dc.contributor.author |
Cassidy, Julie |
en |
dc.coverage.spatial |
Adelaide, Australia |
en |
dc.date.accessioned |
2017-09-26T23:41:26Z |
en |
dc.date.issued |
2017-07-08 |
en |
dc.identifier.citation |
In Australasian Law Teachers Association 2017 Annual Conference. Adelaide, Australia. |
en |
dc.identifier.uri |
http://hdl.handle.net/2292/35791 |
en |
dc.description.abstract |
In New Zealand the disputes resolution regime for all taxes administered by Commissioner of Inland Revenue is contained in Pt IVA Tax Administration Act 1994 (‘TAA’). The current regime came into effect on 1 October 1996. It will be seen that these reforms dramatically turned the tax disputes process in New Zealand ‘on its head’. Under the previous regime, the key was that a tax dispute did not occur until after an assessment was issued by the CIR. It was only once an assessment was raised that the taxpayer could object. This had a number of flow on implications. It meant that the taxpayer had little input into the process that lead to the issuing of the assessment/amended assessment as there were no information sharing processes in place. It also meant there was a perverse incentive on both sides to withhold information until the last moment and effect “trial by ambush”. The introduction of a new regime was originally proposed in the Report of the Organisational Review of Inland Revenue Department (‘IRD’) in 1994. The Report noted that the “way disputes are resolved is critical to taxpayer perceptions of fairness and has wider impacts for the tax administration”: at [65]. It concluded that the “present disputes resolution process is deficient”: at [65]. The aim of the current regime is to promote an “all cards on the table” approach to disputes: SPS 11/05 at [6]. It dictates a series of document exchanges with strict time limits. Thus the dispute occurs before the assessment. This paper critically evaluates both the former and current approach to tax disputes in New Zealand. It concludes that while the identified flaws of the former regime were very real and the new regime has some provided certain benefits, there are nevertheless flaws in the new regime. |
en |
dc.relation.ispartof |
Special Topics in Law |
en |
dc.relation.ispartof |
Australasian Law Teachers Association 2017 Annual Conference |
en |
dc.rights |
Items in ResearchSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated. Previously published items are made available in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. |
en |
dc.rights.uri |
https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/docs/uoa-docs/rights.htm |
en |
dc.title |
"All cards on the table" or "Taxpayer burnout" |
en |
dc.type |
Presentation |
en |
dc.description.version |
VoR - Version of Record |
en |
pubs.author-url |
http://www.aomevents.com/alta2017/Program |
en |
pubs.finish-date |
2017-07-08 |
en |
pubs.start-date |
2017-07-05 |
en |
dc.rights.accessrights |
http://purl.org/eprint/accessRights/OpenAccess |
en |
pubs.subtype |
Conference Oral Presentation |
en |
pubs.elements-id |
637996 |
en |
pubs.org-id |
Business and Economics |
en |
pubs.org-id |
Commercial Law |
en |
pubs.record-created-at-source-date |
2017-07-19 |
en |