Capital Gains Tax On Rental Property, Shares And Collectibles – Calculation And Computation

Overview of Capital Gains Tax

According to the Australian taxation office an individual tax payer may make a capital gains or capital loss when they sell the rental property that is acquired on or after 19th September 1985. In the circumstances of the sale or disposal or the real estate the time of the event is treated normally when a person enters into the contract usually when the settlement is reached (Sadiq et al. 2013). A person may make the capital gains from the sale of the rental property up to the extent that the capital proceeds that is received by them is greater than the cost base of the property. A taxpayer might make the capital loss up to the extent that the property reduce cost base is greater than the capital proceeds.

A gain is treated as the capital gains which is not subjected to income tax under the ordinary concepts. The income tax liability of the taxpayer includes the net capital gains. In other words, the net capital gains is included into the assessable income of the taxpayers (Woellner et al. 2016). The cost base and the reduced cost base of the property comprises of the amount that is paid for along with the certain incidental costs that are related with acquiring, holding and selling the property. This includes the legal fees, stamp duty and real estate agent commission.  

A CGT event A1 occurs under “section 104-10 (1) of the ITAA 1997” when the taxpayer sells any CGT asset. In the current situation it is noticed that Kylie sold an investment property for $580,000. The selling of investment apartment resulted in “CGT event A1” under “section 104-10 (1) of the ITAA 1997” (Braithwaite 2017). The apartment was however bought for $360,000. At the time of acquiring the holiday apartment Kylie reported an expenses of $5000 and $4000 respectively for stamp duty and valuation costs. According to the “section 110-25” the cost base of the asset includes the total amount of money paid to acquire the property. With reference to “section 110-25” expenses on stamp duty and valuation costs for acquiring the rental property are added to the cost base of the apartment under the second element.

The third element of the cost base items includes the cost of ownership. The cost of ownership comprises of the interest, cost of maintenance, repairs and renovation, insurance, rates and land tax (Bankman et al. 2017). Kylie later reported on 1^st July 2009 relating to costs incurred on renovating the apartment. Kylie incurred renovation cost of $15,000. The cost of renovating the apartment falls under the third element of cost base under “section 110-25 of the ITAA 1997”. Therefore, the same is added into the cost base of the apartment.

Capital Gains Tax on Rental Property

The fourth element of cost base comprises of the capital enhancement and preservation costs. This includes any form of capital expenditure such as improvement to the asset that is incurred by the taxpayer in increasing the value of the asset that forms the part of the fourth element of the cost base under “section 110-25 (5) of the ITAA 1997” (Schenk 2017). The fourth element of cost base includes the capital expenditure that is related to the installation or moving the asset. Kylie later reports on 1^st February 2009 an expenditure of $40,000 related to addition of second bathroom in the apartment. The cost can be characterised as improvement to the asset in the form of capital enhancement and falls under the part of fourth element of cost base.

While arriving at the final settlement of the investment apartment Kylie reported legal expenses and real estate commission. The expenses are considered as cost of selling and the same is subtracted to ascertain the net selling price (Murphy and Higgins 2016). The selling of investment apartment resulted in capital gains under “CGT event A1” and the net amount of capital gains is included into the assessable income of Kylie.

Later Kylie granted a three month option of purchasing the rental property to local property developer which eventually lapsed and resulted in receipt of $10,500. She incurred the expense of $500 as the fees paid to solicitor for repairing the contract. Fees paid to the solicitor for preparing the option contract can be treated as eligible deduction under the “section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997” because it was incurred in the gaining the assessable income.

According to the “section 108-10 (2) of the ITAA 1997” collectables refers to the artwork, an antique coin or medallion or a postage stamp that is mainly kept by the taxpayer for their private usage and enjoyment purpose (Schmalbeck, Zelenak and Lawsky, 2015). There are certain special rules that are applicable on collectables. The capital gains and capital losses should be disregarded under “section 118-10 (1) of the ITAA 1997” when the cost base of the collectable is less than $500. The quarantining rule under “section 108-10 (1)” states that capital loss from the collectables can be only used to offset the capital gains from the collectables (Seto 2015). Kylie later reports capital gains from the sale of stamp collection however she has the carry-forward loss of $5000 from the sale of coin. As a result of this, Kylie under the quarantining rule of “section 108-10 (1)” can only offset the capital loss that is made from the sale of antique coin.

Capital Gains Tax on Shares

Shares in company or units in the trust are considered in the similar manner as the other assets for the purpose of capital gains tax. For an individual investors capital gains tax is applied on the shares and units when they sell them originating from the CGT event (Finkelstein 2014). In the current situation it is noticed that Kylie made a capital gains from the shares of BHP however she had the carry forward loss of $20,000 from the shares during the income year of 2008-. The gains made from the shares of BHP are offset against the carry forward loss.

Kylie carried on the business of gymnasium that only made profit once in every ten year however the gymnasium did not reported profit during the year 2017-18. The loss made from the gymnasium should be carry forward to the later years and the same can be offset by Kylie when the business makes profits from such operations carried on by her. 

Computation of Kylie’s Taxable Income and Tax Payable

Calculation of Taxable Income
In the Books of Kylie
For the year ended June 30, 2018
Particulars	Amount ($)	Amount ($)
Assessable Income
Gross Salary		20000
Receipts from grant option		10500
Capital Gains
Net capital gain on disposal of property:
Proceeds	570000
Cost base	424000
Gross capital gain (proceeds less cost base)	146000
50% CGT discount	73000	73000
Net capital gain on disposal of Shares:
Proceeds	65000
Cost base	45000
Gross capital gain (proceeds less cost base)	20000
Less: Carry forward capital loss from shares	20000	Nil
Total assessable income		103500
Allowable deductions
Legal Fees to paid to Solicitor		500
Total Allowable Deductions		500
Total taxable income		103000
Tax on taxable income		25742
Medicare Levy		2060
Total tax payable		27802

Notes:

Note 1	Computation of Capital gains
	For the year ended June 30, 2018
	Particulars	Amount ($)	Amount ($)
	CGT Event A1: Considerations – (Section 104-10(1))
	Capital Proceeds: Sales Proceeds of Apartment		5,80,000
	Less: Cost of Selling
	Legal Expenses	2000
	Agent Commission	8000	10000
	Total Selling Price		5,70,000
	Cost Base (section 110-25)
	Element 1: Purchase	3,60,000
	Element 2: Stamp Duty	5000
	Valuation Cost	4000
	Element 3: Renovation Cost	15000
	Element 4: Capital Addition (1-2-09)	40000	64000
	Cost Base		4,24,000
	Capital Gains		1,46,000
Note 2	Computation of Capital gains from Collectables
	Particulars	Amount ($)	Amount ($)
	Proceeds	25000
	Cost base	22000
	Gross capital gain (proceeds less cost base)	3000
	Less: Carry Forward Capital Loss from Coins	5000
	Gross Capital Loss		-2000
Note 3	Computation of Capital gains from shares
	Particulars	Amount ($)	Amount ($)
	Net capital gain on disposal of Shares:
	Proceeds	65000
	Cost base	45000
	Gross capital gain (proceeds less cost base)	20000
	Less: Carry forward capital loss from shares	20000
	Capital Gains/Loss		0

Characterising the receipts in the form of ordinary income from the business activity comprises of two steps namely, ascertaining whether the taxpayer is performing the business or whether the receipts are treated as the normal proceeds of the business (Hoffman et al. 2014). Gains obtained by the taxpayer from carrying on of the business is treated as the ordinary income under “section 6-5 of the ITAA 1997”. As understood in the current situation, Salvador Ryan was the accountant and Director of accounting practice firm. Salvador reported the receipt of $600,000 from the professional fees and $25,000 from the sales of superannuation guide.

As per “section 6-5” most of the income that comes into the taxpayer must be treated as ordinary income. The court in “Scott v CT (1935)” held that appropriate principles must be applied in determining the receipts within the ordinary concepts (Burns and Ziliak 2017). Therefore, the receipts from professional fees and sales of superannuation guide should be held assessable under the ordinary concept of “section 6-5”.

As per “section 44 (1) of the ITAA 1936” dividends and gains obtained from shares are held as statutory income (Buenker 2018). A resident company may pay franking dividends to a person. The dividends may be entirely franked or may be partially franked which means that the dividend has franked and unfranked amount. As understood Salvador reported a receipt of partially franked $17,000 dividend. The dividend is included for assessment under “section 44 (1) of the ITAA 1936” as the statutory income.

Capital Gains Tax on Collectibles

The interest from bank deposits are treated as the ordinary income under “section 6-5 of the ITAA 1997”. Therefore, the interest received from the bank deposits are ordinary income and it is included for assessment. The court in “Adelaide Fruit and Produce Exchange Co Ltd v FC of T (1932)” stated that the rent refers to the price paid as the right of using another person’s property (Robin 2017). The receipt of rental income from the investment property is held as assessable income as the income from ordinary concepts.    

Salvador reported profits from the sale of the office equipment. The profit has been included for assessment as the receipts under the ordinary concepts. As per the Australian taxation office, the assessable income from the overseas nation should be declared by the taxpayer in their Australian income tax return. An individual that has paid foreign tax in other nation, may be entitled to the Australian foreign income tax offset that provides the taxpayer from the double taxation relief (Blakelock and King 2017). The gross dividend of $850 from the shares of IBM (USA) has been included for assessment as receipts under ordinary concept however the withholding tax of $150 is claimed as foreign income tax offset.

The general deduction rule states that the taxpayer can obtain from their taxable income a loss or the outgoings till the extent that are assessable under “section 8-1 (1) of the ITAA 1997” (Martin and Connor 2017). The expenses should be incurred in gaining or generating the assessable income. The expenses must be necessarily incurred for the business purpose of generating assessable income.

Salvador reported expenses towards office rent, superannuation guides and salary paid to employee secretary. The court in “Amalgamated Zinc Ltd v FC of T (1935)” explained that to claim a deduction for loss or outgoing the expenditure must hold the sufficient nexus or connection in deriving the assessable income (Burton 2017). With reference to the “section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997” the expenses were incurred in gaining the assessable income and the business course of the taxpayer. The expenses are eligible for deduction because it was incurred in course of generating assessable income.

The court in “Lunney v FC of T (1958)” held that the travel between home and a taxpayer usual work place is usually not allowed as deductions (Maley 2018). Salvador reported an expense related to train fare for travel between home and workplace. As held in “Payne v FC of T 2001” the court denied deduction for the cost of travelling between the taxpayer’s home and the airport where he worked. The court held that the travel between the two unrelated place of work is not allowed for deductions. Therefore, the travel expense for traveling to and from home to the place of work is non-deductible expenses.

Computation of Kylie’s Taxable Income and Tax Payable

Legal expenditure is allowed for deductions if the legal expenditure have originated as the outcome of taxpayer’s income generating activities given that the legal cost are not capital in nature or private in nature. The court in “Hallstorms Pty Ltd v FC of T (1946)” held that the legal expenditure can be characterised as the outgoing based on the revenue account or expenses under the capital nature based on the cause or purpose for which the legal expenses are incurred (Bently and Sherman 2014). The legal fees incurred by Salvador will be allowed as deduction under “section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997”.   

As per “section 8-1” an individual taxpayer can claim deduction for the certain forms of expenses that a taxpayer incurs while the property is rented out or available for rent. Rates paid on the rental property will be allowed as deduction under “section 8-1” since the property was used for generating assessable income.

Accordingly, an individual taxpayer is allowed to claim immediate deduction for the expenses related to the rental property. The taxpayer here incurred expenses on interest on loan, the interest here is treated as deductible expenses.  

As per the “taxation ruling of TR 97/23” initial repairs expenses that are associated to the profit making structure are treated as capital expenditure and hence not allowed as deduction (Davison, Monotti and Wiseman 2015). In other words, expenses incurred on the property for initial repairs following the acquisition of property, given the expenses are incurred in remedying the defects or damage existent during the date of acquisition are treated as capital expenses and non-deductible under “section 25-10”. The court in “Law Shipping Co Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners (1923)” held that the cost of repairing the roof, guttering, painting, wall and wooden floor during the year of income when it was acquired was expenses of capital in nature and non-deductible under “section 25-10”. The cost of $5,000 for painting the rental property immediately following the purchase will be treated as capital expenditure and non-deductible under “section 25-10 of the ITAA 1997”.

The court in “W Thomas & Co Pty Ltd v FC of T (1965)” explained that repairs and improvements relating to restoration of thing to a certain condition without changing the character (Miller and Oats 2016). Repairs done on the premises to remedy the defects caused by wear and tear or damage by storm are allowed as deduction under “section 25-10 of the ITAA 1997”. Similarly, the cost of replacing the roof tiles on the investment property will be treated as deductible under “section 25-10” since it involves restoration of the condition on the premises that is damaged by storm.

As per the “taxation ruling of TR 97/23” repairs done on the investment property does not changes necessarily since it was executed at the same time as the improvement (James and Nobes 2016). If the work accounts to substantial improvement, addition or alteration is not treated as repair and it is not deductible under “section 25-10 of the ITAA 1997”. The cost of extending the bathroom in rental property is treated as capital expenses and non-deductible under “section 25-10”.

As per the ATO assets purchase entirely for the business use are treated as allowable deductions. The purchase of BMW for 100% business use is included for deduction since the asset is used entirely for the business purpose.

According to the ATO if the business makes any losses in the earlier year they can carry forward these losses and claim the same as the deduction for those losses in the later year. The carry forward of $42,000 as the loss from the previous year will be allowed as tax offset.      

Calculation of Tax Payable
In the Books of Darwin Taxation Services Pty Ltd
For the year ended 30 June 2018
Particulars	Amount ($)	Amount ($)
Receipts Eligible for Assessment
Professional Accounting Fees		600000
Sales of Superannuation guides		25000
Australian sourced dividend income:
Fully franked (net)	8500
Gross up for franking credits (17000 x 50/50)	8500	17000
Australian sourced interest income		5000
Australian sourced rental income		10000
Foreign sourced dividend income (gross of WHT of AUD 150)		1000
Profit on Sale of Office Equipment		2000
Total Assessable Income		660000
Expenses Eligible as Deductions
Office Rent	14000
Cost of Sales (Superannuation Guide)	10000
Salary Paid to Employee	38000
Legal Fees	1000
Rates on Rental Property	2000
Interest on Loan	15000
Cost of replacing the roof tiles	1000
Cost of new BMW	136000
PAYG Instalments	150000
Total Allowable Deductions		367000
Total taxable Income		293000
Tax on Taxable Income @27.5%		80575
Less: Foreign Income tax offset		150
Less: Franking Credit		8500
Less: Carry-forward of Previous year loss		42000
Total tax payable		29925

Partnership cannot be referred as separate legal entity under the general law and does not pay tax rather it is the partners that pay tax on the profits distributed to them from partnerships (Zeff 2016). Partnerships should lodge the income tax return to reflect how the profits that are distributed to the partners are taxed. As per the “section 92 of the ITAA 1997” the net income or loss is distributed to the partners that pay tax on the distributions. According to the “section 995-1 (1) of the ITAA 1997” partnership refers to the carrying on the business as the partners or in recipient of the ordinary or statutory income together.

In order to characterised the receipts under the ordinary income the business activities comprise of two steps namely to ascertain whether the taxpayer is performing the business, secondly whether the receipts that is received is from the normal proceeds of that business (Oats, Miller and Mulligan 2017). The gross receipts obtained from the trading is treated as the ordinary income in accordance with the ordinary concept of “section 6-5 of the ITAA 1997”. The dividends are taxed differently on the basis of whether the dividends are franked dividends or unfranked dividends.

A resident company of Australia that has decided to join the Australian imputation system might pay the shareholders or credit them with the franked dividend. Dividends can be fully franked which implies that the entire amount of the dividend carries the franking credit (Fleurbaey and Maniquet 2015). While the dividends can be partly franked which implies that the dividend has the franking amount and unfranked amount. The dividend of $12,520 is included for assessment within the statutory concept of “section 44 (1) of the ITAA 1936”.

According to the Australian taxation office the purchase of trading stock is allowed as deduction. The purchases of trading stock amounting to $305,000 is considered as deductions.

Active partners of usually paid salary because of the extra work they do. However, the same is not treated a salary. It is rather treated as before claim on profits prior to the balance is shared among the partners. According to the “section 90” salaries paid to the partners are not regarded as deductible while computing the net income (Sikka 2017). The salaries of $30,000 paid to each of the partners is not deductible under “section 90” while computing the net income of partnership.

Partners may be owed to the money from the partnerships. This can be in the form of distribution of the profits that has not been paid or partners has lent some partnership money. According to the general law the interest that is paid on the partner’s loan is not treated as the deductible expenditure for a partnership. However, the court has relaxed the rules in “Leonard v FCT (1919)” and held that interest on the external borrowings by the partnership to the partner’s contributions employed in the business are allowed as tax deductions (Barkoczy 2018). Similarly, the interest on the cash advance that was made to partnership by Elizabeth is treated as allowable deduction under “section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997”.

The partnerships reported expenditure relating to the payment of salaries and holiday leave to employees. The partnership also made payment of fringe benefit tax to the employees with other general and specific deductions. The taxpayers under the general deduction rule of positive limbs stated the expenses incurred in obtaining or generating the taxable income (Douglas et al. 2014). The expenses should be necessarily incurred in carrying on the business with the objective gaining or generating assessable income. Therefore, the salary paid to employee, fringe benefit tax and other general expenses will be allowed as deductions under the “section 8-1” since it is incurred in the course of derivation of assessable income.

According to the Australian taxation office a business can claim deduction under the simplified rules of depreciation. If a taxpayer decides to use the simplified rules for depreciation, then the taxpayer should implement the entire set of rules and not simply individual elements (Grange, Jover-Ledesma and Maydew 2015). The taxpayers are allowed to claim deductions only for the portion of the assets that is used for the business or other taxable purpose.

The simplified depreciation rule has been considered in determining the depreciation expenses (James 2016). The partnership is allowed to claim deductions only for the portion of the assets that is used for the business or other taxable purpose.

In the later instances it is noticed that Elizabeth worked as the part time instructor and made $15,000. According to the “section 6-1 of the ITAA 1997” income from the personal exertion or income obtained from the personal exertion represents the earnings, wages, salaries, commissions, pension, fees, superannuation contributions or gratuities that is received in advance in respect of the services rendered (Jover-Ledesma 2014). The judicial concept of “section 6-5 of the ITAA 1997” defines ordinary income in accordance with the ordinary concepts and use of mankind (Kenny 2014). As per the “section 6-1” the receipt of salary from the part-time income will be treated as the income obtained by Elizabeth from the personal exertion. The gross salary would be treated as assessable income under the ordinary concept of “section 6-5 of the ITAA 1997”.

Gambling winnings are not treated as income unless the taxpayer is carrying on the business of gambling. A mere windfall gain usually does not possess the character of income. The court in “Moore v Griffiths (1972)” held that mere winnings from the prize is not treated as the income (Kenny, Blissenden and Villios 2018). Similarly, Elizabeth reported a gambling winnings of $2,400. The amount will not be included into the taxpayer’s assessable income for assessment purpose.

As per the Australian taxation office the Australian resident company or the New Zealand franking company that has undertaken the decision of joining the Australian imputation system might pay or credit the shareholders with the franked dividend. Dividends can be entirely franked or may be partially franked (McCouat 2018). The franking credits are claimed as the tax offset by the taxpayer. The taxpayer Elizabeth reported the receipt of $7,000 as the fully franked dividend. The amount of the franking credits that is attached to the dividend is entitled to claim a franking tax offset for the tax the company has paid on its income.

According to the Australian taxation office the simplified depreciation rules is applied for the assets that costs less than the instant asset write-off threshold during the year they are purchased, used or installed for ready use (Morgan, Mortimer and Pinto 2017). Elizabeth reported the purchase of calculator for a sum of $250 for the classes that she conducted as the instructor. The amount of $250 will be claimed as immediate deductions since the asset is bought entirely for generating the assessable income.

According to the Australian taxation office an individual taxpayer is allowed to claim deduction for the union fees, subscription to trade, business or professional associations (Sadiq et al. 2018). Elizabeth reported an expenditure towards the payment of annual membership for professional association. The amount of $500 has been included for deductions.

If an individual or their family does not have the appropriate level of the private hospital insurance cover and the income of the taxpayer is greater than Medicare Levy Surcharge threshold limit (Taylor et al. 2018). As Elizabeth is single and the income threshold limit is below basic tier of $90,000. Therefore, she will be exempted from the Medicare Levy Surcharge.

As per the Australian taxation office, the assessable income from the overseas nation should be declared by the taxpayer in their income tax return. An individual that has paid foreign tax in other nation, may be entitled to the Australian foreign income tax offset that provides the taxpayer from the double taxation relief (Woellner et al. 2014). The gross dividend of $9000 from the shares of US Company has been included for assessment as receipts under ordinary concept however the withholding tax of $1000 is claimed as foreign income tax offset.

Calculation of Net Partnership Income 2016-17

Computation of Net Partnership Income
In the books of Elizabeth and Fred
For the year ended 30 June 2018
Particulars	Amount ($)	Amount ($)
Receipts Eligible for Assessment
Gross receipts from Trading		860000
Australian Sourced Dividend Income
Fully Franked (Net)	8764
Franking Credits (12520*30/70)	3756	12520
Total Assessable Income		872520
Expenses Eligible as deduction
Purchase of Trading Stock	305000
Interest on cash Advance by Elizabeth	2000
Salaries and Holiday leave	60000
Fringe benefit tax paid	2300
Other general and specific deductions	1,23,400
Depreciation for the Current year	39,675
Cost of Goods Sold (Opening stock + Purchase -Closing Stock)	295000
Total Allowable Deductions		827375
Net Income of the Partnership firm for the income year		45145
Share of Partnership Profits
Elizabeth Share (1/2)		22572.5
Fred Share (1/2)		22572.5

Notes:

Calculation of Small business pool balance
Calculation Item	Pool Balance	Depreciation Claim
Closing pool balance from previous year	120000
Add: New Asset Purchase	24500
Subtotal	144500
Less: Proceeds from sale of assets	5000
Subtotal	139500
Pool deduction claim (30% of 120000)	36000	36000
Subtotal	103500
New asset deduction claim (15% of 24500)	3675	3675
Total Depreciation for the current year		39675
Closing pool balance	99825

Computation of income tax liability for Elizabeth

Computation of Assessable Income
In the Books of Elizabeth
For the year ended 30 June 2017
Particulars	Amount ($)	Amount ($)
Assessable Income
Gross Salary		15000
Share of Partnership Income		22572.5
Australian sourced Dividend Income
Fully Franked (Net)	4900
Franking Credits	2100	7000
Foreign Sourced dividend income (gross of WHT of 1000)		10000
Total Assessable Income		54572.5
Allowable Deductions
Purchase of Calculator	250
Membership subscription	500
Total Allowable Deductions		750
Total Taxable Income		53822.5
Tax on Taxable Income		9039.48
Add: Medicare Levy		1076.45
Less: Foreign income tax offset		1000
Less: Franking Credits		2100
Less: PAYG		5000
Total tax payable		2015.93

References: 

Bankman, J., Shaviro, D.N., Stark, K.J. and Kleinbard, E.D., 2017. Federal Income Taxation. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.

Barkoczy, S. 2018. Australian Tax Casebook 2018 14e ebook. Melbourne: OUPANZ.

Bently, L. and Sherman, B., 2014. Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press.

Blakelock, S. and King, P., 2017. Taxation law: The advance of ATO data matching. Proctor, The, 37(6), p.18.

Braithwaite, V., 2017. Taxing democracy: Understanding tax avoidance and evasion. Routledge.

Buenker, J.D., 2018. The Income Tax and the Progressive Era. Routledge.

Burns, S.K. and Ziliak, J.P., 2017. Identifying the elasticity of taxable income. The Economic Journal, 127(600), pp.297-329.

Burton, M., 2017. A Review of Judicial References to the Dictum of Jordan CJ, Expressed in Scott v. Commissioner of Taxation, in Elaborating the Meaning of Income for the Purposes of the Australian Income Tax. J. Austl. Tax’n, 19, p.50.

Davison, M., Monotti, A. and Wiseman, L., 2015. Australian intellectual property law. Cambridge University Press.

Douglas, H., Bartlett, F., Luker, T. and Hunter, R. 2014. Australian feminist judgments.

Finkelstein, M., 2014. Cases on Federal Taxation (Book Review).

Fleurbaey, M. and Maniquet, F., 2015. Optimal taxation theory and principles of fairness (No. 2015005). Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).

Grange, J., Jover-Ledesma, G. and Maydew, G. 2015. Principles of business taxation.

Hoffman, W.H., Raabe, W.A., Maloney, D.M., Young, J.C. and Smith, J.E., 2014. South-Western Federal Taxation 2015: Corporations, Partnerships, Estates and Trusts. Nelson Education.

James, S. 2016. The economics of taxation.

James, S.R. and Nobes, C., 2016. Economics of Taxation: Principles, Policy and Practice. Fiscal Publications.

Jover-Ledesma, G. 2014. Principles of business taxation 2015: Cch Incorporated.

Kenny, P. 2014. Australian tax.

Kenny, P., Blissenden, M. and Villios, S. 2018. Australian Tax 2018.

Maley, M.N., 2018. Australian Taxation Office Guidance on the Diverted Profits Tax.

Martin, F. and Connor, M., 2017. Using Blended Learning to Aid Law and Business Students’ Understanding of Taxation Law Problems. J. Australasian Tax Tchrs. Ass’n, 12, p.53.

McCouat, P. 2018. Australian master GST guide.

Miller, A. and Oats, L., 2016. Principles of international taxation. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Morgan, A., Mortimer, C. and Pinto, D. 2017. A practical introduction to Australian taxation law.

Murphy, K.E. and Higgins, M., 2016. Concepts in Federal Taxation 2017. Cengage Learning.

Oats, L., Miller, A. and Mulligan, E., 2017. Principles of International Taxation.

Robin, H., 2017. Australian taxation law 2017. Oxford University Press.

Sadiq, K., Coleman, C., Hanegbi, R., Hart, G., Jogarajan, S., Krever, R., McLaren, J., Obst, W. and Ting, A., 2013. Principles of taxation law 2018. Thomson Reuters.

Sadiq, K., Coleman, C., Hanegbi, R., Jogarajan, S., Krever, R., Obst, W., Teoh, J. and Ting, A. 2018. Principles of taxation law.

Schenk, D.H., 2017. Federal Taxation of S Corporations. Law Journal Press.

Schmalbeck, R., Zelenak, L. and Lawsky, S.B., 2015. Federal Income Taxation. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.

Seto, T., 2015. Federal Income Taxation: Cases, Problems, and Materials. West Academic Publishing.

Sikka, P., 2017, December. Accounting and taxation: Conjoined twins or separate siblings?. In Accounting forum(Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 390-405). Elsevier.

Taylor, C., Walpole, M., Burton, M., Ciro, T. and Murray, I. 2018. Understanding taxation law.

Woellner, R., Barkoczy, S., Murphy, S., Evans, C. and Pinto, D. 2014. Australian taxation law select.

Woellner, R., Barkoczy, S., Murphy, S., Evans, C. and Pinto, D., 2016. Australian Taxation Law 2016. OUP Catalogue.

Zeff, S.A., 2016. Forging accounting principles in five countries: A history and an analysis of trends. Routledge.