3.1 The 'U-turns' review noted that there were many positive aspects regarding the manner in which the ATO engages with the taxpaying community while developing its views on technical issues. However, the report also identified scope for improvement in certain areas.
3.2 The IGT observed that there were a range of vehicles for the ATO to engage with the community in the development of its views and that determining the right vehicle may be a difficult matter. In particular, the IGT noted that the use of technical discussion papers:
… can better inform technical decisions through impartial discussions on issues. Developing an ATO technical view that involves open consultation with relevant parties ensures that the ATO correctly understands the arrangements and their context and that alternative views are robustly considered before the ATO finalises its view. There is potential to use technical discussion papers to gain knowledge (if approached in an impartial manner) and arrive (in a collegiate manner) at a robust view based on a sound understanding of the relevant arrangements and implications.71
3.3 However, the IGT also observed that the examples raised during the 'U-turns' review showed that the use of technical discussion papers within the broader consultation framework may not be well articulated or understood. The IGT also noted the stakeholder perceptions that technical discussion papers were used to promote a particular ATO view rather than impartial discussions of technical issues.72 These perceptions may lead to adverse reactions from taxpayers and their advisers and result in the adoption of defensive positions which hinders effective discussion of the issues.
3.4 Other areas for improvement identified by the IGT included the need for the ATO to more quickly identify and resolve issues involving significant revenue risk and providing interim guidance where finalisation of the ATO view may be delayed.
3.5 Accordingly, and as noted earlier in Chapter 1, Recommendations 3 and 5 were aimed at:
- reducing ATO delays in identifying compliance concerns and finalising its position in relation to those concerns;
- improving the tone and manner of technical discussion papers on issues of compliance concern; and
- providing interim guidance (to both taxpayers and ATO compliance officers), to the extent it can, for those issues where a final position may take some time to develop.
Implementation of agreed IGT recommendations
3.6 The IGT's assessment of the implementation of these recommendations uses the same terminology set out and defined at the start of Chapter 2.
Recommendation 3 of the IGT's 'U-turns' review
The ATO should, in collaboration with the taxpayer community, improve its framework for taxpayer engagement in developing its technical views and ensures that all staff adhere to the improved framework. The following should be incorporated into the improved framework:
- Use the most appropriate vehicle in the circumstances to engage the taxpayer community on technical issues.
- Engage and be seen to be engaged impartially on matters of uncertainty and in particular, ensure that any ATO technical discussion paper has been independently reviewed by an appropriate peer in the law sub-plan before public release.
- Alert taxpayers to ATO compliance concerns as soon as practicable, but not in a manner that alarms them before such concerns are substantiated and ensure that its alerts are sufficiently targeted towards the issue of specific concern.
- Engage with taxpayers in an appropriate tone and manner, including informal engagement with the taxpayer community on issues of compliance concern before formal engagement commences.
- In relation to any consultation process (including where any technical discussion paper is issued), develop a project plan and adhere to that plan without sacrificing the quality of process.
- In relation to any consultation process (including where any technical discussion paper is issued), provide interim guidance (to compliance staff as well as taxpayers) to the extent the ATO can. If it cannot, it should explain why not and give an indication of the timeframe in which it could expect to do so.
- Use circuit-breakers for impasses on technical issues and involve Treasury where advice regarding the purpose or object of the relevant provisions would be helpful.
- Ensure that delays in developing and finalising ATO technical views are minimised, and reasons are given for those delays.
3.7 The ATO agreed with this recommendation. During the follow up review, the ATO advised that it had undertaken a range of actions to implement this recommendation. The ATO's PSLA 2010/5 Technical discussion papers73 adopts most of the matters outlined in Recommendation 3 while the remainder are reflected in other ATO policy and guidance documents. Table 2 below sets out the matters in Recommendation 3 together with cross-references to corresponding paragraphs in PSLA 2010/5 or relevant parts of other policy and guidance documents. The IGT's conclusions on their implementation status are also set out in the table below.
|Recommendation||Corresponding paragraph in PSLA 2010/5 or other ATO policy and guidance||Implementation status|
|3(iii)||PSLA 2008/15 —
Discussed further below
|3(v)||10, 11, 12||Implemented|
|3(vi)||ATO public rulings program — Discussed further below||Implemented|
|3(vii)||ATO's Transforming Tax Technical Decision Making Project and ATO-Treasury Protocol — Discussed further below||Implemented|
|3(viii)||ATO public rulings program — Discussed further below||Implemented|
3.8 PSLA 2010/5 requires ATO officers to consider less formal strategies to engage with the community on technical issues, while acknowledging that technical discussion papers may be used in appropriate instances.74 Specifically, it notes that technical discussion papers may be issued:75
- where there is significant uncertainty as to the view or approach that the ATO should take on an issue;
- where there is a need to seek formal input on the nature of commercial arrangements relevant to the application of the law; or
- where private sector input is appropriate for the implementation of new law.
3.9 Moreover, PSLA 2010/5 also provides guidance for ATO staff when developing technical discussion papers. The guidance includes that:76
- Technical discussion papers must be published for the purpose of undertaking genuine community consultation and to seek open dialogue on the issue under consideration. Their content and tone should reflect these purposes. A technical discussion paper therefore should not promote a particular precedential ATO view. Where it is appropriate to outline a 'preferred' view, this should be done in an impartial manner, to make it clear that genuine community comment is sought, and to ensure discussion of alternative views.
- The particular issues on which comments are sought should be clearly expressed, and questions to the community clearly articulated.
- The date of effect of the application of the potential precedential ATO view that may flow from the issues raised in the paper must be clearly articulated and canvassed. This might be done by proposing a date of effect and seeking comment on that date, or by simply seeking comment on what the date of effect of the potential precedential ATO view should be.
- Where it is appropriate, the particular audience from whom comments are sought can be indicated.
3.10 In addition to PSLA 2010/5, the ATO has noted that engagement with taxpayers when developing its technical views is also built into a number of other ATO policies and processes. These include the ATO's practice statement on management of high risk technical issues,77 its Public Rulings Manual78 and general procedural guidance on ORCLA.79
3.11 The ATO publishes Taxpayer Alerts to provide information on emerging compliance issues of concern and give guidance on the avenues through which taxpayers may obtain ATO advice on a particular issue.80
3.12 The Taxpayer Alert process is initiated where an ATO officer or an area of the ATO identifies an arrangement which may constitute aggressive tax planning. To assist ATO officers in identifying such arrangements, PSLA 2008/15 outlines a range of indicative factors and elements81 and directs staff that 'it is mandatory to escalate the issue for consideration as to whether a Taxpayer Alert should be published.'82
3.13 Discussions concerning the appropriateness of issuing a Taxpayer Alert on the identified issue are conducted between the relevant business line representative and a senior executive from the Aggressive Tax Planning (ATP) business line. Once approved, relevant drafts of the Taxpayer Alert are provided and signed off by the ATO's Tax Counsel Network, the Deputy Commissioner in the ATP business line, the ATO Second Commissioner — Compliance and the Commissioner before publication.83
3.14 Given the inherent differences between issues, the period of time taken to publish a Taxpayer Alert will vary. However, the ATO has set itself an aspirational timeframe of 52 days to publish Taxpayer Alerts following a decision that the identified issue should be publicly communicated as an Alert.84
3.15 PSLA 2008/15 emphasises that the role of Taxpayer Alerts is to inform taxpayers and tax agents of 'new and emerging higher risk tax planning and superannuation issues'.85 The ATO has communicated to external bodies that Taxpayer Alerts are not intended to alarm the community.86 Notwithstanding this, the IGT identified an example of a Taxpayer Alert which was issued after the 'U-turn' report was released which created significant levels of industry concern. Specifically, TA 2010/2 alerted taxpayers to the use clauses in superannuation trust deeds to limit contributions as an attempt to circumvent the imposition of the excess contributions tax. The alert resulted in industry concerns being raised regarding the ATO's characterisation of the arrangements and the lack of clarity on the mischief sought to be addressed.87 The ATO subsequently withdrew the alert in response to concerns raised by stakeholders.
3.16 The ATO notes that since responding to the IGT's recommendation in 2010, a number of key events have occurred that have had an impact upon implementation of this recommendation.
3.17 First, the ATO has completed the rollout of its Transforming Tax Technical Decision Making (TTTDM) project which, in part, seeks to abolish the previous formal escalation model and adopt a model that engages ATO technical decision makers as early as practicable. The ATO has advised that 'the main benefit of the project relates to improving tax technical decision making to provide a better experience for the community and staff.'88
3.18 The ATO has further advised that the concept of circuit breakers is inherent within the TTTDM project. As the IGT observed in the Review into the ATO's use of early and Alternative Dispute Resolution, 'enhancements in technical decision making and the effective employment of ATO technical expertise should go some way to ensuring that matters at risk of ongoing dispute and litigation are identified and addressed by the most appropriate ATO personnel.'89
3.19 Secondly, an ATO-Treasury Protocol (the Protocol) has been established that, amongst other things, institutes quality assurance processes for new laws with the aim of fostering collaboration between the ATO, the Treasury and external stakeholders in the development and administration of new or changed tax and superannuation laws.90 Such collaboration was envisaged in the IGT's Review into improving the self assessment system (the IGT's self assessment review).91
3.20 Circuit breakers are also contained within the Protocol. Disputes are to be escalated first to the Tax Policy Co-ordination Committee, comprising senior ATO and Treasury officials and, if they cannot be otherwise resolved, to the relevant Minister's officers.92
Recommendation 3(vi) and 3(viii)
3.21 In response to the Recommendations 3(vi) and 3(viii), the ATO has provided evidence of reduced timeframes for issuing public rulings as well as those instances in which it has issued interim advice.
3.22 In the Commissioner's Annual Report 2012–13, it was noted that the ATO had significantly improved the timeliness of its public rulings, with 86 per cent of all public rulings issuing on time,93 being within six months for draft rulings and twelve months for final rulings. The ATO observes that this is above its targeted benchmark of 78 per cent and the 76 per cent which was achieved in 2011–12.94 Information provided by the ATO also indicates that in 2012–13 the average number of days taken to issue a final ruling was 261 days, down from 314 in 2011–12. For draft rulings, it has advised that the average number of days taken was 158, down from 190 in 2011–12.95
3.23 The ATO's Public Rulings Program (which is updated monthly) outlines all rulings' planned issue dates and often provides some details on the status of the ruling including any potential delays, such as a ruling being held pending legislative change or further consultation.96
3.24 The ATO has provided a list of rulings which were on hand as at 30 June 2012, and remain on hand as at 14 January 2013 and noted the reasons for delays in issuing these rulings as well as any interim guidance which has been provided. In five of the eight cases, the ATO has provided interim advice by way of draft Taxation Determinations, while in the remaining cases, the ATO has noted that interim advice is not necessary as the purpose of the ruling was to change the ATO view and until the ruling is finalised, the existing ATO view continues to operate.97
3.25 The ATO's PSLA 2010/5 addresses most of the matters contained in Recommendation 3, including when technical discussion papers may be used and the need to observe tone and content of such papers to promote an impartial consultation. Those matters which are not included in PSLA 2010/5, specifically Recommendations 3(iii), 3(vi), 3(vii) and 3(viii), are included in the ATO's framework for taxpayer engagement in developing its technical views in other ATO guidance mentioned above.
3.26 Accordingly, the IGT recognises that the ATO has developed an improved framework for the use of technical discussion papers when engaging with external stakeholders to develop its technical views. However, the IGT also observes that since the publication of PSLA 2010/5 in December 2010, the ATO has only made use of such papers sparingly. The IGT's investigation indicated that only one technical discussion paper was issued by the ATO in each of 2011–1298 and 2012–1399.
3.27 The Public Rulings Program information which the ATO has provided in support of its implementation of Recommendations 3(vi) and 3(viii) does not include any public details on the interim guidance which the ATO has issued. Accordingly, while the ATO is issuing interim guidance in some cases,100 such guidance is not readily available or accessible to taxpayers and tax practitioners. While the IGT's recommendation did not strictly require the ATO to centrally publish a list of interim guidance, the IGT considers that such a list, where linked to pending public rulings, would significantly assist taxpayers and their advisers.
3.28 It should be noted, however, that the IGT has identified some examples in which the ATO has provided interim guidance to taxpayers following significant Federal Court decisions. For example, following the decision in MBI Properties Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation,101 the ATO published an interim DIS to advise taxpayers that they may continue to rely on GSTR 2002/5, GSTR 2012/1 and GSTR 2012/2 until the matter is finally resolved.102 Similar guidance was also issued by the ATO in relation to the ATS Pacific Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation103 and AP Group Limited v Commissioner of Taxation104 cases.
3.29 In this regard, the IGT observes that the ATO has made good progress on its provision of interim guidance for taxpayers when final views are likely to be delayed. The IGT encourages the ATO to consider wider use of interim guidance in appropriate cases.
3.30 The IGT has also observed that updates and discussions of relevant pending public rulings may occur at consultation forums, such as some sub-committees of the NTLG.105 However, during the course of this follow up review, the ATO announced a new approach to its community consultation, consisting of four liaison groups and four advisory groups.106 These groups replaced the previous ATO consultative forums and are supplemented by technical and special focus working groups 'to consider matters that have the potential to significantly affect the community's willing participation in the tax and superannuation systems' and are established and maintained on a needs basis.107
3.31 Through the above streamlining process, the ATO aims to develop 'a consultative process that is responsive and agile — one that takes a holistic view of the entire interaction with people'108 and to ensure that effective consultation is undertaken on a 'project basis rather than via static, longstanding committees.'109 Given these new arrangements, some time will be needed to assess the effectiveness of these new forums to disseminate relevant updates and information on pending public rulings.
3.32 The IGT considers that with some exceptions such as the TA 2010/2 discussed above, the use of Taxpayer Alerts, as guided by PSLA 2008/15, largely aligns with the intent of Recommendation 3(iii) in providing information to taxpayers on emerging compliance issues of concern.
Recommendation 5 of the IGT's 'U-turns' review
To reduce the timeframes elapsing between industry practices developing and the ATO becoming aware of its compliance concerns (i.e. concerns with practices that are perceived to be incorrect at law), the ATO should be more proactive in identifying areas of compliance concern as early as possible, including:
- supplementing existing consultative forums with technical issues forums (for example, core workshops on sensitive areas and technical discussions with externals with particular expertise in the relevant area); and
- in relation to developing guidance on new law, making better use of ATO and industry knowledge learned from the development of the relevant legislative provisions.
3.33 The ATO agreed with this recommendation, noting that it should be proactive in identifying areas of uncertainty or compliance risks through engagement with taxpayers and their representatives. The ATO has also advised that the Chief Tax Counsel, Deputy Chief Tax Counsel and senior technical officers continue to meet with tax practitioners and legal practitioners to discuss emerging technical issues and other matters of concern.
3.34 Furthermore, the ATO has established consultative groups with specific focus of better understanding the risks associated with taxpayer arrangements. For example, in September 2011, the ATO's Financial Products Taskforce engaged with members of the financial product industry on widely offered wholesale and retail financial products to assess the risks and to determine whether taxpayers should be alerted to certain tax features of products.110
3.35 The ATO has also provided a number of other examples to the IGT to illustrate its public consultation efforts and the outcomes arising from consultations with external stakeholders, including the following:
- Illegal early release of superannuation benefits by self-managed super funds (SMSF) — the ATO engaged with SMSF administrators, industry associations, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission. Arising out of this consultation, a differentiated registrations process was established to enable the manual review of 'high risk' SMSF registrations, a new member verification service through the ATO Business Portal, a new Super Fund Look Up website to assist taxpayers determine the validity and status of an SMSF and a coordinated guidance note drafted by the ATO and issued by APRA relating to specific checks to be conducted before a rollover is progressed.
- GST and foreign currency exchange — as a result of consultations with banking and finance industry representatives, the ATO and industry identified implications arising from the High Court's decision in Travelex Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation111 and sought to address them by issuing GST Determinations112 and addenda to existing GST Rulings.113
- Life insurance assets — an industry body raised concern with the ATO that the proposed application of Division 320 of the ITAA 1997 to the acquisition and disposal of assets held in segregated classes of life insurance companies may potentially be a 'U-turn' and the ATO has advised that its process will seek to address the concerns.
3.36 The ATO has also advised that it is in the process of developing a communication strategy to support the Office of the Chief Tax Counsel (OCTC) in its informal technical discussions with key external stakeholders. The current objectives and approach of the strategy include the following:
Informal technical discussions need to be an open and candid exchange of views.
We are seeking to draw out early information about taxpayer and industry practices or views that we are presently unaware of (our unknown unknowns). However, to create an appropriate environment and to encourage the external parties to speak freely, this needs to be a two way conversation.
Therefore, we will also need to bring emerging issues (our known unknowns) to the discussions. The intention would be to explore these issues further in the conversations. These issues could be identified by staff from OCTC or from the Compliance business lines via technical networks, requests for curbside advice, tax clinics — or the issues may relate to the imminent implementation of new law or a public ruling.114
3.37 Furthermore, the ATO has developed guidelines for such discussions and noted that the purpose and approach are as follows:
The purpose of informal technical discussions between the ATO and leading legal and accounting firms is to:
- proactively identify and surface areas of emerging technical uncertainty or compliance risks to improve the timely mitigation of technical risks;
- create an environment where stakeholders can proactively bring technical issues to the ATO's attention and engage in open discussions on such issues; and
- gain a mutual understanding of respective positions through a candid exchange of views.115
The ATO also states:
For the discussions to achieve the stated objectives, two way conversations are required where participants feel free to raise issues and explore them by openly contributing to the discussion. To enable an open exchange of views, the conversations should operate under the following principles / mutual expectations:
- minutes are not taken;
- issues raised or comments made are not attributed to individuals;
- individual taxpayer details are not disclosed; and
- information arising from the discussions can be used for further exploration but should not be attributed or taken as formal organisational views.116
3.38 The ATO has advised the strategy will be reviewed to assess the effectiveness and ongoing viability.
3.39 Lastly, the ATO Law and Practice business line's 2012–13 Line Plan,117 emphasises the need for ongoing active early engagement with the Treasury, practitioners and the community generally in identifying and advising on areas of uncertainty or areas of the law which were not operating as intended or with which compliance may be difficult.118
3.40 Recommendation 5, which deals with effective early identification and response to areas of uncertainty and risks, is critical in addressing stakeholders' concern with the ATO's risk-based approach to compliance. Generally speaking, the approach seeks to target the ATO's available resources to those areas involving the greatest perceived risk to revenue and results in lower risk cases having a lighter touch. However, these taxpayers may be exposed to potential adverse ATO views, with retrospective effect, where the ATO recalibrates its view of certain risks in later years, such as where lower risk cases accumulate to form a higher risk.119
3.41 In addressing Recommendation 5(a), the ATO has provided details regarding its approach to informal technical discussions with external stakeholders which emphasises proactive identification of emerging technical issues and areas of uncertainty. The ATO has also provided material to the IGT that demonstrates positive outcomes emerging from the implementation of this recommendation.
3.42 Accordingly, the IGT considers that Recommendation 5(a) is implemented, noting that due to the ATO's recent restructured consultation arrangements, referred to earlier, it is too early to assess whether these arrangements will result in earlier and better identification of areas of uncertainty and compliance risks.
3.43 With respect to Recommendation 5(b), the IGT considers that this recommendation is now incorporated within the broader recommendation 2.3 of the subsequent IGT's self assessment review which provides: 120
Where the tripartite tax law design teams consider that certain details are more effectively addressed in ATO public binding advice (see recommendation 5.1), the Government should consider requiring the ATO to synchronise its public binding advice with the enactment of substantial new tax law. Whether any particular new tax law requires synchronised ATO public binding advice, and what matters such advice must cover, should be subject of consultation on the development of that law. After enactment of the new laws, the advice should be monitored and where necessary updated with those changes having prospective effect.
3.44 The then Government agreed in principle to this recommendation and noted that:121
The Government is committed to improving the level of interaction between Government and stakeholders. As part of this commitment, Treasury with the ATO, is continuing to undertake work in the areas of law development, consultation and communication with stakeholders.
As part of the Government's commitment to continually improve its consultation processes, the Government has adopted a tailored consultation approach for tax issues. In this regard, where matters are new and complex or entail major reforms, early ATO involvement in all relevant processes so that it can synchronise the development of its advice will enhance certainty for the community.
3.45 Furthermore, on 10 October 2013 the ATO published PSLA 2013/4 The ATO's role in tax law design and expressing ATO views as part of the law design process (PSLA 2013/4) to outline its role in the tax law design process.122 While PSLA 2013/4 notes that the ATO cannot provide binding advice on legal interpretation until after enactment123 it will provide 'advice to Treasury on the administrative and interpretative aspects of proposed tax laws.'124 Specifically, staff are instructed that they 'can, and should, provide preliminary views about how the ATO would interpret the draft law.'125
3.46 The ATO's early consideration of administrative and interpretative issues through consultation as part of the design process aligns with Recommendation 5(b) and recommendation 2.3 in the IGT's self assessment review such that early consideration should enable the ATO to develop and provide binding advice in a timely manner. Accordingly, the IGT considers that the ATO has implemented Recommendation 5(b).
71 Above n 68, p 34.
72 Ibid, p 35.
73 ATO, Technical Discussion Papers, PSLA 2010/5, 2 December 2010.
74 Above n 73, para .
75 Ibid, para .
76 Ibid, para .
77 ATO, Management of high risk technical issues and engagement of officers in the Tax Counsel Network, PSLA 2012/1, 11 October 2013.
78 ATO, 'Public Rulings Manual', Above n 14, section 7.3.
79 ATO, 'Working Together and sharing information', internal ATO document, 11 April 2014; ATO, 'Engage with the Taxpayer', internal ATO document, 10 October 2013.
80 ATO, Taxpayer Alerts, PSLA 2008/15, 27 June 2013.
81 Ibid, para .
82 Ibid, para .
83 Ibid, para .
84 ATO, 'Taxpayer Alerts', internal ATO document, undated.
85 Ibid, para .
86 Taxpayers Australia, Taxpayer alerts (not taxpayer alarms) (9 August 2013).
87 ATO, NTLG Superannuation Technical Subgroup Minutes, June 2010, item 7; Law Council of Australia, Letter to the Australian Taxation Office (1 April 2010)
88 ATO, 'Talkbook Transforming Tax Technical Decision Making (TTTDM)', internal ATO document, July 2012.
89 Above n 70, p 19.
90 ATO, Treasury and the Australian Taxation Office — Tax and Superannuation Protocol (2012) Annexure A.
91 IGT, Review into improving the self assessment system (2013) pp 127-130.
92 Above n 90.
93 Commissioner of Taxation, Annual Report 2012-13 (2013) p 29.
94 Ibid. The ATO did not report any significant reduction in the number of public rulings issued between 2011–12 (214 public rulings issued) and 2012–13 (213 public rulings issued).
95 ATO communication to the IGT, 12 February 2014; ATO communication to the IGT, 15 February 2013.
97 ATO communication to the IGT, 15 February 2013.
98 ATO, Securitisation and TOFA, TDP 2011/1, 31 August 2011.
99 ATO, GST treatment of recovered dishonoured payment costs, TDP 2012/1, 1 August 2012.
100 See for example ATO, Income tax: when a superannuation income stream commences and ceases, TR 2011/D3, 13 July 2011; ATO, Income tax: Employee share schemes: If a share in a 'no goodwill' professional practice company is acquired by a practitioner-shareholder (or a new practitioner-shareholder), will the Commissioner accept, for the purposes of determining whether that acquisition was at a discount within the meaning of subsection 83A-20(1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997, that the goodwill of the company can be taken to have no value?, TR 2011/D9, 26 October 2011.
101  FCAFC 112.
102 ATO, MBI Properties Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation, Interim Decision Impact Statement, 21 November 2013.
103  FCAFC 105; ATO, AP Group Limited v Commissioner of Taxation, Decision Impact Statement, 4 April 2014.
104  FCA 341; ATO, ATS Pacific Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation, Interim Decision Impact Statement, 6 September 2013.
105 See for example ATO, NTLG Fringe Benefits Tax sub-committee, Minutes, 16 May 2013, item 4.
108 Chris Jordan, Tax, the way ahead (Speech delivered to the Tax Institute 28th Annual Convention, 14 March 2013).
109 Chris Jordan, Reinventing the ATO — building trust in Australia's tax administration (Speech delivered at the ATAX 11th International Tax Administration Conference, 14 April 2014).
110 See for example, ATO, Structured financial products that exploit franking credits and other tax benefits, TA 2012/3, 14 June 2012.
111  HCA 33.
112 ATO, Acquisition-supply in Travelex Scenario, GSTD 2012/5, 6 June 2012.
113 See for example, ATO, Goods and services tax: GST treatment of financial supplies and related supplies and acquisitions, GSTR 2002/2A6, 16 May 2012; ATO, Goods and services tax: supply of rights for use outside Australia — subsection 38-190(1), item 4, paragraph (a) and subsection 38-190(2), GSTR 2003/8A2, 21 December 2011.
114 ATO, 'Draft Communication Strategy', internal ATO document, 21 September 2012
115 ATO, 'Guidelines for informal technical discussions', internal ATO document, September 2012, p 1.
117 The Law and Practice business line is now Review and Dispute Resolution.
118 ATO, Law and Practice Line Plan 2012-13 (2013) internal ATO document, pp 1, 3 and 4.
119 IGT, Annual Report 2004–05 (2005) p 6.
120 Above n 91, p 40.
121 David Bradbury, Inspector-General of Taxation review into improving the self assessment system, Media Release 13 February 2013.
122 ATO, The ATO's role in tax law design and expressing ATO views as part of the law design process, PSLA 2013/4, 10 April 2014.
123 Ibid, para ; ATO, The ATO role in providing information or advice on the potential application of announced changes to the tax law, or where legislative change is contemplated but not announced, PSLA 2004/6, 2 July 2012.
124 Above n 122, para .
125 Ibid, para .