新足迹

 找回密码
 注册

精华好帖回顾

· (原创)我找专业工的一点小窍门 (2006-6-2) 等着瞧 · 好久没来美食版了,今天来冒个泡,老公非要吃的寿司,新加了香柠三文鱼排和芫爆肚丝 (2007-1-14) susan
· 我很丑,可是我很温柔(多图) (2006-4-28) 贝贝 · 分享-我家棉花糖与猫传腹FIP的抗争 (2023-8-4) 花正红
Advertisement
Advertisement
查看: 689|回复: 3

[个人所得税] question for Living away allowance [复制链接]

发表于 2013-1-15 22:33 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 yw0830 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 yw0830 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 yw0830 于 2013-1-15 23:34 编辑

Client's PAYG Payment Summary only recorded his base salary for $57000, not included in any travel allowance or living away allowance which was already paid to his bank account. By adding up all these allowances, his actual money receipts should be about $100,000 after tax.

Client would like to claim his travel expenses and leaving away expenses, and I said "no". Because he has already received tax free allowance which was not included in his PAYG Payment Summary.

His friend was also our company client who had the same situation. My colleague has already claimed the travel expenses in his friend's tax return. Therefore, this client asked for why I rejected his claim.

Today afternoon, my colleague told me another story saying that there's one client has already received private rulling which allowed her to claim the "difference" between government rate on the maximum claims of travel expenses, and the allowance paid by the company.

for example:            Government rate:                $250/per day
                               Company paid allowance:    $200/per day
                                                                         ----------
                               Difference:                           $  50/per day

So thus, client could claim $50 per day as his travel expenses.

I couldn't agree with it.

Has anyone come across it?

大家爽快加分给我吧!
Advertisement
Advertisement

发表于 2013-1-16 01:04 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 sissi1987220 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 sissi1987220 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
I think your colleague is correct.

Take a example: A guy spent $500 for whatever associated to work (which should be totally tax deductible if he doesn't receive any allowance), and he received $ 200 from employer  for LAHA, the difference of $300 should still be tax deductible as long as it incurred during earning his income.

I hope it helps.  

退役斑竹

发表于 2013-1-16 15:22 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 simonwang 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 simonwang 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
sissi1987220 发表于 2013-1-16 02:04
I think your colleague is correct.

Take a example: A guy spent $500 for whatever associated to wor ...

LAFHA is not associated with work so no income tax deduction.

退役斑竹

发表于 2013-1-16 15:36 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 simonwang 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 simonwang 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
The main point is how much the client actually spent, if he only spent $200, no way he can claim the rest $50 for income tax deduction. If he spent $250 or even more while the company pays $200, yes, he can. But better to get the company to pay the gap instead of claim tax deduction.

TD 2012/17 and TR 2004/6 might be helpful.

http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/vie ... AT%2FATO%2F00001%22

http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?locid='TXR/TR20046/NAT/ATO'

For LAFHA, as it is not work-related expenses (instead it is a fringe benefit provided by the employer), no income tax deduction is allowed. If the employee had higher food cost, with evidence, the employer can pay him more than the ATO determined reasonable amount without FBT liability. But the employee must retain the substantiation and no income tax deduction is available.



发表回复

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

Advertisement
Advertisement
返回顶部