Alan Collett

A few more words from me on the general subject of discussing technical issues on forums such as this.

There is a limit to what those of us who are professional advisors can and will say on a general discussion forum. There is a risk of misinterpretation, undue reliance where there is no contractual relationship, possible financial loss, and recriminations as a result.

Discussion forums should be recognised as a place where views can be expressed openly, but where some of the views from the uninformed (or even partially informed) are - in my view at least - wrong. There is a saying that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and in the case of discussion forums users should be most careful about relying on the opinions and comments of other users who base their postings on mere personal experience.

Ultimately, if you want advice on which you can rely (and litigate if it is incorrect) you should be prepared to pay for it.

Best regards.

tweed

With respect you are not the person to judge whether you have mislead people. I know for a fact that others have been mislead. The trouble is that when people express views on this forum others know that this is their view and should be cautious about it. In your case as a professionally qualified person in finance, and offrering financial advice for a fee, they believe what you say. So you should be more carefull in what you say and how you say it!

Regards

Alan Collett

Tweed,

1. I am comfortable with the comments I make on this forum. I give them based on my knowledge of the tax regimes in the UK and in Australia, and as I have said already, I have not (yet) seen any written opinion that contradicts them.

2. Please direct me to postings where I have mislead you.

3. I give my opinions here freely, and those that choose to rely on them do so at their own risk and with no contractual obligations on my part. If you or anyone else wants to place reliance on a professional opinion you should be prepared to part with some money and to engage a professional tax advisor.

4. I am happy to press the ATO for some written/published guidance on this issue, but I sense I will get no thanks for doing so.

Best regards.

renth

Over the many years I've ben here Alan Collett has provided some of the best advice on this forum. But with all thing financial/migration wise the onus is for the individual to either make sure they get it right themselves of pay for the services of an agent or accountant.

tweed

Alan

Do you mean to say that people have been paying you to advise them that cgt tax may be due on personal cash transfers?

You normally only see things in writing where for instance tax needs to be paid. You do not see in writing where tax does not need to be paid. I really think you should get the ATO to give you something positive that you can rely on for your future advice.

Regards

Alan Collett

PS. Please don't think that I want these forex provisions to apply to those of us who retain overseas non-A$ currency bank accounts. However, I think we have here an example of Government preparing legislation that is too widely drawn.

In other words I perceive the ATO didn't realise the consequence of what was being introduced and doesn't really want to catch individuals who move to Australia within this legislation - hence their verbal comments to enquirers generally - but hasn't (yet) issued an interpretation that provides an appropriate exemption to individual taxpayers.

Through my membership of the ICAA I can lobby for clarity and the sought for exemption ... if you would like me to ...

Alan Collett

Tweed,

I give my opinions to clients based on my understanding of the tax law, the Tax Rulings I have read, discussions I have with other professionals and the ATO, etc. I appreciate this specific matter is an area of tax law where the "private or domestic" issue ought to be clarified, but until we have it those of us who advise in this area are on the horns of a dimemna: do we say categorically that there is no forex tax exposure, or that there definitely isn't?

I therefore discuss with clients my take on the position and they are then at liberty to make a more informed decision.

Others will choose to telephone the ATO and use that as their basis for handling the completion of their Tax Returns.

As to the comment about matters only being put in writing by the ATO where tax is payable - not so.

Best regards.

Alan Collett

Thanks renth.

Ultimately though, even after paying for the advice of a third party professional, it remains the individual taxpayer's/applicant's responsibility to complete the forms properly/completely/accurately.

The important difference compared with "going it alone" is that the taxpayer/applicant can choose to litigate against the advisor if the advice was inaccurate leading to financial loss.

Best regards.

thebears

Are you a member of a professional accounting organisation then tweed?

After review of Alan's comments I totally agree with him and advise you to be careful of bringing his name into disrepute.

Wol

I think Alan is accurate in his analysis of the way the legislation has been done without understanding the consequences for people like us.

The Law of Unintended Consequences rules supreme in government!

MartinLuther

Okay. Here's the latest update from me. I'm only reporting my experience I offer no opinion or recommendations.

I called the ATO help line and got passed from person to person. The first person I spoke to didn't know. The 2nd person said that the gain wasn't assessable but she needed to check. The 3rd person said that the gain was assessable for CGT as it had come out of a pre-July-2003 account. She said that if it had come out of a post-July-2003 account then it would not have been assessable. I asked whether I could have this in writing and she said that I should re-address the issue with the person who had handled my PR.

I spoke to the person who had handled my PR and she gave the same story (i.e. if the UK account had been post-July-2003 the gain would not have been assessable). I have added a little complexity to the question as, on my day of arrival, some money was in pre-July-2003 accounts and some money was in post-July-2003 accounts. This money was consolidated into a post-July-2003 account in order to effect the transfer.

That's the story so far - I'll keep you posted with any updates.

Cheers

tweed

There are many but here's one for starters from your post on 21 July 2005

"Don't forget that once you are a tax resident of Australia any currency you held on arrival other than A$'s is a CGT asset: the tax legislation specifically names foreign currency as a CGT asset. That means that if you sell it for more than it was worth on the date you become a tax resident you have an assessable capital gain (just like any other investment such as shares or an investment property).

That's before you consider the forex gains and losses provisions"

Regards

Alan Collett

Tweed,

Section 108-5(2) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 discusses CGT Assets. The Note to that subsection reads as follows:

"Examples of CGT assets are:

· land and buildings;
· shares in a company and units in a unit trust;
· options;
· debts owed to you;
· a right to enforce a contractual obligation;
· foreign currency."


Best regards.

jumbo

Alan there is no dispute about what a cgt asset is in the ITA just whether you should pay cgt on transfers! Your post and many others implies that you should.

Have you vere paid cgt on your own cash transfers? I doubt it

Regards

Alan Collett

jumbo,

1. I was addressing the assertion by Tweed that I am somehow misleading people.

2. I leave it to others who are not trying to make a case against me to decide whether I am helping or "misleading".

3. I am not about to discuss my personal tax affairs on a discussion forum. Unlike others, I am not using a pseudonym.

4. This discussion is becoming circular and we are repeating the same issues that you and I have discussed earlier.

5. I suggest that this discussion has run its course.

Best regards.