Search

The Paris Agreement reinvigorated the use of carbon markets as a means to confront climate change. Both domestic and multi-jurisdictional mechanisms directed at carbon credit creation and trading were endorsed. In particular, a new measure was proposed to replace the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) (and Joint Implementation) at the end of the Protocol’s second compliance period in 2020. With carbon market measures increasingly likely to take centre stage Japan’s Joint Crediting Mechanism (JCM) takes on renewed interest. Under this mechanism Japanese businesses can generate carbon credits from projects that reduce foreign emissions. As such, the measure borrows from the CDM but seeks to address its inadequacies. Although Australia’s current emissions reduction policy is domestically focused it might be expected that cost considerations will necessitate a reconsideration of this policy. The opportunity for Australian entities to instigate cheaper emissions reductions in foreign jurisdictions which might count towards their, and the country’s, reduction obligations could see a policy of embracing or replicating Japan’s JCM. This paper explores the operation of the JCM. It concludes that should the Australian government alter its policy in the foreshadowed 2020 review and move to recognize foreign credits then it could adapt its Emissions Reduction Fund (and safeguard mechanism) to accept credits generated from the JCM. Alternatively, it could implement an Australian version of a JCM.

The Paris Agreement proposed a new measure to replace the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) (and Joint Implementation) at the end of the Protocol’s second compliance period in 2020. The Japanese government has developed the Joint Crediting Mechanism (JCM) with the inadequacies of the CDM in mind. The JCM, therefore, deserves close study. In a previous paper the author outlined the features of the JCM. This paper draws on interviews with government officials, consultants and corporate participants to assess the practical application of the JCM. It concludes that for the program to better achieve its full potential from an environmental perspective it would be preferable for JCM credits to be of value. Furthermore, although the JCM also has diplomatic and commercial mandates these ends are substantially achieved by the complementary funding program for JCM projects. Moves to better interline the two programs, with an emphasis on funding criteria that makes reference to a project’s cost of emissions abatement, should enhance the environmental effectiveness (of the two programs) provided priority is given to this criterion over other (diplomatic/commercial) criteria. The introduction of an emissions trading scheme in Australia in the future (or extension of the current safeguard mechanism) would be expected to provide a market for carbon credits generated from offset schemes. Given that the current Australian offset scheme is solely domestic focused a case could be made to also introduce at that time a JCM type scheme that awarded credits to Australian entities engaged in foreign joint ventures achieving low cost emissions reductions.

In 2005 the EU’s ETS became the first mandatory scheme to be implemented. The 2012 Australian ETS was based on the EU precedent and the plan, before the Australian ETS was repealed, had been to link the two regimes. The EU scheme suffered a serious setback early on when the market price for EU units collapsed below that considered necessary to motivate the intended emission reductions. During the last decade the EU’s institutions have struggled to settle upon solutions to rehabilitate the ETS but, eventually, during 2018, signs of a sustained price increase appeared. For Australia, and other jurisdictions, the EU experience illustrates some pitfalls to avoid when establishing an ETS and provides lessons for ETS design.

A review of the tax changes in the Australian Federal Budget May 2018 as they apply to individuals and SMEs.

The “technological revolution” is influencing almost all aspects of our lives. Certainly the law has not been immune from its influence. Legal practice in Australia is currently undergoing a major disruption. Tax law has been at the vanguard of this phenomenon. The massive amount of regulation and data that is a feature of tax practice rendered it an early candidate for technological intrusion. This paper explores the inroads by technology into Australian tax practice in the last two decades. While initial activities focused on enforcement and compliance, with the development of machine learning and artificial intelligent the age of the smart computer assistant has arrived. The first tax case to consider the implications of a “not so smart” computer has also had to be decided.

[Extract from presentation] Introduction • The growth of Islamic Finance • The Shariah • The prohibitions • The structures • The tax implications • The opportunity • The Australian response

The content of the ethical obligations attached to tax advice (“tax ethics”) may be in the process of undergoing a quantum change from that dominated by the interests of clients to reflecting a balancing with broader interests. It will be demonstrated that there is significant support for this change and, indeed, that there are numerous reasons why the profession should embrace a wider ethic in the provision of advice. From one perspective this debate as to the ethical approach that should be adopted by tax practitioners may only be part of a subterfuge adopted by the opposing parties in the tax collection arena. If one accepts the rule of law thesis that law is determinable then any discretionary scope for tax practitioners is largely diminished with an attendant decline in the significance of tax ethics.By contrast an interminable law thesis gives centre stage to the tax ethics debate. If, as is suggested, the impetus is away from a client centred ethos towards tax practitioners adopting a moral position them this presents numerous issues that need to be addressed. Firstly, what is meant by embracing a moral position and, in particular, what moral foundation is advice to be tested against? Secondly, how is the moral practitioner to guard against confusing motivations with after-the-fact justifications? Thirdly, inherent in the proposition that it is in the interests of society that taxpayers comply with the spirit of the law is the assumption that the law has been fashioned in the public interest. The Parliamentary process can be demonstrated to be a flawed and parochial process. Where does this leave the tax practitioner who is not satisfied that the spirit (or even meaning) of the law is in the public interest?This leads on to a fourth consideration. What is the role of the tax practitioner where they are of the opinion that the government will not spend all or part of the tax revenue in the public interest? Is tax advice that furthers a program of civil disobedience justified or even mandated?Finally, what are the ethical obligations of the tax administrator? If the taxpayer's advisers are required to frame their advice in the public interest then does a similar obligation rest on tax administrators and, if so, what are the implications for tax collection?

The rule of law imperative, so often espoused by industrialised nations, is under siege as tax systems attempt to interface with an ever increasingly complex and globally focused business environment. Compliance by taxpayers and enforcement by the tax administrator has become progressively problematic.Various policy responses have evolved. Attempts to rewrite and simplify taxation legislation have met with limited success. The development of tax intermediaries, an industry devoted to assisting taxpayers to comply has provided some relief. Novel approaches to tax administration have also featured.A particular of approach that has been adopted by a number of industrialised nations has been to move the tax administrator from a command and control posture to a more sophisticated and responsive form of regulation. The OECD has recently endorsed such an approach terming it the “enhanced relationship” model. For the last decade a derivation on this initiative has been championed in Australasia under the banner of “responsive regulation”. Pursuant to this model, the administrators’ approach reflects the posture adopted by the taxpayer. Thus, the focus is on extending assistance to compliant taxpayers and punishing recalcitrant taxpayers. It is thought that this model most effectively encourages voluntary compliance by taxpayers and thereby enhances the efficiency of tax administration.A feature of responsive regulation is for the tax administrator to form community partnerships with other stakeholders in the taxation system. Accordingly, tax administrators describe their relationship with intermediaries as collaborative or a partnership. An “enhanced relationship” in the OECD’s terms. This is in contrast to historical precedents where typically the relationship has been cast as adversarial.The notion of tax intermediaries, or more particularly tax practitioners, forming a partnership or enhanced relationship with tax administrator presents theoretical concerns. In particular, issues relating to conflicts of interest, lack of transparency, consistency in application and regulatory capture are conceivable. These concerns have been borne out by research in the Australasian environment. Whilst the partnership or enhanced relationship approach to tax administration may be worthy of consideration by other countries in the region the model demands further development and, especially in the Asian context, may need to cater for cultural nuances.

The approach to administering the taxation laws by the New Zealand Internal Revenue Department (“IRD”) is founded on the responsive regulation model. Pursuant to the model the IRD describes its relationship with the profession as collaborative or even a partnership. The model has been borrowed from the Australian initiatives. However there is evidence is that the partnership model has been very patchy in its application, both over time and depending upon the IRD operatives involved. Subjective attitudes and external influences appear to have a significant impact upon the nature of the relationship. This evidence suggests that the partnership model in both New Zealand, and Australia, may be appropriately viewed as dynamic, with the relationship molded more by the environment than by managerial design.

[Extract] Introduction *The growth of Islamic Finance *The Shariah *The prohibitions *The structures *The tax implications *The opportunity *The Australian response

In 1998, the OECD issued a report announcing an initiative to eradicate harmful tax practices world wide. Non-OECD states with preferential tax regimes were labelled tax havens and the focus of the report soon became these countries.The tax havens’ primary response has been to point to the absence of a level playing field. As a result, the OECD’s initiative evolved to focus on the need for tax regime transparency and international information exchange agreements.This placed the initiative in accord with other international initiatives directed to similar ends. Faced with overwhelming international pressure, all but five of the tax havens have committed to co-operate. The critical issue now is as to how the principles of transparency and information exchange will be embraced.This paper argues that a proper balance between the rights of nations and of taxpayers must be maintained. This proposition is illustrated by reference to the relationship between Australia and the tax haven Vanuatu. A way forward for these two countries that acknowledges the commercial value of the information sought by Australia and contains protections for taxpayers is outlined. This proposal could serve as a blueprint for the implementation of tax havens’ commitments to the OECD.

Global initiatives to reduce emissions can be categorised as either regulatory measures or measures that seek to place a price on carbon. Most jurisdictions employ a combination of the two, with pricing measures generally preferred by economists. Where carbon is priced, this is typically achieved by imposing a carbon tax and/or an emissions trading scheme (ETS).Australia introduced a nationwide ETS from 1 July 2012, with California (and Quebec) following suit from 1 January 2013. The Australian ETS was set to link with that of the European Union from 1 July 2014 and linkage with New Zealand was also being explored. Meanwhile, California and Quebec linked six months earlier. The first tentative steps towards a global carbon market seemed underway.However, the Australian Opposition party rallied against the ETS and, with its subsequent election to government, repealed the regime. The prime mechanism to achieve Australia’s emissions reductions commitment is now the emissions reduction fund (ERF). Under this scheme, the government holds “reverse auctions” whereby the cheapest emissions reduction proposals put to it by industry are funded. As a “safeguard” measure, large emitters are to remain subject to emissions caps with default (possibly) leading to fines where offsets cannot be sourced elsewhere. Thus, carbon pricing and (limited) trading will still feature under the revised Australian regime.The circumstances leading to the implementation and then demise of the Australian ETS, and its replacement with the ERF, are explored in this article. Both the former ETS and ERF will be compared with the Californian ETS, widely regarded as operating successfully since its commencement six months after Australia’s ill‑fated ETS. It will be observed that a focus on domestic emissions is a feature of both the Californian and new Australian regimes. While political expediency and, possibly, environmental integrity concerns might motivate this dislike of foreign credits, one effect is that emissions reductions are likely to come at a much higher cost and the regimes fail the opportunity to assist in curtailing developing world emissions. On the flip side, both regimes are then quarantined from the mistakes and market failures of the global market. With critics suggesting that the Australian ERF experiment may be short lived, there is a prospect that Australia might again embrace an ETS. This could serve as an opportunity to reorientate the focus on international linkage from Europe to California.

The Australian and Japanese Governments have both introduced a tax consolidation regime effective fiscal year 2002103. The two regimes have many similarities. In particular, they both mandate 100 per cent ownership as the threshold for consolidation, consolidation is voluntary but if elected all eligible companies must consolidate, and intra-group transactions are largely ignored. The regimes have been held out as reducing both tax liabilities and compliance costs, removing double taxation, enhancing corporate restructuring, and providing greater commercial flexibility and competitiveness. However, the Australian corporate sector remains cautious, primarily because of concerns over the compliance costs associated with the transition to the new regime and the potential loss of existing tax credits and losses. Whilst these transitional issues are less of a concern to Japanese companies, in the absence of existing rules permitting the transfer of tax attributes, a Japanese surtax of 2 per cent over the first two years of consolidation has to be weighed against the apparent benefits of the regime. A comparison of the two regimes also reveals a very different approach to the treatment on consolidation of inherent gains and losses.

Japanese culture and society harbours particular strengths and weaknesses. These are, in turn, reflected in its institutions, including its universities. The author is a frequent visitor to Japan and is currently the visiting professor in Australian cultural studies at Tokyo University. This paper reflects on the author's experience of Japanese universities from the perspective of someone with in excess of 20 years experience as an Australian academic. Whilst not purposively controversial some of the observations may be uncomfortable. Some may also be naive as the author does not profess to understand the inner workings of Japan's tertiary sector. However the objective is to highlight some aspects of the system that to an outsider are in need of critical reflection. The tertiary education system in Japan epitomises the cultural paradox: the challenge of transforming or internationalising conservative institutions steeped in tradition.

In 2010 the Japanese Government made substantial commitments to the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. In particular it proposed a 25% reduction on 1990 levels by 2020 and an 80% reduction by 2050. At the forefront of this policy was to be an additional (carbon) tax on fossil fuels, strategies to promote renewable energy (in particular a feed-in tariff) and an emissions trading scheme. Notoriously there was to be greater reliance on nuclear energy. Subsequent events conspired to derail these plans. The Fukushima power station disaster forced the Government to reconsider nuclear power. Continued global economic uncertainty, together with the damage to the economy caused by the March 2011 tsunami, resulted in the deferral of the introduction of the emissions trading scheme.Meanwhile on July 1, 2012 the Australian Government introduced a hybrid carbon tax/emissions trading scheme putting it at the cutting edge of climate change response using fiscal measures. However the path to the introduction of this regime was not easy and its future is not assured. Whilst Australia had been active in negotiating the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, and an early signatory, during the subsequent decade the Liberal coalition Government refused to embrace a price on carbon, the centerpiece of the Protocol, even questioning the science on climate change. With the election of a Labor Government in 2007 the Kyoto Protocol was promptly ratified and an emissions trading scheme proposed. However the proposal met neither the expectations of environmentalists nor industry and in 2010 it was shelved upon failing to pass through Parliament for a third time. Although it seemed that the impetus had been lost, with the toppling of a Prime Minister later that year and a Federal election resulting in Labor forming a coalition with the Greens, momentum again swung in favour of an emissions trading scheme.Meanwhile the Liberal coalition Opposition remains divided as to the approach it would adopt if it wins government in the elections scheduled for late 2013. Having dismissed one party leader for promoting an emissions trading scheme, the current policy of the party is that it would repeal the Government’s scheme and focus on emissions reduction strategies requiring other than a fiscal response. There may be political economy lessons for the rest of the world, including Japan, in how the carbon tax / emissions trading scheme was designed and implemented in Australia. This paper explores the developments in Australia. It is hoped that Japanese policy analysts might find the Australian experience informative.

The importance of tax intermediaries in the efficient administration of a tax system has been acknowledged in the OECD's "enhanced relationship" model. This paper reports on research conducted in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom focusing on the determinants of the relationship between the tax administrator and tax practitioners. It is hoped that the analysis will stimulate input from conference participants on the dynamics at play in their jurisdictions

Getting published is the name of the game but how to get started? Once up and running as an early career researcher you may seek to add another dimension to your research in the form of policy/jurisprudential analysis or empirical research. Both streams can take the legally trained scholar out of their comfort zone, arguably more so with empirical research involving surveys and statistical analysis. But there is an alternative form of empirical research utilising semi-structured interviews that can be both more flexible and insightful than the use of surveys. This paper canvasses the lessons for researchers drawn from the author's experience. In particular, it explores the semi-structured interview methodology focusing on issues associated with its implementation.

In considering how tax administrators should relate to tax intermediaries, one approach has been to move tax administrators from a command and control posture to a more sophisticated form of regulation, as recently endorsed by the OECD's "enhanced relationship" model. The tax administrators in Australia and New Zealand have recognized the significance of their relationship with the tax profession in seeking to maximize voluntary compliance. These tax administrators have espoused their relationship with the profession as being a partnership (the partnership model). This article explores the experiences of Australia and New Zealand with the partnership model.

[Extract] The deductibility of continuing expenses after the relevant business has ceased has given rise to a string of cases. Decisions such as AGC (Advances) Ltd v FC of T 75 ATC 4057 and Placer Pacific Pty Ltd (in liq) v FC of T 95 ATC 4459 have upheld a principle that the expenses remained deductible on the basis that the "occasion" of the outgoing was to be found in the prior business operations.

[Extract] Since the early 1980s the Government has manipulated the tax system to encourage the accumulation of funds in pension or superannuation funds. Initially the taxation regime was very favourable but the tax concessions have gradually been reduced. However the grandfathering of these concessions has created a highly complex tax regime. Superannuation support by employers is compulsory, currently to the extent of 8% of salary, but to be 9% from 1 July 2002. Contributions are often paid into large funds controlled by professional investment managers. However it is possible to structure a superannuation fund so that the members can manage the investment. Most commonly employers will establish a superannuation fund thereby enabling them more control over the investment. Naturally there are stringent prudential and preservation requirements.

The hierarchy of the Australian Tax Office (ATO) presents a picture of the ATO being in a partnership with the tax profession. It is suggested that the relationship is, or should be, one of co-operation with the aim to maximize voluntary compliance with the tax system by taxpayers. Such a model is in contrast to the traditional adversarial model and questions arise as to whether such a relationship is workable. The partnership model presents ethical conflicts, the possibility of regulatory capture and issues of transparency. In any event it is not clear whether the rhetoric of the ATO hierarchy is, in fact, implemented in practice. To test whether a partnership style relationship does exist between the ATO and the profession, the limits of the relationship and how it might be improved, the views of the profession and employees within the ATO need to be considered. With the prospect of an extended interview program a pilot program was conducted interviewing a sample of the profession. The experiences in conducting these interviews are instructive for establishing a methodology for any wider program. Furthermore, the observations of the, admittedly small and arguably unrepresentative, sample provided some evidence that the implementation of the partnership model remains problematic. In particular, observations were made to suggest that current structures within the ATO may inhibit the organisations ability to embrace, at all levels, a partnership style approach. Also, it might be that the profession does not share the same view as to its obligations within the partnership as does the ATO.

The increase in the revenues of Arab nations arising from the surge in world oil prices, together with the withdrawal of Arab investment from the United States, presents an opportunity for Australia to increase its share of Arab investment. But Islamic investors are expected to invest only in financial products and structures that comply with shariah law, which prohibits returns in the nature of interest. This article explores whether Australia's income tax laws should be amended to facilitate greater Arab investment in the country.