|
此文章由 3IX37 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 3IX37 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
本帖最后由 3IX37 于 2012-9-17 19:54 编辑
STS-TAX 发表于 2012-9-16 13:20 data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d4d46/d4d469e5ff88ee3d52ac5f4e4e5d1780c6756876" alt=""
我花了很久看完你写的内容,我不知道哪里你看出来我是一个听不得别人意见的人。
既然你提出来不同意见,我 ...
please excuse my ambiguity as i thought this issue had already repealed. Anyway, i believe both of you have a valid points. and both of you are right. Let me shed some additional light on the issue.
Conceptually speaking there was no double deduction. Practically, there was, which in line with the word used "possible"
Under salary sacrifice plan, employee would be the one paying for the computer as it come out of his wage, only before tax.
Under fringe benefit plan, employer is paying for the computer in addition to the employee's wage.
if the computer is used for work purpose, it does not matter, there is no difference between new rule and old under each plan.
If the computer is not used for work, under the old rule, ATO wouldve had difficulties to set up a case, as employer can argue either way-It can be benefit or part of salary, so can employee.
In theory, if employer pays for it as a benefit, employer can claim it as deductible and old FBT rule exempts it, employee can't claim the depreciation, because he didn't pay the consideration. However employee can also argue it comes out from his payment as salary sacrifice. ATO wouldn't be able to prove otherwise and it would have to give this a benefit of reasonable doubt. It would be really hard for ATO to set up a case to against this. Double dip therefore happens. Despite the fact that it breaches the law, (which comes back to Simon's point, that the law never had allowed this double deduction) But ATO wouldn't be able to prove the case.
under the new rule, it is much clear. if Employee claim the deduction of depreciation, Employer would have pay the FBT if it is not used for work purpose.
Since this is not professional forum, please forgive my poor structure. i hope it makes sense.
PS. this is pure based on what i understand, might not be fully accurate. All feedback or criticism are welcome. |
|