Ross Hocking, Melissa Bader and Tass Kourkoulis discuss the outcomes of a recent decision in regarding to R&D promoter penalties.
Recently, the Federal Court of Australia (FCA) (Logan J) handed down its decision in Commissioner of Taxation v International Indigenous Football Foundation Australia Pty Ltd  FCA 528. Logan J ordered a civil penalty of $4.25 million to a company for acting as a promoter of a tax exploitation scheme (promoter penalties).
Promoter penalty provisions were introduced in 2006, aimed at imposing penalties on entities (including individuals) that promote taxation exploitation schemes.
The respondent company was found to have provided research and development (R&D) Tax Incentive advisory services through ‘separate’ and ‘bespoke’ schemes to a range of clients through a common business model (the decision addresses the imposition of penalties in detail but barely addresses the nature of the promotion of the scheme). His Honour also held that the company’s director had contravened the promoter penalty provisions, however, the director entered into a statutory undertaking with the Commissioner of Taxation and therefore, no civil penalties were imposed.
This is the first R&D promoter penalty decision (the first promoter penalty decision was the Ludekens decision) and reflects a climate of increased scrutiny by the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) of promoters of tax exploitation schemes. Logan J was particularly mindful of the precedential value of the case and stated that it was “necessary to fix penalties at a level which would make it a form of economic suicide to engage in such activities”. His Honour highlighted that as well as civil penalties, entities engaged in the promotion of tax exploitation schemes at a severe level also risked the imposition of criminal sanctions, which includes imprisonment for culpable individuals (though they were not applied in this case).
In his judgment, Logan J observed that “[t]he range of research and development activities is limited only by the bounds of human ingenuity” and that the R&D Tax Incentive is currently “uncapped”. His Honour asserted that there was a very real and corresponding need to send a loud and clear message of general deterrence by the imposition of a penalty for entities who purport to exploit the R&D Tax Incentive.
The FCA found that:
Logan J has clearly signalled that the courts will strive to uphold the integrity of incentives within the Australian tax system through the imposition of heavy civil, and potentially criminal, penalties upon entities found to engage in the promotion of tax exploitation schemes.
©2021 KPMG, an Australian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG global organisation of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a private English company limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are trademarks used under license by the independent member firms of the KPMG global organisation.
Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.
For more detail about the structure of the KPMG global organisation please visit https://home.kpmg/governance.