and SMSF trustees should be aware that there can be substantial penalties applied when super is accessed outside of the legislated conditions of release. You should never provide another party with access to your MyGov login or allow a third party to make applications on your behalf. Penalties may also apply for making false declarations. Should you have any questions or concerns relating to proposed access to your superannuation please reach out to us. Related links Accessing superannuation under compassionate grounds Accessing superannuation due to financial hardship

Government Review of Supermarket Unit Pricing: What It Could Mean for Your Business

By Clarke McEwan • October 10, 2025

Submissions closed just a few weeks later on 19 September 2025, marking the end of a very short opportunity for stakeholders to have their say. A Quick Recap Unit pricing is what allows shoppers to compare costs per standard measure (e.g. $/100g or $/litre) across different pack sizes and brands. Since 2009, large supermarkets have been required to display this information to help customers spot value. While compliance has been relatively low-cost and penalties limited, the Government’s review signals that much tighter rules could be on the way. Why Now? The ACCC’s recent supermarket inquiry highlighted that while unit pricing helps, there are still gaps. The big concern is shrinkflation—when pack sizes quietly reduce while prices remain the same or higher. With cost-of-living pressures dominating headlines, the Government is looking at clearer, fairer pricing to rebuild consumer trust. What Might Change? Proposals considered in the consultation paper include: · Shrinkflation alerts – supermarkets may need to flag when a product becomes smaller without a matching price cut. · Clearer displays – larger, more prominent unit prices both in-store and online. · Wider coverage – expanding the rules beyond major supermarkets to smaller retailers and online sellers. · Standardised measures – eliminating confusing “per roll” vs “per sheet” comparisons. · Civil penalties – introducing fines for non-compliance. The Commercial Impact For suppliers, packaging decisions could come under closer scrutiny. For retailers, costs might arise from updating shelf labels, software, or e-commerce systems. But there are also opportunities: businesses that embrace transparency could build loyalty and stand out in a competitive market. What You Should Do Now that the consultation period has closed, Treasury will consider submissions and the Government is expected to announce its response later this year. Businesses in food, grocery, and household goods should stay alert—the final shape of the rules could affect pricing, packaging, and compliance obligations across the sector. At Clarke McEwan, we can help you model potential compliance costs, assess financial impacts, and prepare for upcoming regulatory change. Reach out to discuss how this review might affect your business.

ATO Interest Charges Are No Longer Deductible – What You Can Do

By Clarke McEwan • October 10, 2025

Leaving debts outstanding with the ATO is now more expensive for many taxpayers. As we explained in the July edition of our newsletter, general interest charge (GIC) and shortfall interest charge (SIC) imposed by the ATO is no longer tax-deductible from 1 July 2025. This applies regardless of whether the underlying tax debt relates to past or future income years. With GIC currently at 11.17%, this is now one of the most expensive forms of finance in the market — and unlike in the past, you won’t get a deduction to offset the cost. For many taxpayers, this makes relying on an ATO payment plan a costly strategy. Refinancing ATO debt Businesses can sometimes refinance tax debts with a bank or other lender. Unlike GIC and SIC amounts, interest on these loans might be deductible for tax purposes, provided the borrowing is connected to business activities. While tax debts will sometimes relate to income tax or CGT liabilities, remember that interest could also be deductible where money is borrowed to pay other tax debts relating to a business, such as: · GST · PAYG instalments · PAYG withholding for employees · FBT However, before taking any action to refinance ATO debt it is important to carefully consider whether you will be able to deduct the interest expenses or not. Individuals If you are an individual with a tax debt, the treatment of interest expenses incurred on a loan used to pay that tax debt really depends on the extent to which the tax debt arose from a business activity: · Sole traders: If you are genuinely carrying on a business, interest on borrowings used to pay tax debts from that business is generally deductible. · Employees or investors: If your tax debt relates to salary, wages, rental income, dividends, or other investment income, the interest is not deductible. Refinancing may still reduce overall interest costs depending on the interest rate on the new loan, but it won’t generate a tax deduction. Example: Sam is a sole trader who runs a café. He borrows $30,000 to pay his tax debt, which arose entirely from his café profits. The interest should be fully deductible. However, if Sam also earns salary or wages from a part-time job and some of his tax debt relates to the employment income, only a portion of the interest on the loan used to pay the tax debt would be deductible. If $20,000 of the tax debt relates to his business and $10,000 relates to employment activities, then only 2/3rds of the interest expenses would be deductible. Companies and trusts If a company or trust borrows to pay its own tax debts (income tax, GST, PAYG withholding, FBT), the interest will usually be deductible if it can be traced back to a debt that arose from carrying on a business. However, if a director or beneficiary borrows money personally to cover those debts, the interest would not normally be deductible to them. Partnerships The position is more complex when it comes to partnership arrangements. If the borrowing is at the partnership level and it relates to a tax debt that arose from a business carried on by the partnership then the interest should normally be deductible. For example, this could include interest on money borrowed to pay business tax obligations such as GST or PAYG withholding amounts. However, the ATO takes the view that if an individual who is a partner in a partnership borrows money personally to pay a tax debt relating to their share of the profits of the partnership, the interest isn’t deductible. The ATO treats this as a personal expense, even if the partnership is carrying on a business activity. Practical takeaway Leaving debts outstanding with the ATO is now more expensive than ever because GIC and SIC are no longer deductible. Refinancing the tax debt with an external lender might provide you with a tax deduction and might also enable you to access lower interest rates. The key is to distinguish between tax debts that relate to a business activity and other tax debts. For mixed situations, you may need to apportion the deduction. If you’re unsure how this applies to you, talk to us before arranging finance. With the right strategy, you can manage tax debts more effectively and avoid costly surprises.

Measuring the health of your business with ratio measures

By Clarke McEwan • October 3, 2025

Business ratios