# JobKeeper payment: eligibility of sole traders without employees



## Jack Malarkey

1. On Monday 30 March 2020, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer foreshadowed the introduction of a wage subsidy known as the JobKeeper Payment: $130 billion JobKeeper payment to keep Australians in a job | Prime Minister of Australia.

2. Eligible businesses are to receive $1,500 per fortnight per employee for up to six months from the Australian Taxation Office as reimbursement of salary paid.

3. The payment is determined by a loss of turnover of 30% (50% if turnover exceeds $1 billion).

4. It is payable from 1 May 2020 but is to be backdated to 30 March 2020.

5. Although the focus of the JobKeeper payment is on businesses with employees, a Treasury fact sheet indicates that the self-employed with no employees may also be eligible. This is of essential importance to rideshare drivers who are sole traders without employees.

6. Here is the relevant part of the Treasury fact sheet:

Businesses without employees

Businesses without employees, such as the self-employed, can register their interest in applying for JobKeeper Payment via ato.gov.au from 30 March 2020.

Businesses without employees will need to provide an ABN for their business, nominate an individual to receive the payment and provide that individual's Tax File Number and provide a declaration as to recent business activity.

People who are self-employed will need to provide a monthly update to the ATO to declare their continued eligibility for the payments. Payment will be made monthly to the individual's bank account.

Further details for the self-employed will be provided on ato.gov.au: Home page.

(https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-03/Fact_sheet_Info_for_Employers_0.pdf)

7. The Treasury fact sheet also includes the following example:

Self-employed

Melissa is a sole trader running a florist. She does not have employees. Melissa's business has been in operation for several years. The economic downturn due to the Coronavirus has adversely affected Melissa's business, and she expects that her business turnover will fall by more than 30 per cent compared to a typical month in 2019.

Melissa will be able to apply for the JobKeeper Payment and would receive $1,500 per fortnight before tax, paid on a monthly basis.

8. This payment will require legislation but this is to be expedited.

9. For an overview of the proposed JobKeeper payment, see this brief by government relations firm Barton Deakin: https://bartondeakin.com/app/uploads/2020/03/300320-Third-Stimulus-Package-EDITED.pdf.


----------



## Immoralized

Jack Malarkey said:


> 1. On Monday 30 March 2020, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer foreshadowed the introduction of a wage subsidy known as the JobKeeper Payment: https://www.pm.gov.au/media/130-billion-jobkeeper-payment-keep-australians-job.
> 
> 2. Eligible businesses are to receive $1,500 per fortnight per employee from the Australian Taxation Office. Each business will then pay each eligible employee the $1,500.
> 
> 3. The payment is determined by a loss of turnover of 30% (50% if turnover exceeds $1 billion).
> 
> 4. It is payable from 1 May 2020 but is to be backdated to 30 March 2020.
> 
> 5. Although the focus of the JobKeeper payment is on businesses with employees, a Treasury fact sheet indicates that the self-employed with no employees may also be eligible. This is of essential importance to rideshare drivers who are sole traders without employees.
> 
> 6. Here is the relevant part of the Treasury fact sheet:
> 
> Businesses without employees
> 
> Businesses without employees, such as the self-employed, can register their interest in applying for JobKeeper Payment via ato.gov.au from 30 March 2020.
> 
> Businesses without employees will need to provide an ABN for their business, nominate an individual to receive the payment and provide that individual's Tax File Number and provide a declaration as to recent business activity.
> 
> People who are self-employed will need to provide a monthly update to the ATO to declare their continued eligibility for the payments. Payment will be made monthly to the individual's bank account.
> 
> Further details for the self-employed will be provided on ato.gov.au: https://www.ato.gov.au/.
> 
> (https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-03/Fact_sheet_Info_for_Employers_0.pdf)
> 
> 7. This payment will require legislation but this is to be expedited.
> 
> 8. For an overview of the proposed JobKeeper payment, see this brief by government relations firm Barton Deakin: https://bartondeakin.com/app/uploads/2020/03/300320-Third-Stimulus-Package-EDITED.pdf.


Good job old bumpa ✔ looking forward to the much needed $1500 relief payments.


----------



## Rudi Zarzoff

If you have a spouse and he/she has not lost wages you're rooted according to my accountant.

Happy to go through my life without dependence on Centrelink.


----------



## Sandhills

Nice work Jack... So much info and many here may not be able to read very well, like fraqtl...


----------



## Beepbeep41

Jack Malarkey said:


> 1. On Monday 30 March 2020, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer foreshadowed the introduction of a wage subsidy known as the JobKeeper Payment: https://www.pm.gov.au/media/130-billion-jobkeeper-payment-keep-australians-job.
> 
> 2. Eligible businesses are to receive $1,500 per fortnight per employee for up to six months from the Australian Taxation Office. Each business will then pay each eligible employee the $1,500.
> 
> 3. The payment is determined by a loss of turnover of 30% (50% if turnover exceeds $1 billion).
> 
> 4. It is payable from 1 May 2020 but is to be backdated to 30 March 2020.
> 
> 5. Although the focus of the JobKeeper payment is on businesses with employees, a Treasury fact sheet indicates that the self-employed with no employees may also be eligible. This is of essential importance to rideshare drivers who are sole traders without employees.
> 
> 6. Here is the relevant part of the Treasury fact sheet:
> 
> Businesses without employees
> 
> Businesses without employees, such as the self-employed, can register their interest in applying for JobKeeper Payment via ato.gov.au from 30 March 2020.
> 
> Businesses without employees will need to provide an ABN for their business, nominate an individual to receive the payment and provide that individual's Tax File Number and provide a declaration as to recent business activity.
> 
> People who are self-employed will need to provide a monthly update to the ATO to declare their continued eligibility for the payments. Payment will be made monthly to the individual's bank account.
> 
> Further details for the self-employed will be provided on ato.gov.au: https://www.ato.gov.au/.
> 
> (https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-03/Fact_sheet_Info_for_Employers_0.pdf)
> 
> 7. The Treasury fact sheet also includes the following example:
> 
> Self-employed
> 
> Melissa is a sole trader running a florist. She does not have employees. Melissa's business has been in operation for several years. The economic downturn due to the Coronavirus has adversely affected Melissa's business, and she expects that her business turnover will fall by more than 30 per cent compared to a typical month in 2019.
> 
> Melissa will be able to apply for the JobKeeper Payment and would receive $1,500 per fortnight before tax, paid on a monthly basis.
> 
> 8. This payment will require legislation but this is to be expedited.
> 
> 9. For an overview of the proposed JobKeeper payment, see this brief by government relations firm Barton Deakin: https://bartondeakin.com/app/uploads/2020/03/300320-Third-Stimulus-Package-EDITED.pdf.


so even if I was earning like earning $150 a week after expenses from Uber would I still be eligible for the $750?. Ubers my only income & my partner earns 55k a year


----------



## Who is John Galt?

Beepbeep41 said:


> so even if I was earning like earning $150 a week after expenses from Uber would I still be eligible for the $750?. Ubers my only income & my partner earns 55k a year


Perhaps rivers of gold are about to flow your way from Centrelink, or whatever their new name is.

.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Beepbeep41 said:


> so even if I was earning like earning $150 a week after expenses from Uber would I still be eligible for the $750?. Ubers my only income & my partner earns 55k a year


We'll need to wait for additional information to be sure but the information available so far suggests that you would be.

There is no indication that a spouse's income is relevant (unlike the position with the JobSeeker payment).

Apply and find out.The worst position you can be in is the same as if you don't apply.



Who is John Galt? said:


> Perhaps rivers of gold are about to flow your way from Centrelink, or whatever their new name is.
> 
> .


Services Australia (but it's the Australian Taxation Office that will be making the JobKeeper payments).


----------



## DEvok

So we can apply for $1500 please confirm to much contradiction information.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

DEvok said:


> So we can apply for $1500 please confirm to much contradiction information.


The available information would suggest we can provided we have had a downturn in turnover of more than 30%.


----------



## Sandhills

DEvok said:


> So we can apply for $1500 please confirm to much contradiction information.


Are you suggesting it has been Photoshopped Devok?:kiss:


----------



## Who is John Galt?

Jack Malarkey said:


> Services Australia.


Thanks, Jack. I like the name, connotations and also the subtle invitation that the name 'Services Australia' conjures up.

In looking at government benevolence and the taxpayer funded generosity of luxury accomodation for weary travellers, I'm thinking of a scheme whereby I may be able to trade 5☆ performance with Über for 5☆ accomodation in a luxury hotel room for myself and a friend.

If we were to head out on a fishing boat, preferably a little larger than a tinnie, and somehow get beyond the 12 nautical mile limit, get into international waters and then turn around and come home, it would seem, theoretically at least, that my friend and I should be locked up together for 14 days in 5☆ luxury courtesy of 'Service Australia'.

I think this idea has merit and invite others for their thoughts.

.


----------



## UberOka

Jack Malarkey said:


> 1. On Monday 30 March 2020, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer foreshadowed the introduction of a wage subsidy known as the JobKeeper Payment: https://www.pm.gov.au/media/130-billion-jobkeeper-payment-keep-australians-job.
> 
> 2. Eligible businesses are to receive $1,500 per fortnight per employee for up to six months from the Australian Taxation Office. Each business will then pay each eligible employee the $1,500.
> 
> 3. The payment is determined by a loss of turnover of 30% (50% if turnover exceeds $1 billion).
> 
> 4. It is payable from 1 May 2020 but is to be backdated to 30 March 2020.
> 
> 5. Although the focus of the JobKeeper payment is on businesses with employees, a Treasury fact sheet indicates that the self-employed with no employees may also be eligible. This is of essential importance to rideshare drivers who are sole traders without employees.
> 
> 6. Here is the relevant part of the Treasury fact sheet:
> 
> Businesses without employees
> 
> Businesses without employees, such as the self-employed, can register their interest in applying for JobKeeper Payment via ato.gov.au from 30 March 2020.
> 
> Businesses without employees will need to provide an ABN for their business, nominate an individual to receive the payment and provide that individual's Tax File Number and provide a declaration as to recent business activity.
> 
> People who are self-employed will need to provide a monthly update to the ATO to declare their continued eligibility for the payments. Payment will be made monthly to the individual's bank account.
> 
> Further details for the self-employed will be provided on ato.gov.au: https://www.ato.gov.au/.
> 
> (https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-03/Fact_sheet_Info_for_Employers_0.pdf)
> 
> 7. The Treasury fact sheet also includes the following example:
> 
> Self-employed
> 
> Melissa is a sole trader running a florist. She does not have employees. Melissa's business has been in operation for several years. The economic downturn due to the Coronavirus has adversely affected Melissa's business, and she expects that her business turnover will fall by more than 30 per cent compared to a typical month in 2019.
> 
> Melissa will be able to apply for the JobKeeper Payment and would receive $1,500 per fortnight before tax, paid on a monthly basis.
> 
> 8. This payment will require legislation but this is to be expedited.
> 
> 9. For an overview of the proposed JobKeeper payment, see this brief by government relations firm Barton Deakin: https://bartondeakin.com/app/uploads/2020/03/300320-Third-Stimulus-Package-EDITED.pdf.


Thanks Jack. So we get paid to sit on our posterior. Do people not realise that money being typed up on a pc or printed is the beginning of a long term global collapse. The money will become more and more worthless. Prices will go higher and higher. New World Order, One World Government. Our nightmares have come true.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

You register interest for the JobKeeper payment via https://www.ato.gov.au/Job-keeper-payment/.

The online registration-of-interest form is very simple. Make sure you have your ABN available when you complete it.

This is what the form looks like:










And this is the message you receive after submitting it online:


----------



## ghrdrd

Beepbeep41 said:


> so even if I was earning like earning $150 a week after expenses from Uber would I still be eligible for the $750?. Ubers my only income & my partner earns 55k a year


Wow, talk about not wearing the pants in the family.



UberOka said:


> Thanks Jack. So we get paid to sit on our posterior. Do people not realise that money being typed up on a pc or printed is the beginning of a long term global collapse. The money will become more and more worthless. Prices will go higher and higher. New World Order, One World Government. Our nightmares have come true.


You forgot to add, the world being butt fkd by China as they swoop in to buy assets the world over on the cheap.


----------



## Rizer

Rudi Zarzoff said:


> If you have a spouse and he/she has not lost wages you're rooted according to my accountant.
> 
> Happy to go through my life without dependence on Centrelink.


...ofcourse the threshold $79K of the partner comes into account, less the better... Perfect sense..


----------



## Wild Colonial Boy

I wonder if the payment is taxable...


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Wild Colonial Boy said:


> I wonder if the payment is taxable...


I fully expect that the payments will be assessable income for income tax purposes as the Prime Minister and Treasurer's media release refers to the amounts 'before tax'.

If the amounts were to be tax-free, they would have made a big thing of it.

I suspect the amounts will not be subject to GST as the nexus of the payment to the rendering of services (the making of a supply) would appear to be too remote. It would, however; be helpful if the Tax Office were in time to confirm this interpretation.



Rizer said:


> ...ofcourse the threshold $79K of the partner comes into account, less the better... Perfect sense..


This payment doesn't have an income test or an assets test either for the claimant or their partner. All that is needed is a drop in turnover of at least 30%.


----------



## Dead Ant

You forgot to add, the world being butt fkd by China as they swoop in to buy assets the world over on the cheap.
[/QUOTE]
Time to vote for Pauline


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Who is John Galt? said:


> Thanks, Jack. I like the name, connotations and also the subtle invitation that the name 'Services Australia' conjures up.
> 
> In looking at government benevolence and the taxpayer funded generosity of luxury accomodation for weary travellers, I'm thinking of a scheme whereby I may be able to trade 5☆ performance with Über for 5☆ accomodation in a luxury hotel room for myself and a friend.
> 
> If we were to head out on a fishing boat, preferably a little larger than a tinnie, and somehow get beyond the 12 nautical mile limit, get into international waters and then turn around and come home, it would seem, theoretically at least, that my friend and I should be locked up together for 14 days in 5☆ luxury courtesy of 'Service Australia'.
> 
> I think this idea has merit and invite others for their thoughts.
> 
> .


Great idea. I'm sure Chaser would like the film footage as you demand entry to quarantine. While you're at it, argue that they should quarantine you both for 40 days and 40 nights based on the etymology of the word 'quarantine':

*quarantine (n.)*

1660s, "period a ship suspected of carrying disease is kept in isolation," from Italian quaranta giorni, literally "space of forty days," from quaranta "forty," from Latin quadraginta"forty," which is related to quattuor "four" (from PIE root *kwetwer-"four").

So called from the Venetian policy (first enforced in 1377) of keeping ships from plague-stricken countries waiting off its port for 40 days to assure that no latent cases were aboard.

(https://www.etymonline.com/word/quarantine)


----------



## Who is John Galt?

ghrdrd said:


> You forgot to add, the world being butt fkd by China as they swoop in to buy assets the world over on the cheap.


Foreign investment review board thresholds have been reconfigured back to $0 in many instances. China certainly won't be swooping in to buy anything on the cheap in Australia.

.


----------



## ghrdrd

F


Who is John Galt? said:


> Foreign investment review board thresholds have been reconfigured back to $0 in many instances. China certainly won't be swooping in to buy anything on the cheap in Australia.
> 
> .


Finally a rational decision not thinking with wallet


----------



## Who is John Galt?

ghrdrd said:


> Finally a rational decision not thinking with wallet


I don't want to derail Jack's thread, but effective from 10.30pm AEST on Sunday 29 March 2020, the following is relevant:

*Key points:*

Every purchase application from foreign investors will now be scrutinised, regardless of value
The Government says the measures are necessary to safeguard the national interest
But it said the move was not an investment freeze



> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03...ctions-australian-assets-coronavirus/12101332


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Text just received from the Australian Taxation Office:


Thank you for registering for JobKeeper payment updates. We'll send you further updates as more information becomes available; there is no need to call us.

You can also view updates at ato.gov.au/jobkeeper

Australian Taxation Office


----------



## Boofhead

Jack Malarkey said:


> The available information would suggest we can provided we have had a downturn in turnover of more than 30%.


Thanks for all the info JM.

This bit is vague for now - it says turnover from a comparable period of at least a month from a year ago - or something - and it seems to say "expected" turnover from now?


----------



## Board

Income down 30% "Tick"
Income less than $750/so "Tick"

No Uber driver's ever make before the Cvirus based on a 38/hr wk $750

So, should be all pretty easy, it's the ATO though and not Centrelink. See how this goes.

They most likely will ban Rideshare at some stage.
Part time driver catches it, takes it home to family and then further more flys back to work.
Hmmm not good


----------



## GTO911

What did you put in business name?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

GTO911 said:


> What did you put in business name?


Typically, a rideshare driver would use their personal name as in 'Jack BeNimble Malarkey'.

You can check what business name they have listed for you by looking up the publicly accessible Australian Business Register (ABN lookup) at https://abr.business.gov.au/.

Use that name.



Boofhead said:


> Thanks for all the info JM.
> 
> This bit is vague for now - it says turnover from a comparable period of at least a month from a year ago - or something - and it seems to say "expected" turnover from now?


There will be greater clarity on these matters as more information becomes available.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Having regard to the information currently available, it would seem that there will still need to be a continuing business to receive the JobKeeper payments: it wouldn't be sufficient to have a former business.

Where does this place those drivers (like me) who have temporarily ceased rideshare driving but intend to resume once the COVID-19 pandemic is safely behind us?

My conclusion is that the business hasn't ceased but has paused: it is dormant (or in hibernation).

Some of the business activities have been paused having regard to the risks to health of COVID-19 and the ensuing collapse in demand for rideshare but there is every intention to resume the gamut of business activity as soon as one reasonably can.

To that end, I consider it important to make the relevant calculations and to continue to lodge business activity statements (BASs).

Earlier today, I lodged my activity statement for the quarter ended 31 March 2020. I showed sales as $0 and claimed GST credits of $29, which will result in a refund of $29.

Of course, I'll need to check all of this against the JobKeeper payment legislation (when available) and any ensuing administrative guidance from the Australian Taxation Office.

My thinking on this matter has been influenced by this Tax Office guidance on pausing or ceasing your business: https://www.ato.gov.au/Individuals/...singyourbusiness#Ceasingorpausingyourbusiness.


----------



## Wild Colonial Boy

I think it could be argued that, unless the ABN has been cancelled, a temporary halt in driving will only establish that the business has suffered a drop of 30% or greater compared to the same period last year. My argument would be that the business is still in existence if you have to lodge a BAS this month for the March quarter.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Wild Colonial Boy said:


> I think it could be argued that, unless the ABN has been cancelled, a temporary halt in driving will only establish that the business has suffered a drop of 30% or greater compared to the same period last year. My argument would be that the business is still in existence if you have to lodge a BAS this month for the March quarter.


Agreed.


----------



## Who is John Galt?

Jack Malarkey said:


> My conclusion is that the business *hasn't ceased but has paused: it is dormant (or in hibernation).*


Perhaps it is simply 'pining for the fjords' or 'merely stunned'. :smiles:

.


----------



## UberOka

Jack Malarkey said:


> You register interest for the JobKeeper payment via https://www.ato.gov.au/Job-keeper-payment/.
> 
> The online registration-of-interest form is very simple. Make sure you have your ABN available when you complete it.
> 
> This is what the form looks like:
> 
> View attachment 439974
> 
> 
> And this is the message you receive after submitting it online:
> 
> View attachment 439977





Who is John Galt? said:


> Foreign investment review board thresholds have been reconfigured back to $0 in many instances. China certainly won't be swooping in to buy anything on the cheap in Australia.
> 
> .


Thankyou very much Jack. As some of us are still doing a bit of ridesharing while it's dead, we declare this before claiming our Centrelink payments. Do you declare the full amount in that 2 week period or do you deduct the gst amount and expenses. Thanks again.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

UberOka said:


> Thankyou very much Jack. As some of us are still doing a bit of ridesharing while it's dead, we declare this before claiming our Centrelink payments. Do you declare the full amount in that 2 week period or do you deduct the gst amount and expenses. Thanks again.


Sorry, @UberOka, I don't know about the Centrelink requirements.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

I understand that Parliament (quorums only) will sit on Wednesday 8 April 2020 to enact the JobKeeper payment legislation.


----------



## UberOka

Thanks. Canberra, hub of political PAEDOPHILES. As their masters, Washington, district of paedo criminals. Australia is a corporation of DC. Hence, the Australian government is counterfeit, as its territories and laws. We are being deluded.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

A close reading of the Government documents has led me to infer that the extension to businesses without employees was made very late in the accelerated decision-making.

The Prime Minister and the Treasurer's media release assumes throughout that the eligible businesses have employees.

(https://www.pm.gov.au/media/130-billion-jobkeeper-payment-keep-australians-job)

It's only in a Treasury fact sheet that it's apparent that businesses without employees are also eligible.

(https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-03/Fact_sheet_Info_for_Employers_0.pdf)

The relevant paragraph and its supporting example (the sole trader florist without employees) were clearly added after the rest of the document had been completed.

There was clearly no time to adjust the documents fully to allow for the very late change in policy.

There was also not enough time to change the wording of the Australian Taxation Office registration of interest form (see below).

I suspect the very late change in policy came about because the decision-makers only then focused on the fact that there are many businesses that employ only the principal of the business via a company structure and that it would be unfair to make the payments to these companies but not to the self employed without employees.

Tax Office registration of interest form. Note the reference to employers:









(https://www.ato.gov.au/Job-keeper-payment/)


----------



## Wild Colonial Boy

UberOka said:


> Thanks. Canberra, hub of political PAEDOPHILES. As their masters, Washington, district of paedo criminals. Australia is a corporation of DC. Hence, the Australian government is counterfeit, as its territories and laws. We are being deluded.


Mate. This is not the right forum to spray these kinds of deluded opinions. I suggest you put these on the forum of the Communist Party or at east the Greens.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

In-app advice received from Uber by drivers on Wednesday 1 April 2020:


----------



## ghrdrd

UberOka said:


> Thanks. Canberra, hub of political PAEDOPHILES. As their masters, Washington, district of paedo criminals. Australia is a corporation of DC. Hence, the Australian government is counterfeit, as its territories and laws. We are being deluded.


Mighty big words for a greenhorn.
The question is, what are you going to do about it?
My guess - absolutely nothing.


----------



## Wild Colonial Boy

ghrdrd said:


> Mighty big words for a greenhorn.
> The question is, what are you going to do about it?
> My guess - absolutely nothing.


He'll probably start a one man revolution. What's that song again? On a road to nowhere...


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Business Insider Australia

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/uber-wage-subsidy-jobkeeper-2020-4
*Uber sent an email to its Australian drivers recommending they apply for the federal government's new JobKeeper wage subsidy*








JAMES HENNESSY
APR 1, 2020


Uber has emailed its Australian drivers recommending they apply for the federal government's JobKeeper wage subsidy, if they are eligible.
The JobKeeper payment, which is available to sole traders if they have taken a hit to their income due to the coronavirus, is $1,500 per fortnight.
A spokesperson for Uber told Business Insider Australia that drivers are still entitled to apply for the company's COVID-19 compensation scheme if they are infected with the coronavirus or instructed to self-isolate.

Uber has contacted its Australian drivers to encourage them to apply for the federal government's recently announced JobKeeper wage subsidy.

In an email, seen by Business Insider Australia, Uber acknowledged that recent restrictions on movement to prevent the spread of the coronavirus have had a "particularly tough impact" on drivers, as they have led to significantly reduced demand.

"The Australian government is introducing a new payment for businesses and self-employed workers impacted by the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak - the JobKeeper payment," the email reads.

"You may be eligible to claim $1,500 a fortnight for up to 6 months under the new scheme."

The email contains a link to the Australian Tax Office website for drivers to register their interest in receiving the JobKeeper payment.

The JobKeeper wage subsidy, which was announced on Monday, is a $1,500 fortnightly payment from the government to Australian businesses. It is intended to keep Australians on payrolls through the coronavirus downturn, which has had a devastating impact on a variety of sectors.

While it is intended to prevent employers standing down or laying off their employees due to the coronavirus, it is also available to sole traders - as long as they can prove they have taken a 30% hit to turnover. Uber drivers are sole traders who work with the company as contractors, and are thus eligible.

In March, Uber announced its own coronavirus compensation scheme, agreeing to pay drivers for two weeks if they are diagnosed with COVID-19 or instructed to self-isolate by a health authority.

A spokesperson for Uber confirmed to Business Insider Australia the above scheme still applies in Australia regardless of whether a driver has applied for the JobKeeper payment or not.

Other rideshare platforms operating in Australia have also announced compensation schemes for drivers through the COVID-19 pandemic.

In March, DiDi announced it would pay a lump sum to drivers who had either contracted COVID-19 or been instructed to self-isolate.

"Driver-partners who have a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 will be paid a one-off payment of an amount equal to their net earnings from the DiDi Driver app up to the past 28 days, from the date they were last online," the company wrote on its blog.

A spokesperson for DiDi confirmed to Business Insider Australia that the above scheme was still active, as well as a reduction of DiDi's service fee to 5%.

Ola also announced a compensation scheme of up to 14 days for drivers who were either infected with COVID-19 or instructed to self-isolate.

However, Ola stipulated on its blog that its 'Driver Relief Fund' was only available to partners who "are not able to receive or participate in any financial assistance program offered by the Australian Federal or State or Territory governments" - which would preclude those who apply for the JobKeeper payment.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Ola sent the following email to drivers on Thursday 2 April 2020 at 5.35 pm:

COVID-19: Ways to boost your business - JobKeeper Payment



Drive with us and receive JobKeeper benefits​ 


​
Hi Jack,​We understand that rider demand has dropped due to the tightened restrictions on our community, and we want to thank you for your continued support during these trying times.​We are working hard to find new ways to boost your businesses, including packaged deliveries which we will keep you updated on.​In the meantime, the Government has announced a JobKeeper Payment for businesses, including sole traders, significantly impacted by COVID-19. This payment is to help with paying your wages.​*You can still continue to drive with us and claim the JobKeeper Payment of $1,500 a fortnight if you are eligible.*​You can register your interest in the JobKeeper Payment via the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) website from 30 March 2020. Please note that if you are self-employed, you will need to provide your ABN.​
​
Find Out More​Register Your Interest​
​
Thanks,​Team Ola​


----------



## Wild Colonial Boy

The concern for our welfare is overwhelming. I’ve got tears in my eyes. Mind you, I’ve already registered my eligibility for the JobKeeper payments.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

What if you have been carrying on the business for less than one year?

See the relevant information in Business.gov.au:

To establish that a business has faced either a 30 (or 50) per cent fall in their turnover, most businesses would be expected to establish that their turnover has fallen in the relevant month or three months (depending on the natural activity statement reporting period of that business) relative to their turnover a year earlier.

Where a business was not in operation a year earlier, or where their turnover a year earlier was not representative of their usual or average turnover, (e.g. because there was a large interim acquisition, they were newly established or their turnover is typically highly variable) the Tax Commissioner will have discretion to consider additional information that the business can provide to establish that they have been significantly affected by the impacts of the Coronavirus.

The Tax Commissioner will also have discretion to set out alternative tests that would establish eligibility in specific circumstances (e.g. eligibility may be established as soon as a business has ceased or significantly curtailed its operations).

There will be some tolerance where employers, in good faith, estimate a greater than 30 (or 50) per cent fall in turnover but actually experience a slightly smaller fall.

(https://www.business.gov.au/risk-ma...on-and-support-for-business/jobkeeper-payment)


----------



## Boofhead

^^^

Thanks for the info Jack 👍


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Useful overview by DriveTax of the application of the JobKeeper and JobSeeker payments to rideshare drivers: https://www.drivetax.com.au/uber-covid-19/.

They will be updating the overview as more information becomes available.

The DriveTax overview includes the following:

'To answer a frequently asked question, if you drive for multiple companies (Uber, DiDi, Ola etc), they are added together for the purposes of the 30% test. This is because as a sole-trader you do not have 'jobs', you are running a business, so all of your rideshare and food delivery income forms part of your one business under your one ABN.

...

'Note that the JobKeeper Payment is taxable income just the same as your Uber income was. The ATO will not withhold any tax from the payments they send you, so you should put aside some savings for your end of year tax bill if necessary, just as you normally would.

'Also note that the JobKeeper Payment is considered income, so it will push you over the threshold for JobSeeker Payment. In other words you can only claim one or the other. If you're eligible for both, the JobKeeper Payment will put the most money in your pocket'.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

I have asked the Australian Taxation Office for a private ruling on whetherJobKeeper payments received by a sole trader rideshare driver without employees are subject to GST.

I will report back when I receive a reply.

Here is the full text of my private ruling request:

REQUEST FOR PRIVATE RULING: GST TREATMENT OF JOBKEEPER PAYMENT

1. I am a rideshare driver using the Uber app. I am a sole trader without employees.

2. I expect to be eligible for the JobKeeper payment.

3. Would you please advise (in the form of a private ruling) whether any JobKeeper payments that I receive are subject to GST.

(Jack MALARKEY)


----------



## Boofhead

Be nice to know if being on JobKeeper will allow you to access $10k super - given that JobKeeper may not even go the full six months JobSeeker may be a better alternative?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Boofhead said:


> Be nice to know if being on JobKeeper will allow you to access $10k super - given that JobKeeper may not even go the full six months JobSeeker may be a better alternative?


I'm not aware of any reason that receiving the JobKeeper payment would prevent you from having early access to superannuation under the new arrangements.

DriveTax has some excellent analysis on the comparison between the JobKeeper and JobSeeker payments: https://www.drivetax.com.au/uber-covid-19/.



Jack Malarkey said:


> I have asked the Australian Taxation Office for a private ruling on whetherJobKeeper payments received by a sole trader rideshare driver without employees are subject to GST.
> 
> I will report back when I receive a reply.
> 
> Here is the full text of my private ruling request:
> 
> REQUEST FOR PRIVATE RULING: GST TREATMENT OF JOBKEEPER PAYMENT
> 
> 1. I am a rideshare driver using the Uber app. I am a sole trader without employees.
> 
> 2. I expect to be eligible for the JobKeeper payment.
> 
> 3. Would you please advise (in the form of a private ruling) whether any JobKeeper payments that I receive are subject to GST.
> 
> (Jack MALARKEY)


My own thinking on the GST issue is that
the JobKeeper payment would not be subject to GST as the nexus between the receipt of the payment and the rendering of a specific service (the making of a supply) would be too remote.

Whether or not the payments are subject to GST would make a difference of almost $1,650 for a driver receiving the payments for the full six months.

DriveTax now relevantly comments:

'GST on the JobSeeker Payment - the government have not yet specified whether GST be payable upon receiving the JobSeeker Payment. However based on general GST legislation I expect that GST will not apply because there is not a sufficient connection between receiving the payment and supplying a service. I'll update once this is confirmed'.

(https://www.drivetax.com.au/uber-covid-19/)


----------



## frank.grimes

Board said:


> Income less than $750/so "Tick"


What is the relevance of income being less than $750/week? Have i missed something? Only requirement I've read about is the 30% drop in turnover.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

frank.grimes said:


> What is the relevance of income being less than $750/week? Have i missed something? Only requirement I've read about is the 30% drop in turnover.


Irrelevant.


----------



## flinchy

i'm hoping we get clarification on this soon

i'm down 30-40% on a month or two ago (basically, the last 9 months were really consistent til this downturn), but i'm actually similar or even 'up' on 12 months ago as i took some time off in Q1+2 2019/ was lazy.

like... what if i was a sparky/chippy/plumber who started a business in jan 2019,all businesses start slow

and they've grown it so even though they're seen a 50% drop from Q1 to Q2 2020, they're up 300% from Q1/2 2019? from what they're said so far, that business wouldn't be eligible even though they've taken a huge hit.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

flinchy said:


> i'm hoping we get clarification on this soon
> 
> i'm down 30-40% on a month or two ago (basically, the last 9 months were really consistent til this downturn), but i'm actually similar or even 'up' on 12 months ago as i took some time off in Q1+2 2019/ was lazy.
> 
> like... what if i was a sparky/chippy/plumber who started a business in jan 2019,all businesses start slow
> 
> and they've grown it so even though they're seen a 50% drop from Q1 to Q2 2020, they're up 300% from Q1/2 2019? from what they're said so far, that business wouldn't be eligible even though they've taken a huge hit.


@flinchy, the legislation will confer on the Commissioner of Taxation (ie, the Australian Taxation Office) a significant discretion to recognise additional cases of businesses having suffered a drop in turnover of at least 30% because of the COVID-19 crisis.

Your situation may well be one that attracts the Tax Office to exercise its discretion in your favour.

The relevant Bill (together with its accompanying explanatory memorandum) is expected to become publicly available on Wednesday 8 April 2020 and to become law that same day.


----------



## flinchy

Jack Malarkey said:


> @flinchy, the legislation will confer on the Commissioner of Taxation (ie, the Australian Taxation Office) a significant discretion to recognise additional cases of businesses having suffered a drop in turnover of at least 30% because of the COVID-19 crisis.
> 
> Your situation may well be one that attracts the Tax Office to exercise its discretion in your favour.
> 
> The relevant Bill (together with its accompanying explanatory memorandum) is expected to become publicly available on Wednesday 8 April 2020 and to become law that same day.


As long as the requirements are made clear soon, it'll be easy to tell how to be eligible, who, etc.

Just annoying not knowing the specifics


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Another good website from which to obtain an overview of the various measures is https://www.australia.gov.au/.

Also:

Stay informed. Download the official government "Coronavirus Australia" app in the Apple App Store or Google Play, or join our WhatsApp channel on iOS or Android.


----------



## GAVN

Jack Malarkey said:


> 1. On Monday 30 March 2020, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer foreshadowed the introduction of a wage subsidy known as the JobKeeper Payment: https://www.pm.gov.au/media/130-billion-jobkeeper-payment-keep-australians-job.
> 
> 2. Eligible businesses are to receive $1,500 per fortnight per employee for up to six months from the Australian Taxation Office. Each business will then pay each eligible employee the $1,500.
> 
> 3. The payment is determined by a loss of turnover of 30% (50% if turnover exceeds $1 billion).
> 
> 4. It is payable from 1 May 2020 but is to be backdated to 30 March 2020.
> 
> 5. Although the focus of the JobKeeper payment is on businesses with employees, a Treasury fact sheet indicates that the self-employed with no employees may also be eligible. This is of essential importance to rideshare drivers who are sole traders without employees.
> 
> 6. Here is the relevant part of the Treasury fact sheet:
> 
> Businesses without employees
> 
> Businesses without employees, such as the self-employed, can register their interest in applying for JobKeeper Payment via ato.gov.au from 30 March 2020.
> 
> Businesses without employees will need to provide an ABN for their business, nominate an individual to receive the payment and provide that individual's Tax File Number and provide a declaration as to recent business activity.
> 
> People who are self-employed will need to provide a monthly update to the ATO to declare their continued eligibility for the payments. Payment will be made monthly to the individual's bank account.
> 
> Further details for the self-employed will be provided on ato.gov.au: https://www.ato.gov.au/.
> 
> (https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-03/Fact_sheet_Info_for_Employers_0.pdf)
> 
> 7. The Treasury fact sheet also includes the following example:
> 
> Self-employed
> 
> Melissa is a sole trader running a florist. She does not have employees. Melissa's business has been in operation for several years. The economic downturn due to the Coronavirus has adversely affected Melissa's business, and she expects that her business turnover will fall by more than 30 per cent compared to a typical month in 2019.
> 
> Melissa will be able to apply for the JobKeeper Payment and would receive $1,500 per fortnight before tax, paid on a monthly basis.
> 
> 8. This payment will require legislation but this is to be expedited.
> 
> 9. For an overview of the proposed JobKeeper payment, see this brief by government relations firm Barton Deakin: https://bartondeakin.com/app/uploads/2020/03/300320-Third-Stimulus-Package-EDITED.pdf.


Thanks a lot, now we've got all details, that's useful


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Attorney-General, Christian Porter:


> "No matter how late we have to sit, the change will be happening next Wednesday [8 April 2020]. Six million Australian jobs depend on it."


Mr Porter said the Government was working to ensure the legislation was not open to rorting and to make sure the JobKeeper payments went to businesses and employees genuinely disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

He conceded the Government was not yet clear about how the wage subsidy would apply to casual workers.

"We're working on that and listening and so when you see the final draft you will see we are trying to be as inclusive and reasonable as possible."

(https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2020...keeper-government-access/12123232?pfmredir=sm)

Treasurer, Josh Frydenberg:

5 April 2020

*Making it easier for charities to access JobKeeper*

Charities that are registered with the national regulator will be eligible for the Morrison Government's $130 billion JobKeeper Payment if they have suffered a 15 per cent decline in turnover as a result of the coronavirus.

Legislation to be introduced into the Parliament this week will include a concessional test for ACNC registered charities given the benefit they provide to the Australian community.

...

(https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/m...s/making-it-easier-charities-access-jobkeeper)


----------



## Still Standing

Have had no reply or correspondence of any kind since registering intent to claim .. jobkeeper allowance .. a full time Rideshare driver , earned $120 last Mon to Mon week for 25 hrs online .
Just how are we supposed to exist ?
Knew the announcement was just PR .. some Rideshare drivers have capital finance debts of over $30000 to $ 50000 their income has been wiped out due to shutdown imposed by govt.
Yet we cannot get even a reply weeks later.
My income last year was $1100 gross .
This year $120 Uber and Didi.
Whilst welfare army sit at home .. those who want to work receive zero .
Fair go?
Absolute crap .
Have applied like many others for these so called thousands of jobs at Coles and Woolies etc .
Not one reply .
Apparently the international students and backpackers are more of a priority .. there are tens of thousands of sole traders , casuals .. out of work in a blink of the eye.
People who were working one month ago .. people who haven’t even received a phone call back from ATO or Centrelink .
The announcement on TV was it just snake oil spin?


----------



## Wild Colonial Boy

I registered and received a reply basically saying that the ATO will be in touch. I’m sure that others also have had a reply. It takes a couple of days, and I can imagine that this might have stretched out with more and more applying. If you’re sure your application has gone through, sit tight, if you’re not sure, apply again.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Still Standing said:


> Have had no reply or correspondence of any kind since registering intent to claim .. jobkeeper allowance .. a full time Rideshare driver , earned $120 last Mon to Mon week for 25 hrs online .
> Just how are we supposed to exist ?
> Knew the announcement was just PR .. some Rideshare drivers have capital finance debts of over $30000 to $ 50000 their income has been wiped out due to shutdown imposed by govt.
> Yet we cannot get even a reply weeks later.
> My income last year was $1100 gross .
> This year $120 Uber and Didi.
> Whilst welfare army sit at home .. those who want to work receive zero .
> Fair go?
> Absolute crap .
> Have applied like many others for these so called thousands of jobs at Coles and Woolies etc .
> Not one reply .
> Apparently the international students and backpackers are more of a priority .. there are tens of thousands of sole traders , casuals .. out of work in a blink of the eye.
> People who were working one month ago .. people who haven't even received a phone call back from ATO or Centrelink .
> The announcement on TV was it just snake oil spin?


They're still finalising the legislation for the JobKeeper payment and the associated administrative arrangements. These are both massive tasks.

Once the legislation becomes law on Wednesday 8 April 2020 (not far off now), I'm confident things will happen promptly with payments in the first week of May backdated to 30 March 2020 (the date of announcement).


----------



## Still Standing

Yes but many inc me have not received any instructions on what information , documents we need... is it reasonable to get on TV and promise income compensation for the imposed shutdown of the western world .. and then leave hundreds of thousands of people with rent .. finance , credit card, food bills living on promises not fulfilled ?
I would rather work for $750 .. not sit at home like a whimpering pooch .. but Iam earning less than $2 per hour after fuel.
My partner is working her guts out in ages Care .. and is facing eviction as we need two incomes to survive .
Snake oil salesmen .. fact.


----------



## Wild Colonial Boy

Mate, relax. There is a moratorium on evictions. If your landlord tries to evict you, he is in deep do-do, potentially leaving himself open for a claim by you for the cost of alternative accommodation and any other damage or loss you may have sustained. Speak to your local chamber magistrate, found in your local courthouse, for advice.


----------



## Immoralized

Still Standing said:


> Yes but many inc me have not received any instructions on what information , documents we need... is it reasonable to get on TV and promise income compensation for the imposed shutdown of the western world .. and then leave hundreds of thousands of people with rent .. finance , credit card, food bills living on promises not fulfilled ?
> I would rather work for $750 .. not sit at home like a whimpering pooch .. but Iam earning less than $2 per hour after fuel.
> My partner is working her guts out in ages Care .. and is facing eviction as we need two incomes to survive .
> Snake oil salesmen .. fact.


They are not selling you on anything and you are not buying a product. They are giving you money if you are eligible for it. If you are then you'll get paid sometime in May but if you are not then you won't get a cent. You can't rush the government they work at their own pace.

They have Jobseeker as well and you can go ahead and apply for that through centerlink and if you really need $$$ for an emergency centerlink can give you an emergency loan interest free.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Wild Colonial Boy said:


> Mate, relax. There is a moratorium on evictions. If your landlord tries to evict you, he is in deep do-do, potentially leaving himself open for a claim by you for the cost of alternative accommodation and any other damage or loss you may have sustained. Speak to your local chamber magistrate, found in your local courthouse, for advice.


Another possible source of advice about evictions is the Tenants' Union: https://www.tenants.org.au/tu.


----------



## flinchy

Still Standing said:


> Have had no reply or correspondence of any kind since registering intent to claim .. jobkeeper allowance .. a full time Rideshare driver , earned $120 last Mon to Mon week for 25 hrs online .
> Just how are we supposed to exist ?
> Knew the announcement was just PR .. some Rideshare drivers have capital finance debts of over $30000 to $ 50000 their income has been wiped out due to shutdown imposed by govt.
> Yet we cannot get even a reply weeks later.
> My income last year was $1100 gross .
> This year $120 Uber and Didi.
> Whilst welfare army sit at home .. those who want to work receive zero .
> Fair go?
> Absolute crap .
> Have applied like many others for these so called thousands of jobs at Coles and Woolies etc .
> Not one reply .
> Apparently the international students and backpackers are more of a priority .. there are tens of thousands of sole traders , casuals .. out of work in a blink of the eye.
> People who were working one month ago .. people who haven't even received a phone call back from ATO or Centrelink .
> The announcement on TV was it just snake oil spin?


which city is it that quiet in?

in brisbane most drivers have quit, so the money is still.. reasonable. it's gone down a lot, but still worth going out.

edit: you seem to be in brisbane? come drive north side.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> Another possible source of advice about evictions is the Tenants' Union: https://www.tenants.org.au/tu.





flinchy said:


> you seem to be in brisbane? come drive north side.


Here's a link for Tenants Queensland (re advice on evictions): https://tenantsqld.org.au/.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Treasury has released a fact sheet entitled 'Support for Sole Traders' (last updated on Sunday 5 April 2020) that incorporates information about the JobKeeper payment:

https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-04/Fact_sheet-Support_for_sole_traders.pdf
There is some limited new information but it mainly collates the existing information in the one document.* (I have bolded below what I understand to be new information.)*

Here's the relevant part of the fact sheet:

INCOME SUPPORT FOR SOLE TRADERS

A sole trader is a business structure where the individual owner is legally responsible for all aspects of the business, including any debts and losses and day-to-day business decisions.

A sole trader may or may not employ other people in their business.

Sole traders may be eligible to receive the JobKeeper Payment if their turnover has fallen or will likely fall by 30 per cent or more, assuming they have a turnover of less than $1 billion.

Following registration by the eligible business, the Government will provide $1,500 per fortnight per eligible employee for a maximum of 6 months. This will support the income of sole traders and maintain connection with their employees.

To support self-employed people, eligible businesses will be able to nominate one eligible person (such as an owner) to receive the JobKeeper Payment. *For businesses with employees, this is in addition to receiving the JobKeeper Payment for any eligible employees.*

The Government is also temporarily expanding the eligibility criteria for the JobSeeker Payment to support sole traders if their income is negatively affected by the economic impact of the Coronavirus.

For example, as a member of a couple you could receive up to $1,060.80 per fortnight through the JobSeeker Payment and Coronavirus supplement, although the precise amount will depend on the amount of income you and your partner continue to earn.

Receiving the JobSeeker Payment may also make you eligible for other Government payments like Rent Assistance and the Energy Supplement.

However, if you receive the JobKeeper Payment, this will affect your eligibility for payments from Services Australia as you must report your JobKeeper Payment as income.

Eligibility for JobKeeper Payment

Sole traders will be eligible for the JobKeeper Payment if, at the time of applying, they:

• estimate their business turnover has or will fall by 30 per cent or more (assuming their turnover is less than $1 billion);

• *had an ABN on or before 12 March 2020, and

either had an amount included in their assessable income for the 2018-19 year and it was included in their income tax return lodged on or before 12 March 2020 (or such later time as allowed by the Commissioner),

or

made a supply during the period 1 July 2018 to 12 March 2020 and provided this information to the Commissioner on or before 12 March 2020 (or such later time as allowed by the Commissioner);

• were actively engaged in the business;*

• are not entitled to another JobKeeper
Payment (either a nominated business participant of another business or as an eligible employee);

• were aged at least 16 years of age as at 1 March 2020;

• were an resident for Australian tax purposes on 1 March 2020; and

• were an Australian citizen, the holder of a permanent visa, or a Special Category (Subclass 444) Visa Holder at 1 March 2020.

To establish that a business has faced or is likely to face a 30 per cent or more fall in turnover, most would be expected to establish that their turnover has fallen or will likely fall in the relevant month or quarter (depending on their Business Activity Statement reporting period) relative to their turnover in a corresponding period a year earlier.

Turnover is calculated as it is for GST purposes, and is reported on Business Activity Statements. It includes all taxable supplies and all GST free supplies but not input taxed supplies.

Where a business was not in operation a year earlier, or where their turnover a year earlier was not representative of their usual or average turnover, (for example, because there was a large interim acquisition, they were newly established, were scaling up, or their turnover is typically highly variable), the Tax Commissioner will have discretion to consider additional information that the business can provide to establish that they have been adversely affected by the impacts of the Coronavirus. Businesses that are in liquidation are not eligible for this payment.

The Tax Commissioner will also have discretion to set out alternative tests that would establish eligibility in specific circumstances (for example, eligibility may be established as soon as a business ceases or significantly curtails its operations).

There will be some tolerance where employers, in good faith, estimate a 30 per cent or more or 50 per cent or more fall in turnover but actually experience a slightly smaller fall.

*[Bolding added by Jack Malarkey to identify relevant new information]*


----------



## Elatte

Jack Malarkey said:


> Eligibility for JobKeeper Payment
> 
> made a supply during the period 1 July 2018 to 12 March 2020 and provided this information to the Commissioner on or before 12 March 2020 (or such later time as allowed by the Commissioner);


Can you please clarify what "made a supply" means? Sorry if it's a dumb question &#128533;


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Elatte said:


> Can you please clarify what "made a supply" means? Sorry if it's a dumb question &#128533;


Essentially provided a service or goods. It's a GST term.


----------



## Elatte

Jack Malarkey said:


> Essentially provided a service or goods. It's a GST term.


So if I haven't lodged my 18-19 tax yet as it's not due til May, will is still be eligible for job keeper as I've been lodging my BAS every quarter?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Elatte said:


> So if I haven't lodged my 18-19 tax yet as it's not due til May, will is still be eligible for job keeper as I've been lodging my BAS every quarter?


I believe so (based on the information in the fact sheet) but it may be prudent to lodge your 2018-19 income tax return reasonably soon.


----------



## Elatte

Jack Malarkey said:


> I believe so (based on the information in the fact sheet) but it may be prudent to lodge your 2018-19 income tax return reasonably soon.


Ok, noted. Thanks for your help.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The relevant Bill and its explanatory memorandum are now before Parliament:

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar...slation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6533









Bill: https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/bills/r6533_first-reps/toc_pdf/20053b01.pdf;fileType=application/pdf: see Schedule 2

Explanatory memorandum:
https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r6533_ems_1daae531-9b3a-493f-8596-23432c143fb3/upload_pdf/735865.pdf;fileType=application/pdf. See chapter 2.









(as at 12.30 pm Canberra time, Wednesday 8 April 2020)

No. 2 Bill has consequential amendments: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar...slation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6535.

I'm still coming to grips with the legislation but it appears that the eligibility rules will in fact be made by the Treasurer as rules that are legislative instruments (delegated legislation).


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Another issue of interest (at least to me!) is whether the JobKeeper payments as paid to a rideshare driver qualify for the small business income tax offset.

This will depend on whether the payments for income tax purposes count as gross business income from which net business income is calculated or whether the payments are included separately in the income tax return.

The offset provides a tax discount of 8% on net small business income in the 2019-20 income year and of 13% in the 2020-21 income year. The maximum tax reduction in any one income year is $1,000.

For more information about the offset, see:








Small business income tax offset


The small business income tax offset can reduce the tax on your small business income by up to $1,000 each year.




www.ato.gov.au




.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

I have now requested a private ruling from the Australian Taxation Office on the eligibility of the JobKeeper payment for the small business income tax offset and will report back.

The full text of my private ruling request is below:

REQUEST FOR PRIVATE RULING: ELIGIBILITY OF THE JOBKEEPER PAYMENT FOR THE SMALL BUSINESS INCOME TAX OFFSET

1. I am a rideshare driver using the Uber app who operates as a sole trader without employees and who is eligible for the small business income tax offset on net small business income.

2. I expect to be eligible for the JobKeeper payment.

3. Would you please advise (in the form of private rulings for the 2019-20 and 2020-21 income years) whether any JobKeeper payments that I receive benefit from the small business income tax offset.

(Jack MALARKEY)


----------



## Elatte

Good stuff Jack. Thanks for keeping us informed.

Seeing as there are 5 weeks in April, can we expect to be backpaid $3750 for the month of April?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Elatte said:


> Seeing as there are 5 weeks in April, can we expect to be backpaid $3750 for the month of April?


Technically, it's a fortnightly payment of $1,500 paid monthly. As it's being backdated to 30 March, the last two days of March also need to be thrown into the witches' cauldron.

I'm not really sure exactly how much will emerge from the cauldron!


UPDATE:

The Bills have been passed by the House of Representatives and are now before the Senate, which is expected to pass them later this evening.

The Royal Assent process is to be expedited.


----------



## flinchy

So we won't know the exact eligibility for a few more days at best? Zzzz


----------



## Board

Still Standing said:


> Have had no reply or correspondence of any kind since registering intent to claim .. jobkeeper allowance .. a full time Rideshare driver , earned $120 last Mon to Mon week for 25 hrs online .
> Just how are we supposed to exist ?
> Knew the announcement was just PR .. some Rideshare drivers have capital finance debts of over $30000 to $ 50000 their income has been wiped out due to shutdown imposed by govt.
> Yet we cannot get even a reply weeks later.
> My income last year was $1100 gross .
> This year $120 Uber and Didi.
> Whilst welfare army sit at home .. those who want to work receive zero .
> Fair go?
> Absolute crap .
> Have applied like many others for these so called thousands of jobs at Coles and Woolies etc .
> Not one reply .
> Apparently the international students and backpackers are more of a priority .. there are tens of thousands of sole traders , casuals .. out of work in a blink of the eye.
> People who were working one month ago .. people who haven't even received a phone call back from ATO or Centrelink .
> The announcement on TV was it just snake oil spin?


457s m8, I spent 12yrs looking after farms, Aussies that have been forced out for the last 10yrs.
M8 I've got a M8, 52yrs old, Australian, younger yrs rode in the rodeo and travelled Australia, sneaks into a country pub and cracks the who to wake everyone up.
But cannot get a job in his own country, and ****s call him lazy

Go the **** home


----------



## Jack Malarkey

flinchy said:


> So we won't know the exact eligibility for a few more days at best? Zzzz


Yes, I suspect so.

The Treasurer needs to make rules in the form of legislative instruments. He will expedite this. (I may have overstated the role of the Treasurer, which seems to be directed to making any changes to or filling in any gaps in the criteria.)

Also, the Commissioner of Taxation has significant discretion in the application of the drop in turnover test. The Australian Taxation Office will need quickly to develop its administrative approach as discretions need to be applied consistently but with regard to the facts of the particular case and not arbitrarily or capriciously.

Treasury and the Australian Taxation Office will be seized with the urgency of all this and the whole process will continue to be fast tracked.

UPDATE

The Bills have now been passed in identical form by both Houses: https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp...-of-australias-road-out-of-coronavirus-crisis.

See also:
https://www.google.com.au/amp/amp.abc.net.au/article/12132940.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The Treasurer's second reading speech is useful as an overview (but is written from the perspective of employers):

https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInf...dr/247e20e8-7bbe-4712-afcb-c8833dc6a228/0034"
Extract:

*[Bolding added by Jack Malarkey]*

The JobKeeper payment

The government will provide financial support to businesses, not-for-profits and sole traders affected by the coronavirus outbreak.

Under this framework, the government will deliver a wage subsidy to those employers significantly impacted by the coronavirus outbreak to continue paying their employees.

The JobKeeper payment will support employers to maintain their connection to their employees, helping them to reactivate their operations quickly-without having to rehire staff-when the crisis is over.

*Eligibility for the JobKeeper payment will be set out in the rules made by the Treasurer.*

The JobKeeper payment will be payable to an eligible employer who chooses to participate in the scheme, for a maximum of 26 weeks in respect of each employee that is on their books on 1 March 2020 and is retained or continues to be engaged by that employer.

The program commences on 30 March 2020, the day of its announcement. Eligible businesses can begin distributing the JobKeeper payment immediately and will be reimbursed from the first week of May.

This schedule will also help new parents who have been stood down during the coronavirus pandemic to retain their eligibility for the government's Paid Parental Leave scheme by allowing the JobKeeper payment to qualify as work for the purposes of the Paid Parental Leave work test.

This change will provide increased certainty and security for expectant families through this difficult time.

To assist Services Australia to assess claims for social security payments, the bill allows temporary modifications to part 5 of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 to enable the ATO to share information with Services Australia in relation to payments, such as the JobKeeper payment, made as part of the Coronavirus Economic Response Package.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The JobKeeper Bills received Royal Assent earlier today (Thursday 9 April 2020) and are now law: http://www.medianet.com.au/releases/186200/.

Treasury FAQs regarding the JobKeeper payment (last updated on Sunday 5 April 2020): https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-04/JobKeeper_frequently_asked_questions.pdf.

(I haven't identified relevant new information.)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Message from the Australian Taxation Office on its website on Thursday 9 April 2020:









(https://www.ato.gov.au/general/gen/jobkeeper-payment/)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Excellent overview:

https://piperalderman.com.au/insigh...eper-legislation-what-it-does-and-doesnt-say/.

*Breaking news - The JobKeeper legislation: What it does and doesn't say*


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Treasury fact sheets and FAQs on the JobKeeper payment:
https://treasury.gov.au/coronavirus/jobkeeper.

The rules to establish the JobKeeper scheme will be made by the Treasurer under section 20 of the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Act 2020. Those rules have not yet been released.

The Australian Taxation Office is in the process of updating its website and we expect to learn more soon: https://www.ato.gov.au/general/gen/jobkeeper-payment/.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Another excellent overview:

SmartCompany

https://www.smartcompany.com.au/coronavirus/jobkeeper-eligibility-business/
*JobKeeper eligibility explained: Everything we know so far about applying for wage subsidies*

MATTHEW ELMAS

April 9, 2020

The Morrison government's $130 billion JobKeeper wage subsidy package passed through parliament on Wednesday, giving effect to the largest single piece of fiscal policy in Australian history.

But the question on the mind of more than 730,000 businesses heading into the Easter long weekend remains whether or not they'll be accepted into the scheme, which will provide $1,500 fortnightly payments for each eligible employee on their books.

About six million workers are expected to be covered by the program, but many businesses remain nervous about their prospects heading into April, as the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) prepares to begin accepting formal applications.

Despite reassurances that officials will look to be inclusive rather than excluding well-meaning firms, there are still more questions than answers about the types of business activities the ATO will be taking into account when considering eligibility.

Legislation passed through parliament yesterday outlines how the JobKeeper scheme will work for those accepted into the program, but includes far fewer details about eligibility requirements and the application process.

Under the laws, which amend the Fair Work Act temporarily, Treasurer Josh Frydenberg has been granted broad powers to pen additional rules about eligibility under the program, including the manner in which payments are made, the process for reviewing decisions and record-keeping requirements.

Wondering how the JobKeeper scheme will work for accepted employers? Read our explainer here.

*Treasurer and tax commissioner have broad powers*

The making of these rules can be delegated to tax commissioner Chris Jordan by the Treasurer, enabling officials from the ATO and Treasury to maintain a large degree of flexibility about which businesses and workers will and won't be eligible for JobKeeper payments throughout the life of the scheme.

It's been designed that way to enable officials to modify and update the JobKeeper framework as the program progresses, preventing a situation where the ATO is forced to rule out businesses based on regulations already enshrined in the Fair Work Act.

These rules may cover:


Eligibility criteria for JobKeeper payments;
How JobKeeper applications must be made;
Whether a payment will be made in instalments or a lump sum;
Entitlement to payments or instalments;
The amount of JobKeeper payments;
When a JobKeeper payment should be made;
Conditions for applying to the JobKeeper scheme;
Providing information or notices; and
The rights, obligations and liabilities of JobKeeper recipients and other entities that benefit from those payments.
At the time of writing on Thursday morning, the JobKeeper legislation has not received Royal Assent yet. While this part is largely a formality, it limits what the ATO is able to say publicly about the scheme.

*SmartCompany is expecting responses to a list of questions about the administration of the program next week; we'll update this article when that information becomes available.*

*What we know so far*

We already know a fair bit about the approach the ATO will be taking though. The headline eligibility requirement for employers and sole traders, updated by Treasury last Sunday, involves:


Businesses estimating their turnover has, or will likely, fall by 30% or more (where turnover is under $1 billion);
Businesses estimating their turnover has, or will likely, fall by 50% or more (where turnover is over $1 billion).
Businesses are expected to provide evidence, such as with business activity statements (BAS), of these revenue declines.

...

*I'm a sole trader, what about me?*

Sole traders are eligible to apply for JobKeeper payments and can register alongside all other businesses.

Firms without employees are required to provide their ABN and then nominate an 'employee' (that's the sole trader in most instances) to receive the payment alongside that person's Tax File Number (TFN).

*Sole traders must also have included assessable income from their business in their 2018-19 tax return and lodged taxable supplies between July 1, 2018 and March 12, 2020. This is basically a test to ensure an applicant has been operating their business.*

_[Jack Malarkey comments: The Treasury fact sheet uses the word 'or' rather than 'and'.]_

Sole traders must have had an ABN on or before March 12, 2020, and have been "actively engaged" in their business.

Eligible sole traders must also meet the same age, citizenship and visa status requirements as employees (explained above).

Sole trader payments will be made monthly to a nominated bank account.

Other than this, the same eligibility criteria apply to sole traders as other businesses regarding turnover decline and ATO discretion.

Businesses operating through partnership structures can only nominate one partner to receive the JobKeeper payment, but where shareholders provide labour to the company but receive dividends in lieu of wages Treasury says one shareholder can be nominated for JobKeeper.

Sole trader structured firms with employees will be eligible to receive one JobKeeper payment for the director and other payments for eligible employees.

NOW READ: JobKeeper subsidies for sole traders: How do I know if I'm eligible, and how much money will I get?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

We still can't apply (beyond registering interest) but that time is definitely getting closer.

The Treasurer has just now made the eligibility rules (final form):

Rules: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00419

Explanatory statement: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00419/Explanatory Statement/Text

As per @Sandhills in the Sydney forum (https://uberpeople.net/threads/wed-job-keeper-d-day.391420/page-2#post-6110013):

The rules are in the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Rules 2020 (Cth) with a draft being circulated by Treasury.

The Commissioner must pay the Jobkeeper payment within 14 days of the end of the calendar month in which the Jobkeeper fortnight ends.

...The Rules also provide that the Commissioner may, by legislative instrument, prescribe an alternative decline in turnover test that employers may be able to satisfy, if they do not satisfy the decline in turnover test prescribed in the Rules.

Comment
Based on the Treasury Fact Sheet for the Jobkeeper measure, it appears that this alternative test will aim to cover new businesses that were not in operation a year earlier, or where the turnover of a business from a year earlier is not representative...

...where the partners of a partnership only receive a share of profits, one partner can be nominated to receive the payment under the Jobkeeper scheme;
2. where directors of a company only receive dividends, one director can be nominated to receive payment under the Jobkeeper scheme; and
3. where beneficiaries of a trust only receive distributions, one individual beneficiary (i.e. not a corporate beneficiary) can be nominated to receive payment under the Jobkeeper scheme.

Source

https://www.bwslawyers.com.au/news-article/covid-19-jobkeeper-scheme-are-you-eligible
Treasury has updated their fact sheets to Apr 9

https://treasury.gov.au/coronavirus/resources
From the Apr 9 treasury fact sheets ;

WHAT ARE THE ELIGIBLE PAYMENT PERIODS FOR REIMBURSEMENT?
...
The first period starts on Monday 30 March 2020 and ends on Sunday 12 April 2020.
( 1 fns in first pay?)

The final period will start on Monday 14 September 2020 and end on Sunday 27 September 2020

payments will be made by the ATO monthly in arrears

WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF TURNOVER?
Turnover (for purpose of determining how much turnover has declined by) will be defined according to the
current calculation for GST purposes and is reported on Business Activity Statements. It includes all taxable
supplies and all GST free supplies but not input taxed supplies.

New businesses
Where a business was not in operation a year earlier, or where their turnover a year earlier was not
representative of their usual or average turnover, (for example ...they were newly established, were scaling up, or their turnover is typically highly variable), the
Tax Commissioner will have discretion to consider additional information and will also have discretion to set out alternative tests

f a business does not meet the turnover test as at 30 March 2020, the business can start receiving the
JobKeeper Payment at a later time once the turnover test has been met. In this case, the JobKeeper
Payment is not backdated to the commencement of the scheme. Businesses can receive the JobKeeper
Payments up to 27 September 2020.

f a business does not meet the turnover test as at 30 March 2020, the business can start receiving the
JobKeeper Payment at a later time once the turnover test has been met. In this case, the JobKeeper
Payment is not backdated to the commencement of the scheme. Businesses can receive the JobKeeper
Payments up to 27 September 2020.

WILL THE ATO USE THE JOBKEEPER PAYMENTS TO OFFSET A BAS DEBT?
The payment will ... not be used to offset tax liabilities, as the intent is that it is a payment that facilitates employers to pay their employees.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

According to DriveTax:

Employment + Uber

_*NEW* _If you have a full time or part time employee job, you cannot claim the JobKeeper Payment as a sole trader. You can only recieve the JobKeeper Payment through your employer. This is true regardless of whether your employer actually pays you the JobKeeper Payment or not.

The government have brought in this rule because they assume if you have a full time or part time job, then EITHER:


your employer's business has declined 30% and so you will get the JobKeeper Payment of $1,500/fn (before tax) OR
your employer's business has not declined 30% and so you will get your normal wages.
Either way, you will be getting paid, and so you are not eligible for further government assistance.

If you lose your job entirely then you can claim the JobKeeper Payment as a sole-trader as long as you pass the 30% decline test. If you can't pass the 30% test then you can claim the JobSeeker Payment instead.

(https://www.drivetax.com.au/uber-covid-19/)



Jack Malarkey said:


> I have asked the Australian Taxation Office for a private ruling on whetherJobKeeper payments received by a sole trader rideshare driver without employees are subject to GST.
> 
> I will report back when I receive a reply.
> 
> Here is the full text of my private ruling request:
> 
> REQUEST FOR PRIVATE RULING: GST TREATMENT OF JOBKEEPER PAYMENT
> 
> 1. I am a rideshare driver using the Uber app. I am a sole trader without employees.
> 
> 2. I expect to be eligible for the JobKeeper payment.
> 
> 3. Would you please advise (in the form of a private ruling) whether any JobKeeper payments that I receive are subject to GST.
> 
> (Jack MALARKEY)


Re GST, the Treasurer has stated in the explanatory statement accompanying the eligibility rules the following:

'Goods and services tax does not apply in relation to JobKeeper payments made to employers because the payments are not consideration for supplies made by employers to the Government'.

(https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00419/Explanatory Statement/Text)

By parity of reasoning, this would also extend to the self-employed without employees.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> According to DriveTax:
> 
> Employment + Uber
> 
> _*NEW* _If you have a full time or part time employee job, you cannot claim the JobKeeper Payment as a sole trader. You can only recieve the JobKeeper Payment through your employer. This is true regardless of whether your employer actually pays you the JobKeeper Payment or not.
> 
> The government have brought in this rule because they assume if you have a full time or part time job, then EITHER:
> 
> 
> your employer's business has declined 30% and so you will get the JobKeeper Payment of $1,500/fn (before tax) OR
> your employer's business has not declined 30% and so you will get your normal wages.
> Either way, you will be getting paid, and so you are not eligible for further government assistance.
> 
> If you lose your job entirely then you can claim the JobKeeper Payment as a sole-trader as long as you pass the 30% decline test. If you can't pass the 30% test then you can claim the JobSeeker Payment instead.


At this stage, I can't find where this is provided for in the primary Act or in the Treasurer's rules.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> According to DriveTax:
> 
> Employment + Uber
> 
> _*NEW* _If you have a full time or part time employee job, you cannot claim the JobKeeper Payment as a sole trader. You can only recieve the JobKeeper Payment through your employer. This is true regardless of whether your employer actually pays you the JobKeeper Payment or not.
> 
> The government have brought in this rule because they assume if you have a full time or part time job, then EITHER:
> 
> 
> your employer's business has declined 30% and so you will get the JobKeeper Payment of $1,500/fn (before tax) OR
> your employer's business has not declined 30% and so you will get your normal wages.
> Either way, you will be getting paid, and so you are not eligible for further government assistance.
> 
> If you lose your job entirely then you can claim the JobKeeper Payment as a sole-trader as long as you pass the 30% decline test. If you can't pass the 30% test then you can claim the JobSeeker Payment instead.





Jack Malarkey said:


> At this stage, I can't find where this is provided for in the primary Act or in the Treasurer's rules.


I have now established (with kind help from @Sandhills) that the statement by DriveTax about sole traders being ineligible if they are otherwise employees does accord with Treasury's frequently asked questions (FAQs) (as updated on Thursday 9 April 2020) but It doesn't appear to be reflected in the Treasurer's eligibility rules in their present form.

Here's the relevant FAQ:

Self-employed and other eligible businesses

I AM SELF-EMPLOYED. AM I ELIGIBLE FOR THE PAYMENT?

Yes. People who are self-employed will be eligible for the payment provided, at the time of applying, they:
• estimate their GST turnover has or will fall by 30 per cent or more;
• had an ABN on or before 12 March 2020, and
- either had an amount included in its assessable income for the 2018-19 year and it was included in their income tax return lodged on or before 12 March 2020 (or such later time as allowed by the Commissioner), or
- made a supply during the period 1 July 2018 to 12 March 2020 and provided this information to the Commissioner on or before 12 March 2020 (or such later time as allowed by the Commissioner);
• were actively engaged in the business;
• are not entitled to another JobKeeper Payment (either a nominated business participant of another
business or as an eligible employee);
• *are not a permanent employee of any other employer;*
• were aged at least 16 years of age as at 1 March 2020; and
• were an Australian citizen, the holder of a permanent visa, or a Special Category (Subclass 444) Visa Holder at 1 March 2020.

(https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-04/JobKeeper_frequently_asked_questions_1.pdf)

[*Bold italics added by Jack Malarkey]*


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Elatte said:


> Seeing as there are 5 weeks in April, can we expect to be backpaid $3750 for the month of April?





Jack Malarkey said:


> Technically, it's a fortnightly payment of $1,500 paid monthly. As it's being backdated to 30 March, the last two days of March also need to be thrown into the witches' cauldron.
> 
> I'm not really sure exactly how much will emerge from the cauldron!


@Elatte, after checking the Treasurer's _Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Rules 2020_, I can now advise that the payment to be made in early May 2020 will be $3,000.

The fortnightly payment amount is $1,500. The Australian Taxation Office pays up shortly after the end of each calendar month for fortnights that have ended in that month.

Two relevant fortnights will end in April 2020.

The first fortnight is that beginning on Monday 30 March and ending on Sunday 12 April. The second is that beginning on Monday 13 March and ending on Sunday 26 March.

So there'll be no extra in that first month even though April has five weeks.

(https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00419)


----------



## Elatte

Jack Malarkey said:


> @Elatte, after checking the Treasurer's _Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Rules 2020_, I can now advise that the payment to be made in early May 2020 will be $3,000.
> 
> The fortnightly payment amount is $1,500. The Australian Taxation Office pays up shortly after the end of each calendar month for fortnights that have ended in that month.
> 
> Two relevant fortnights will end in April 2020.
> 
> The first fortnight is that beginning on Monday 30 March and ending on Sunday 12 April. The second is that beginning on Monday 13 March and ending on Sunday 26 March.
> 
> So there'll be no extra in that first month even though April has five weeks.
> 
> (https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00419)


Thanks Jack!


----------



## flinchy

So basically it's based off a 30% fall for the full quarter, as reported in your G1 in your BAS

So unless we want to have a more personalised chat with the ATO about it, that's the easiest way to go. Say you've experienced a fall, then show it at BAS time

A little sucky for drivers like me that had a VERY bad quarter last yr (~$1000/week) lol


----------



## Jack Malarkey

flinchy said:


> So basically it's based off a 30% fall for the full quarter, as reported in your G1 in your BAS
> 
> So unless we want to have a more personalised chat with the ATO about it, that's the easiest way to go. Say you've experienced a fall, then show it at BAS time
> 
> A little sucky for drivers like me that had a VERY bad quarter last yr (~$1000/week) lol


The Tax Office has a discretion to recognise different periods.


----------



## flinchy

Jack Malarkey said:


> The Tax Office has a discretion to recognise different periods.


Yeah just saying that's the easiest, straightforward no fuss approach. I'm sure I and any driver could explain how it was a non-representative quarter and we have fallen regardless. Just more hassle and less guaranteed


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> I have now established (with kind help from @Sandhills) that the statement by DriveTax about sole traders being ineligible if they are otherwise employees does accord with Treasury's frequently asked questions (FAQs) (as updated on Thursday 9 April 2020) but It doesn't appear to be reflected in the Treasurer's eligibility rules in their present form.
> 
> Here's the relevant FAQ:
> 
> Self-employed and other eligible businesses
> 
> I AM SELF-EMPLOYED. AM I ELIGIBLE FOR THE PAYMENT?
> 
> Yes. People who are self-employed will be eligible for the payment provided, at the time of applying, they:
> • estimate their GST turnover has or will fall by 30 per cent or more;
> • had an ABN on or before 12 March 2020, and
> - either had an amount included in its assessable income for the 2018-19 year and it was included in their income tax return lodged on or before 12 March 2020 (or such later time as allowed by the Commissioner), or
> - made a supply during the period 1 July 2018 to 12 March 2020 and provided this information to the Commissioner on or before 12 March 2020 (or such later time as allowed by the Commissioner);
> • were actively engaged in the business;
> • are not entitled to another JobKeeper Payment (either a nominated business participant of another
> business or as an eligible employee);
> • *are not a permanent employee of any other employer;*
> • were aged at least 16 years of age as at 1 March 2020; and
> • were an Australian citizen, the holder of a permanent visa, or a Special Category (Subclass 444) Visa Holder at 1 March 2020.
> 
> (https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-04/JobKeeper_frequently_asked_questions_1.pdf)
> 
> [*Bold italics added by Jack Malarkey]*


IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT

Very late on Saturday 11 April 2020, Treasury updated its FAQs to clarify that also being an employee doesn't in itself exclude a sole trader from the JobKeeper payment.

Here's the updated FAQ:

I AM SELF-EMPLOYED AND ALSO HAVE A JOB. AM I ELIGIBLE FOR THE JOBKEEPER PAYMENT?

An individual can only receive the JobKeeper Payments from one source. *However, if you are eligible for a JobKeeper Payment, you can also receive income from other sources including another job.* To be eligible as a self-employed individual, you must not be a permanent employee of any other employer.

Last updated: 11 April 2020

*[emphasis added by Jack Malarkey]*

(https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-04/JobKeeper_frequently_asked_questions_2.pdf

The FAQ (as updated) accords with the Treasurer's rules made on Friday 10 April 2020.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The Australian Taxation Office from Tuesday 14 April 2020 has additional general information about the jobkeeper payment on its website:
https://www.ato.gov.au/general/JobKeeper-Payment/?=Redirected_URL
We'll be able to enrol for the jobkeeper payment from Wednesday 20 April 2020.

However, we need to wait for for information specific to sole traders:

*'Sole traders*
Sole traders can be eligible for the JobKeeper payment if their business has experienced a downturn according to the eligibility criteria. We will provide more information soon about the eligibility of sole traders for the JobKeeper payment'.


DECLINE IN TURNOVER TEST

This is what the Tax Office has to say about the 30% decline in turnover test:

How to calculate a fall in turnover for the first fortnight starting 30 March 2020

To work out your fall in turnover, you can compare either:

GST turnover for March 2020 with GST turnover for March 2019

projected GST turnover for April 2020 with GST turnover for April 2019

projected GST turnover for the quarter starting April 2020 with GST turnover for the quarter starting April 2019.

How you choose to project your fall in turnover is not dependent on whether you report a quarterly or monthly BAS, though you can do that if it is easier. The turnover calculation is based on GST turnover, but there are some modifications, including disregarding GST grouping (where two or more associated business entities operate as a single GST group). We will provide more information soon about applying the turnover test.

If you work out that you qualify for the JobKeeper payments for the first fortnight because your turnover has declined by the relevant amount, you remain eligible and do not need to keep testing turnover in following months. However, you will have ongoing monthly reporting requirements. More information will be provided soon.

The Commissioner of Taxation also has the discretion to set out alternative tests that can establish your eligibility when turnover periods are not appropriately comparable (for example, if your business has been in operation less than a year). We will provide more information soon about alternative tests.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobk...e-employers/#Howtodetermineadeclineinturnover)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> The Australian Taxation Office from Tuesday 14 April 2020 has additional general information about the jobkeeper payment on its website:
> https://www.ato.gov.au/general/JobKeeper-Payment/?=Redirected_URL
> We'll be able to enrol for the jobkeeper payment from Wednesday 20 April 2020.
> 
> However, we need to wait for for information specific to sole traders:
> 
> *'Sole traders*
> Sole traders can be eligible for the JobKeeper payment if their business has experienced a downturn according to the eligibility criteria. We will provide more information soon about the eligibility of sole traders for the JobKeeper payment'.
> 
> 
> DECLINE IN TURNOVER TEST
> 
> This is what the Tax Office has to say about the 30% decline in turnover test:
> 
> How to calculate a fall in turnover for the first fortnight starting 30 March 2020
> 
> To work out your fall in turnover, you can compare either:
> 
> GST turnover for March 2020 with GST turnover for March 2019
> 
> projected GST turnover for April 2020 with GST turnover for April 2019
> 
> projected GST turnover for the quarter starting April 2020 with GST turnover for the quarter starting April 2019.
> 
> How you choose to project your fall in turnover is not dependent on whether you report a quarterly or monthly BAS, though you can do that if it is easier. The turnover calculation is based on GST turnover, but there are some modifications, including disregarding GST grouping (where two or more associated business entities operate as a single GST group). We will provide more information soon about applying the turnover test.
> 
> If you work out that you qualify for the JobKeeper payments for the first fortnight because your turnover has declined by the relevant amount, you remain eligible and do not need to keep testing turnover in following months. However, you will have ongoing monthly reporting requirements. More information will be provided soon.
> 
> The Commissioner of Taxation also has the discretion to set out alternative tests that can establish your eligibility when turnover periods are not appropriately comparable (for example, if your business has been in operation less than a year). We will provide more information soon about alternative tests.
> 
> (https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobk...e-employers/#Howtodetermineadeclineinturnover)


See also https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobk...rs/enrol-and-apply-for-the-jobkeeper-payment/.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Treasury fact sheet (as updated on Tuesday 14 April 2020) in relation to a sole trader being ineligible for the jobkeeper payment if also a permanent employee of another employer:

'Self-employed individuals will be eligible to receive the JobKeeper Payment where they meet the relevant turnover test ..., *and are not a permanent employee of another employer'. [emphasis added]

(https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-04/Fact_sheet_supporting_businesses_4.pdf)*

And I have belatedly found precisely where the Treasurer's rules give legislative effect to this restriction.

Under the rules, a sole trader must be an 'eligible business participant' as defined in section 12.

Subparagraph 12(4)(b)(ii) stipulates that 'the individual is not an employee (other than a casual employee) of another entity)'.

(https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00419)


----------



## kooljp

Jack Malarkey said:


> We'll be able to enrol for the jobkeeper payment from Wednesday 20 April 2020.


20 April 2020 is actually a Monday on my Calendar.

PS: Thanks for the info Jack.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

kooljp said:


> 20 April 2020 is actually a Monday on my Calendar.
> 
> PS: Thanks for the info Jack.


So it is!


----------



## Jack Malarkey

We can enrol for the jobkeeper payment from MONDAY 20 April 2020 either ourselves or via a tax professional for a tax deductible fee:
https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobk...rs/enrol-and-apply-for-the-jobkeeper-payment/.

https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/Tax-professionals/
All the signs are that there will NOT be any paper application form and that we'll need to use the business portal (not regular MyGov):
https://www.ato.gov.au/business/business-portal/
The DriveTax website has important information:

*How Do I Apply for JobKeeper?*

_*New*_ The ATO have now given us some further detail about how JobKeeper applications will work:

Step 1) Register your interest with the ATO if you haven't done so already. This will subscribe you for email updates from the ATO. It only takes a minute or two, and you'll need your ABN handy. Here's the link:


ATO - JobKeeper Payment - Register Your Interest
Step 2) JobKeeper applications will be done through your Business Portal on MyGov using your MyGov ID login. If you haven't already set this up I suggest doing so now before JobKeeper enrolments open and the ATO get super busy. You should also check that your bank account details are up to date with the ATO.

Step 3) JobKeeper Enrolments open on the 20th of April. You will be asked if you are 'claiming an entitlement based on business participation'. A business participant means a sole-trader who is not an employee, which is you, so the answer is YES. You will also be asked for the number of employees you have, and the answer will be 0. You yourself are a 'business participant', not an employee. I presume there will also be questions about your income declining 30%, but the ATO haven't given any information about this yet. You must enrol by the 30th of April in order to get payments for April.

(https://www.drivetax.com.au/uber-covid-19/)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The Australian Taxation Office itself has now confirmed:

'The JobKeeper payment is not subject to GST'.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/Tax-professionals/#Howtoknowifyourclientiseligible)










Until now, we've had to rely on a statement by the Treasurer about GST not applying in the explanatory statement accompanying the Treasurer's eligibility rules:

Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Rules 2020



Jack Malarkey said:


> We can enrol for the jobkeeper payment from MONDAY 20 April 2020 either ourselves or via a tax professional for a tax deductible fee:
> https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobk...rs/enrol-and-apply-for-the-jobkeeper-payment/.
> 
> https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/Tax-professionals/
> All the signs are that there will NOT be any paper application form and that we'll need to use the business portal (not regular MyGov):
> https://www.ato.gov.au/business/business-portal/
> The DriveTax website has important information:
> 
> *How Do I Apply for JobKeeper?*
> 
> _*New*_ The ATO have now given us some further detail about how JobKeeper applications will work:
> 
> Step 1) Register your interest with the ATO if you haven't done so already. This will subscribe you for email updates from the ATO. It only takes a minute or two, and you'll need your ABN handy. Here's the link:
> 
> 
> ATO - JobKeeper Payment - Register Your Interest
> Step 2) JobKeeper applications will be done through your Business Portal on MyGov using your MyGov ID login. If you haven't already set this up I suggest doing so now before JobKeeper enrolments open and the ATO get super busy. You should also check that your bank account details are up to date with the ATO.
> 
> Step 3) JobKeeper Enrolments open on the 20th of April. You will be asked if you are 'claiming an entitlement based on business participation'. A business participant means a sole-trader who is not an employee, which is you, so the answer is YES. You will also be asked for the number of employees you have, and the answer will be 0. You yourself are a 'business participant', not an employee. I presume there will also be questions about your income declining 30%, but the ATO haven't given any information about this yet. You must enrol by the 30th of April in order to get payments for April.
> 
> (https://www.drivetax.com.au/uber-covid-19/)


I have just completed the task of establishing my MyGovID (different from MyGov) via its app and then linking it to my ABN via RAM (Relationship Authorisation Manager).

It wasn't fun but I somehow managed it.

All of this is to enable me to use the Business Portal (also separate from MyGov) to enrol for the jobkeeper payment from Monday 20 April 2020.

I expect many drivers will opt to pay a tax professional a tax deductible fee to enrol them for the jobkeeper payment.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office:

'If you use the ATO Business Portal, you will need a myGovID linked to your ABN in relationship Authorisation Manager (RAM). You can find out how to set this up at ato.gov.au/MyGovID'.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobk...eeper-payment/#RegisterfortheJobKeeperpayment)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

https://bp.ato.gov.au/


----------



## Jack Malarkey

What can you do if you think the Australian Taxation Office has incorrectly (on legal grounds) denied you a jobkeeper payment including by not exercising any discretion in your favour?

Section 13 of the primary legislation confers objection and review rights.

If you are dissatisfied by a decision by the Tax Office, you can lodge an objection against the decision. If you remain dissatisfied, you can obtain a review (on the merits of the decision and not just on the processes followed) by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The Australian Taxation Office has now released information about the eligibility of sole traders for the jobkeeper payment:

https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/Sole-traders-and-other-entities/
Note also the recent inclusion of the following statement:

Keeping the system fair:

We are committed to tackling any illegal JobKeeper behaviour to protect honest businesses and the community. To report illegal behaviour, visit making a tip off.

[end of extract]

We still await information about the Tax Office's exercise of its discretion for the decline in turnover test.



Jack Malarkey said:


> https://bp.ato.gov.au/
> View attachment 448211


Some very welcome news. It looks as though we don't need to register for myGovID and RAM after all.

Sorry to have led everyone on a wild goose chase.

Here's the most recent statement:

Your entity can enrol for the business participation entitlement from 20 April 2020 using an online form, which will be available on our website (link will be included from 20 April).


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The jobkeeper enrolment form is available NOW (one day early) on myGov (no need to use MyGovID).

I have submitted my own enrolment showing 0 employees.

Show 0 employees and as sole trader. Skip any non-applicable steps.

Have your bank account details handy.

Know the period for which you have had 30% or higher drop in turnover (eg, month of March 2020 compared with March 2019). You don't need to include actual figures.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

There are three areas both where the Australian Taxation Office it is yet to provide information (as at 11.30 am eastern standard time, Sunday 19 April 2020). See the added bold italics:

(1) and (2)

*How to determine a fall in turnover*

You only need to satisfy this requirement once - you don't need to retest turnover each month.

At the time you enrol in the JobKeeper payment scheme, you need to confirm that your business in a relevant period has had, or is likely to have, a:


30% fall in turnover (for an aggregated turnover of $1 billion or less)
50% fall in turnover (for an aggregated turnover of more than $1 billion), or
15% fall in turnover (for ACNC-registered charities other than universities and schools).
*How to calculate a fall in turnover for the first fortnight starting 30 March 2020*

To work out your fall in turnover, you can compare either:


GST turnover for March 2020 with GST turnover for March 2019
projected GST turnover for April 2020 with GST turnover for April 2019
projected GST turnover for the quarter starting April 2020 with GST turnover for the quarter starting April 2019.
How you choose to project your fall in turnover is not dependent on whether you report a quarterly or monthly BAS, though you can do that if it is easier. The turnover calculation is based on GST turnover, but there are some modifications, including disregarding GST grouping (where two or more associated business entities operate as a single GST group). *We will provide more information soon about applying the turnover test.*

If you work out that you qualify for the JobKeeper payments for the first fortnight because your turnover has declined by the relevant amount, you remain eligible and do not need to keep testing turnover in following months. However, you will have ongoing monthly reporting requirements. More information will be provided soon.

*The Commissioner of Taxation also has the discretion to set out alternative tests that can establish your eligibility when turnover periods are not appropriately comparable (for example, if your business has been in operation less than a year). We will provide more information soon about alternative tests.*

(3)

*Eligible business entities*

Your entity is eligible if:


on 1 March 2020, it carried on a business in Australia
it satisfies the fall in turnover test for the relevant period
it satisfied certain conditions as at 12 March 2020, being:
it had an ABN on 12 March 2020, and
it had lodged, on or before 12 March 2020, at least one of
a 2018-19 income tax return showing that it had an amount included in its assessable income in relation to it carrying on a business, or
an activity statement or GST return for any tax period that started after 1 July 2018 and ended before 12 March 2020 showing that it made a taxable, GST-free or input-taxed sale.



*Note: A discretion to give further time after 12 March 2020 may apply in limited circumstances. More information will be available soon.*

*(https://www.ato.gov.au/general/JobKeeper-Payment/)*


----------



## Arcs1210

Jack Malarkey said:


> The jobkeeper enrolment form is available NOW (one day early) on myGov (no need to use MyGovID).
> 
> I have submitted my own enrolment showing 0 employees.
> 
> Show 0 employees and as sole trader. Skip any non-applicable steps.
> 
> Have your bank account details handy.
> 
> Know the period for which you have had 30% or higher drop in turnover (eg, month of March 2020 compared with March 2019). You don't need to include actual figures.


Mate. Excellent job. But i cannot find the form. I checked on my business portal but there is no link to such a form.
Perhaps i am in a wrong location?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Arcs1210 said:


> Mate. Excellent job. But i cannot find the form. I checked on my business portal but there is no link to such a form.
> Perhaps i am in a wrong location?


Go to myGov (not myGovID). Then go to Australian Taxation Office.

Select 'View' at:

COVID-19

Access ATO measures and tailored support during coronavirus (COVID-19).

You'll find the jobkeeper payment enrolment form there.

(You'll have relevant access to myGov if you use it to lodge business activity statements or tax returns.)


----------



## Arcs1210

all good mate. Thx


----------



## Boofhead

Jack Malarkey said:


> There are three areas both where the Australian Taxation Office it is yet to provide information (as at 11.30 am eastern standard time, Sunday 19 April 2020). See the added bold italics:
> 
> *The Commissioner of Taxation also has the discretion to set out alternative tests that can establish your eligibility when turnover periods are not appropriately comparable (for example, if your business has been in operation less than a year). We will provide more information soon about alternative tests.*
> 
> Thanks for all this Jack - I think there's a couple on here in the same situation as me - that is having started driving last September - I suppose it's just still wait and see for us?
> 
> I have another small business under the same ABN which has been going for years and I'm pulling the pin on that immediately but it nets *less than $20k - is this a requirement? *- I have an accountant but calculating the turnover for any given month or quarter would be a nightmare as there's random large bulk purchases made at odd times. Any thoughts on that mess?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Questions from @Boofhead

(1) Thanks for all this Jack - I think there's a couple on here in the same situation as me - that is having started driving last September - I suppose it's just still wait and see for us?

(2) I have another small business under the same ABN which has been going for years and I'm pulling the pin on that immediately but it nets less than $20k - is this a requirement? - I have an accountant but calculating the turnover for any given month or quarter would be a nightmare as there's random large bulk purchases made at odd times. Any thoughts on that mess?

Answers

(1) Yes, you'll need to wait until the Australian Taxation Office provides guidance on how it will exercise its discretion. That should be soon.

(2) The comparison between the two selected periods should take into account ALL business turnover (ie, gross income) under your ABN and result in a drop of total turnover of at least 30%.

The Tax Office is ultimately concerned that you can clearly demonstrate that you have met the required drop in turnover rather than the precise constituent figures as such. Once you can clearly demonstrate that, it doesn't really matter whether the drop in turnover is, say, 35% or 75%.

Remember also that turnover is gross income so purchases and other expenses are irrelevant.

(Sorry, but I don't understand the reference to netting under $20,000 and whether it's a requirement.)


----------



## Boofhead

Thanks Jack - what I meant about the $20k is Jobkeeper available to Sole Traders with a turnover of less than $20k pa? And thanks for clarifying turnover btw.

Also does the drop in turnover have to be a direct result of Covid-19? 

It's just coincidence my other business has tanked at this time (a long and boring story and knew it was coming hence starting RS) and I could definitely show a drop in turnover and could possibly argue that because of Covid-19 it's not a great time to be investing in expanding any business ventures. Especially on the never never. 

Except maybe dunny paper and face masks.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Boofhead said:


> Thanks Jack - what I meant about the $20k is Jobkeeper available to Sole Traders with a turnover of less than $20k pa? And thanks for clarifying turnover btw.
> 
> Also does the drop in turnover have to be a direct result of Covid-19?
> 
> It's just coincidence my other business has tanked at this time (a long and boring story and knew it was coming hence starting RS) and I could definitely show a drop in turnover and could possibly argue that because of Covid-19 it's not a great time to be investing in expanding any business ventures. Especially on the never never.
> 
> Except maybe dunny paper and face masks.


Thanks, @Boofhead.

There is no minimum turnover for jobkeeper. What you need is a decline in whatever turnover you do have of at least 30%.

Moreover, the decline doesn't need to be proved to be directly linked to COVID-19. In any event (as you say), the general decline in economic conditions caused by COVID-19 dampens the prospect of further investment, resulting in reductions in turnover.


----------



## Boofhead

Thanks heaps mate - you've been very generous with your time and knowledge - I'm working on getting this last quarter's BAS in right now - thanks to your past help - so everything is up to date and ticketyboo - I was relying on RS and now living on the never never - I've never been on the rock'n'roll but having paid about $70k in State Stamp duty over the past 14 years I'm keen to get my paws on some gubberment coin 🙃


----------



## Jack Malarkey

At least at this stage, the only relevant form for sole traders remains the enrolment form available on myGov.

The new form linked to from the Tax Office website from today and relating to 'eligible business participants' does NOT apply to sole traders:

'If you are an eligible business participant such as a partner, adult beneficiary of a trust, or a shareholder in or director of a company, you need to complete the Eligible business participant nomination notice (excluding sole traders) to record that you have agreed to be nominated to receive JobKeeper payments through an eligible business'.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobk...-other-entities/#Eligiblebusinessparticipant1)


NEW POST: TIMELINE OF JOBKEEPER CONTENT CHANGES ON TAX OFFICE WEBSITE

The Australian Taxation Office website now has a useful summary of the various changes made to the website. For example:

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment.

*20 April 2020*










New guides available:

JobKeeper guide - sole traders - a practical step-by-step guide for sole traders.
JobKeeper guide - employers reporting through STP - a practical step-by-step guide for employers reporting through STP.
JobKeeper guide - employers not reporting through STP - a practical step-by-step guide for employers not reporting through STP.


(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/)


----------



## zsk123

Jack Malarkey said:


> At least at this stage, the only relevant form for sole traders remains the enrolment form available on myGov.
> 
> The new form linked to from the Tax Office website from today and relating to 'eligible business participants' does NOT apply to sole traders:
> 
> 'If you are an eligible business participant such as a partner, adult beneficiary of a trust, or a shareholder in or director of a company, you need to complete the Eligible business participant nomination notice (excluding sole traders) to record that you have agreed to be nominated to receive JobKeeper payments through an eligible business'.
> 
> (https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobk...-other-entities/#Eligiblebusinessparticipant1)
> 
> 
> NEW POST: TIMELINE OF JOBKEEPER CONTENT CHANGES ON TAX OFFICE WEBSITE
> 
> The Australian Taxation Office website now has a useful summary of the various changes made to the website. For example:
> 
> *JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*
> 
> A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment.
> 
> *20 April 2020*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New guides available:
> 
> JobKeeper guide - sole traders - a practical step-by-step guide for sole traders.
> JobKeeper guide - employers reporting through STP - a practical step-by-step guide for employers reporting through STP.
> JobKeeper guide - employers not reporting through STP - a practical step-by-step guide for employers not reporting through STP.
> 
> 
> (https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/)


Thank you for the updates.

I know one of conditions to eligibility state that the sole trader cannnot be an employee (full or part time) of another entity. I am a full time employee of another entity and do Uber casually on the side. Does this mean I am definitely not eligible? Is it worht applying?

Otherwise, I think this requirement does not apply to super withdrawal so I may be eligible to withdraw super.


----------



## duracell

Thanks John. Interesting 

I only earned $150 a week in March 2019 and even less so since.

So now I'm eligible for $750 a week? I've never earned that much in a month through Uber.


----------



## zsk123

duracell said:


> Thanks John. Interesting
> 
> I only earned $150 a week in March 2019 and even less so since.
> 
> So now I'm eligible for $750 a week? I've never earned that much in a month through Uber.


Same as me, and yes your understanding is correct. Do you have a full time or part time job as well? If so, I don't think you will be eligible. If not, that's great. Some people are winners in this crisis.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

duracell said:


> Thanks John. Interesting
> 
> I only earned $150 a week in March 2019 and even less so since.
> 
> So now I'm eligible for $750 a week? I've never earned that much in a month through Uber.


Yes, provided you meet the drop in turnover test and other requirements.

Unlike the equivalent British arrangements, the Australian jobkeeper scheme doesn't seek to base the amount of the payment on previous income.

For many, this means a significant increase in income particularly given that they will no longer incur business expenses of anywhere near the same size.

In their announcement of the jobkeeper payment, the Prime Minister and Treasurer explained:

'The payment will provide the equivalent of around 70 per cent of the national median wage.

'For workers in the accommodation, hospitality and retail sectors it will equate to a full median replacement wage'.

(https://www.pm.gov.au/media/130-billion-jobkeeper-payment-keep-australians-job)



zsk123 said:


> Same as me, and yes your understanding is correct. Do you have a full time or part time job as well? If so, I don't think you will be eligible. If not, that's great. Some people are winners in this crisis.


You are ineligible if you are also a permanent employee (whether full-time or part-time).

You are not made ineligible simply by also being a part-time or full-time casual employee.


----------



## duracell

Jack Malarkey said:


> Yes, provided you meet the drop in turnover test and other requirements.
> 
> Unlike the equivalent British arrangements, the Australian jobkeeper scheme doesn't seek to base the amount of the payment on previous income.
> 
> For many, this means a significant increase in income particularly given that they will no longer incur business expenses of anywhere near the same size.
> 
> In their announcement of the jobkeeper payment, the Prime Minister and Treasurer explained:
> 
> 'The payment will provide the equivalent of around 70 per cent of the national median wage.
> 
> 'For workers in the accommodation, hospitality and retail sectors it will equate to a full median replacement wage'.
> 
> (https://www.pm.gov.au/media/130-billion-jobkeeper-payment-keep-australians-job)
> 
> 
> You are ineligible if you are also a permanent employee (whether full-time or part-time). You are not made ineligible simply by also being a part-time or full-time casual employee.


Thanks Jack.
I have a little casual side income ($12k last year) besides Uber . I can't find anything about secondary sole trader income affecting this.
Would you happen to know? Thanks


----------



## Jack Malarkey

duracell said:


> Thanks Jack.
> I have a little casual side income ($12k last year) besides Uber . I can't find anything about secondary sole trader income affecting this.
> Would you happen to know? Thanks


Secondary sole trader income doesn't exclude you from jobkeeper.

Note, however, when you do the drop in turnover comparisons, you need to take into account business turnover from all businesses under your ABN.


----------



## duracell

Jack Malarkey said:


> Secondary sole trader income doesn't exclude you from jobkeeper.
> 
> Note, however, when you do the drop in turnover comparisons, you need to take into account business turnover from all businesses under your ABN.


Thanks again Jack. I registered through MyGov. There was no questionnaire for the income comparisons. I guess they're relying on trust and holding us to the declaration, which is punishable for not telling the truth.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Boofhead said:


> Thanks Jack - what I meant about the $20k is Jobkeeper available to Sole Traders with a turnover of less than $20k pa? And thanks for clarifying turnover btw.
> 
> Also does the drop in turnover have to be a direct result of Covid-19?
> 
> It's just coincidence my other business has tanked at this time (a long and boring story and knew it was coming hence starting RS) and I could definitely show a drop in turnover and could possibly argue that because of Covid-19 it's not a great time to be investing in expanding any business ventures. Especially on the never never.
> 
> Except maybe dunny paper and face masks.


@Boofhead, DriveTax has what I think is sensible advice for someone who has been doing rideshare for less than a year:

*If You Weren't Trading A Year Ago*

If you were not trading a year ago, or if the period a year ago is not a reasonable benchmark (e.g. a year ago you were only driving part time and more recently you switched to full time) the ATO have said there will be an Alternative Test, but they haven't announced any details yet. One possibility is that they'll ask you to average out your turnover over a number of months and use that as your comparison, but that is only speculation.

If you're confident you would pass the 30% test under any methods then you should go ahead and enrol now, but if you're not sure I would recommend waiting. JobKeeper Enrolments are open until the 30th of April, and the ATO will surely publish more detail about the alternative test before then. You can read more information here.

(https://www.drivetax.com.au/uber-covid-19/)


----------



## zsk123

Jack Malarkey said:


> @Boofhead, DriveTax has what I think is sensible advice for someone who has been doing rideshare for less than a year:
> 
> *If You Weren't Trading A Year Ago*
> 
> If you were not trading a year ago, or if the period a year ago is not a reasonable benchmark (e.g. a year ago you were only driving part time and more recently you switched to full time) the ATO have said there will be an Alternative Test, but they haven't announced any details yet. One possibility is that they'll ask you to average out your turnover over a number of months and use that as your comparison, but that is only speculation.
> 
> If you're confident you would pass the 30% test under any methods then you should go ahead and enrol now, but if you're not sure I would recommend waiting. JobKeeper Enrolments are open until the 30th of April, and the ATO will surely publish more detail about the alternative test before then. You can read more information here.


Hi Jack, any chance you could help with my question? Are full time employees excluded from Jobkeeper (i.e. do uber part time and have a full time job)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

BAS AGENTS?

The Australian Taxation Office has confirmed that registered BAS agents (and not just registered tax agents) can legally provide services relating to the jobkeeper payment:

'Tax and BAS agents play an important role in helping businesses affected by coronavirus (COVID-19). A legislative instrumentExternal Link was registered on 16 April 2020 to allow registered BAS agents to provide services to support the JobKeeper Payment scheme'.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/Tax-and-BAS-agents/)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

zsk123 said:


> Thank you for the updates.
> 
> I know one of conditions to eligibility state that the sole trader cannnot be an employee (full or part time) of another entity. I am a full time employee of another entity and do Uber casually on the side. Does this mean I am definitely not eligible? Is it worht applying?
> 
> Otherwise, I think this requirement does not apply to super withdrawal so I may be eligible to withdraw super.


Also being a part-time or full-time permanent (non-casual) employee makes you ineligible for the jobkeeper payment as a sole trader but being a part-time or full-time casual employee does not.

This is unequivocally reflected in the Treasurer's eligibility rules (please see below) so those rules would need to be relevantly amended before a permanent (non-casual) employee would be eligible to enrol as a sole trader.

Such an amendment has not been made or foreshadowed.

Relevant part of the Treasurer's rules:

Under the Treasurer's rules, a sole trader must be an 'eligible business participant' as defined in section 12.

Subparagraph 12(4)(b)(ii) stipulates that 'the individual is not an employee (other than a casual employee) of another entity'.

(https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00419)



zsk123 said:


> Hi Jack, any chance you could help with my question? Are full time employees excluded from Jobkeeper (i.e. do uber part time and have a full time job)


Please see my answer above.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

SCOPE OF 'ACTIVELY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS'

Question:

One of the eligibility criteria is that you be 'actively involved in the business'. Does this mean you must still be actively driving?

Answer:

1. My view is that a sole trader driver can still satisfy the 'actively engaged in the business' requirement while their driving business is in hibernation and their turnover is low or nil. Others take a different view.

2. The requirement is imposed by paragraph 12(2)(a) of the rules made by the Treasurer on 9 April 2020. These rules are a legislative instrument entitled the _Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Rules 2020._

3. Paragraph 12(2)(a) reads as follows: 'the individual is actively engaged in the business carried on by the entity'.

4. There is no relevant legislative definition of 'actively engaged in the business'.

5. The accompanying explanatory statement, however, shines some light on the intended scope of this requirement:

'_The business participation requirements are that...the individual is actively engaged in the business carried on by the entity. The individual must be actively engaged in the operations and activities of the body'._

6. A business can be in hibernation (including with nil turnover) but still be carried on. In present circumstances, this may be because of mandatory government shutdowns or because of more general safety concerns related to COVID-19 and the collapse in demand in consequence.

7. As long as the relevant individual continues to make decisions and be engaged in the operations and scaled-down activities of the business (including if in hibernation), the individual is actively engaged in the business in the relevant sense.

8. The alternative view is that by definition 'in hibernation' is not 'actively engaged'.

9. So far at least, the Australian Taxation Office hasn't given any indication that it would take a restrictive approach.

10. If any driver has a jobkeeper payment refused or reversed on these grounds, I'd suggest that they immediately pursue objection and appeal rights.

Rules: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00419.

Explanatory statement: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00419/Explanatory Statement/Text.


----------



## Boofhead

Thanks for that Jack - you would think that keeping up Business Rego and RS Insurance current and performing periodic safety checks and routine maintenance and cleaning would have to show that we're just champing at the bit to hit the road again :biggrin:


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office:

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment.

*21 April 2020*










New content published:

Top calls about COVID-19- we're regularly reviewing our top call centre questions so we can answer them online where possible.


(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The Australian Taxation Office has advised that, once you qualify, you remain qualified and don't need to retest. You simply have monthly reporting requirements.

Australian Taxation Office:

'_If you work out that you qualify for JobKeeper payments for the first fortnight because your turnover has declined by the relevant amount, you remain eligible and do not need to keep testing turnover in following months. However, you will have ongoing monthly reporting requirements.'_

(https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobk...neinturnover#Howtodetermineadeclineinturnover)

The Tax Office explains this further in its jobkeeper guide for sole traders:

_'Each month, you must reconfirm the eligibility of your business and your reported eligible employees.

You must also provide information as to your current and projected GST turnover. This is not a retest of your eligibility, but rather an indication of how your business is progressing under the JobKeeper Payment scheme.'

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper-guide---sole-traders/)_


----------



## Jack Malarkey

MONTHLY AND TOTAL PAYMENT AMOUNTS

Contrary to my earlier understanding, the total payments for the jobkeeper payment will be $19,500 rather than $18,000. This is because the payment in September will be $4,500 and not $3,000.

The Treasurer's rules specify that $1,500 per fortnight is to be paid in a month for fortnights ending in the previous calendar month.

I had incorrectly assumed you would only ever get two fortnights ending in any calendar month.

But in August 2020, there are THREE fortnights ending in that month so the payment in September goes up to $4,500.

The three fortnights are (1) Monday 20 July to Sunday 2 August; (2) Monday 3 August to Sunday 16 August; and (3) Monday 17 August to Sunday 30 August.

So the total payments over the six months will be $19,500.










(https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobk...igible-employees/amount-of-jobkeeper-payment/)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Updates of Australian Taxation Office guidance:

JobKeeper - timeline of content updates

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment.

22 April 2020











We made minor changes to enrolment forms on the evening of 21 April 2020 in response to user feedback. We have updated our guides to reflect these changes:

JobKeeper guide - sole traders - a practical step-by-step guide for sole traders.
JobKeeper guide - employers reporting through STP - a practical step-by-step guide for employers reporting through STP.
JobKeeper guide - employers not reporting through STP - a practical step-by-step guide for employers not reporting through STP.
(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/)


----------



## omiata

Hey Jack I was just wondering if you could help me out here. So for complicated reasons regarding my name, I am not able to apply through myGov. I can however, apply through myGovID Business Portal. I have followed the guides you've linked above and I have completed the first step, however I'm not sure how complete step 2 as I am an Uber Driver (Sole Trader) and I have no employees. How would I complete step 2?


----------



## Boofhead

If we use the April-June 2020 quarter for the turnover test do we still get the lot?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The Australian Taxation Office's jobkeeper guide now includes guidance on when the Tax Office will exercise its discretion to allow a later date than 12 March 2020 for having lodged business activity statements and income tax returns:

_'We have the discretion to give further time, but only in limited circumstances, including if you:_


_did not have a requirement to lodge your 2018-2019 return until after 12 March 2020_
_have deferred your lodgment under an extension of lodgment date we initiated._
_'Examples include:_


_You are included in a registered agent's lodgement program whereby your lodgement due date is after 12 March 2020._
_You have an automatic ATO lodgement deferral in place as you were affected by the Australian bushfires in late 2019, and you are not registered or required to be registered for GST, so will not have lodged a BAS before 12 March 2020'.
(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper-guide---sole-traders/)_



Boofhead said:


> If we use the April-June 2020 quarter for the turnover test do we still get the lot?


Yes.



omiata said:


> Hey Jack I was just wondering if you could help me out here. So for complicated reasons regarding my name, I am not able to apply through myGov. I can however, apply through myGovID Business Portal. I have followed the guides you've linked above and I have completed the first step, however I'm not sure how complete step 2 as I am an Uber Driver (Sole Trader) and I have no employees. How would I complete step 2?


I'd just skip step 2 as it's not applicable in your circumstances.


----------



## omiata

Are you sure that it will still go through if I simply skip it. The guide you linked above says to go on to "the Business Portal using myGovID to confirm that you don’t have any employees to identify." (see attached). 
I can't find the option on the Business Portal to follow that instruction. 
Should I still just skip it?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

omiata said:


> Are you sure that it will still go through if I simply skip it. The guide you linked above says to go on to "the Business Portal using myGovID to confirm that you don't have any employees to identify." (see attached).
> I can't find the option on the Business Portal to follow that instruction.
> Should I still just skip it?


I think it should go through (but I can't guarantee it). Give it a go and see what happens. That's what I did.

Wherever it asks for the number of employees, insert 0. (The Tax Office made minor changes to the enrolment form last night to make it easier to show 0 employees.)


----------



## Boofhead

Thanks for all this Jack - this may be of interest to someone in a similar situation to me where you have been doing RS for less than a year but already had an ABN with another (small) business and are looking at using the April-June 2020 quarter...

What I'm not getting here is there seems to be a contradiction in the two parts I've highlighted in bold italics - is the second part designed to stop anyone just deliberately reducing their trade by 30% so they can get the $750 per week? e.g. some bloke who does $600 worth of lawn mowing per week just saying to one third of his customers sorry I can't mow your lawn anymore my back's buggered...

*Disclaimer - I don't mow lawns

From - https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper-guide---sole-traders/

*Estimating your projected GST turnover*
You need to identify the sales you made, or are likely to make, during the turnover test period.

Given that you can test eligibility part way through a period, when applying the fall in turnover test, you need to consider what you expect to happen for the remainder of that period. Relevant considerations include:


the period during which the business is not expected to trade because it has been closed due to the coronavirus, or its ability to trade has been restricted
recent patterns in trading that are expected to continue
revised business plans.
*The reasons for a fall or expected fall in turnover are not prescribed and are not limited only to the direct impacts of the coronavirus.*

A business may intend on making substantial changes to their structure and operations, as part of responding to the coronavirus. However, projected GST turnover excludes:


supplies that are made by transfer of capital assets
*supplies that are made as a consequence of substantially and permanently reducing in size or scale the enterprise.*
A 10% reduction is generally accepted as a substantial reduction in size and scale (a smaller reduction may be substantial depending on the particular circumstances of the enterprise). The reduction will be permanent if it is enduring but not if it is reasonable to expect the reduction will end, for example in one or two years. This means that, for example, where an entity decides to close 1 out of its 10 stores in its business, the income from selling the store or the assets used in the store would be excluded when calculating projected GST turnover.

This means that the turnover from structural changes may need to be excluded when calculating projected GST turnover.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office jobkeeper telephone enquiries (1800 806 218)

*Phone us*
...


Phone numberEnquiry typeExtended hours1800 806 218
Emergency Support InfolineEnquiries about the recently announced JobKeeper payment and superannuation measures10.00am-4.00pm (AEST)
Saturday and Sunday

8.00am-10.00pm (AEST)
Monday to Friday

(https://www.ato.gov.au/about-ato/contact-us/phone-us/)

I understand that the telephone enquiries staff are now in a position and willing to correct applications from sole traders without employees (where necessary) to reduce the number of employees shown from 1 to 0.

Have your ABN handy when you phone.

Some drivers are experiencing some delays getting through but others are getting through promptly.


----------



## 2fast 2furious

@Jack Malarkey I just phoned the ATO to clarify whether we put 1 or 0 for number of employees.

They said to put 1 employee because we withhold and pay our own taxes.

Not sure where it would be applicable for a rideshare driver doing Uber/Ola/DiDi to put 0 employees? None of those companies withhold our tax.


----------



## Arcs1210

2fast 2furious said:


> @Jack Malarkey I just phoned the ATO to clarify whether we put 1 or 0 for number of employees.
> 
> They said to put 1 employee because we withhold and pay our own taxes.
> 
> Not sure where it would be applicable for a rideshare driver doing Uber/Ola/DiDi to put 0 employees? None of those companies withhold our tax.


When i called the ATO about rhis confusion the rep said that is SHOULD BE 0 as i have NO employees but myself. This guy knew exactly what i was talking Bout and he forwarded the regulation exlaining all this. As others have said, reps not always know the fine print. I hope all this helps


----------



## Jack Malarkey

2fast 2furious said:


> @Jack Malarkey I just phoned the ATO to clarify whether we put 1 or 0 for number of employees.
> 
> They said to put 1 employee because we withhold and pay our own taxes.
> 
> Not sure where it would be applicable for a rideshare driver doing Uber/Ola/DiDi to put 0 employees? None of those companies withhold our tax.


@2fast 2furious, unfortunately that tax officer has provided incorrect advice as evidenced by the Tax Office's jobkeeper guide for sole traders:

_'Do not include yourself in the count of eligible employees. You should enrol as a sole trader below.

'If your business doesn't have any employees, leave these fields as '0'.'

(https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobkeeper-payment/In-detail/JobKeeper-guide---sole-traders/)_


Also:

*'As a sole trader, how do I enrol for JobKeeper with '0' employees?*

_'This was a known system error that we have corrected on Tuesday night 21 April 2020. You will now be able to enrol online with '0' employees'._

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/COVID-19/Top-calls-about-COVID-19/)



Arcs1210 said:


> When i called the ATO about rhis confusion the rep said that is SHOULD BE 0 as i have NO employees but myself. This guy knew exactly what i was talking Bout and he forwarded the regulation exlaining all this. As others have said, reps not always know the fine print. I hope all this helps


That tax officer has provided correct advice.


----------



## Who is John Galt?

.​My God Jack, you have the patience of a saint.

.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office: recent updates to jobkeeper payment information:

JobKeeper - timeline of content updates

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment.

23 April 2020











New content published:

JobKeeper: Easier to read information for employees- This content is presented in an easy to read format. This is a format that helps some people in the community understand information.








Updates have been made to content to reflect the release of the legal instrument Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Alternative Decline in Turnover Test Rules 2020This link opens in a new window

Applying the turnover test - Alternative test
Eligible employers
Sole traders and other entities








New content published:

We have begun to publish JobKeeper content in other languages


(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/)


*NEW AND SEPARATE POST*

Legislative instrument made by the Australian Taxation Office on Thursday 23 April 2020:

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00461
Explanatory statement:

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00461/Explanatory Statement/Text


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*EXTENSION OF TIME TO ENROL FOR JOBKEEPER FROM 30 APRIL 2020 to 31 MAY 2020*

The Australian Taxation Office has now advised:

_'Extension of time to enrol for the JobKeeper scheme

'Please note the Commissioner has extended the time to enrol for the initial JobKeeper periods, from 30 April 2020 until 31 May 2020.

'If you enrol by 31 May you will still be able to claim for the fortnights in April and May, provided you meet all the eligibility requirements for each of those fortnights. ...

...

'You can enrol and claim for JobKeeper earlier if you choose. For example, you can enrol by the end of April to claim JobKeeper payments for the two fortnights in April'._

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*BE WARY OF SCAM PHONE CALLS!*

Earlier today, I received a phone call on my mobile number claiming to be from the Australian Taxation Office.

The woman on the other end said I'd need to provide information to confirm my identity. I asked what her enquiry was about and she said the jobkeeper scheme.

I declined to provide any information and asked her to advise the Tax Office number I could phone. She advised 13 28 61 and said she would annotate my file with information about their enquiry.

Having confirmed that it was a valid Tax Office number, I phoned 13 28 61 and was very quickly through to the jobkeeper enquiries area.

The man to whom I spoke said that there was no annotation on my file and that there was no additional information they needed for my jobkeeper payment application. He then did a further check under my ABN with the same result.

The call was a scam.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*(This update isn't relevant to sole traders without employees.)*

Australian Taxation Office:

*'Update to JobKeeper rules*

_'To ensure the integrity and the efficient operation of the JobKeeper Payment scheme, the Government is clarifying the operation of some rules:_


_employees employed through a special purpose entity, rather than an operating entity_
_charities and the treatment of government revenue_
_religious practitioners_
_'one in all in' principles_
_full time students aged 16 and 17 years old_
_international aid organisations, and_
_universities._
_'We are developing information and guidance and will update our website as soon as possible. For more information, see the media releaseExternal Link issued by the Treasurer, the Hon Josh Frydenberg MP, on 24 April 2020'.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/)_


----------



## duracell

My rideshare earnings

Mar 19 - $280
Apr19 -$800
May19 -$850
Jun19 -$2100
Jul19 -$750
Aug19 - $1000

2020 - $0 so far

It reads like I'm entitled to $750 a week from the beginning of the Jobseeker scheme as I can choose the March19 $280 comparison month.

I just can't get my head around that it appears like nearly $20k of free money now for those of us who were just driving for pocket money last year.

Please tell me I'm not missing anything!


----------



## Jack Malarkey

duracell said:


> My rideshare earnings
> 
> Mar 19 - $280
> Apr19 -$800
> May19 -$850
> Jun19 -$2100
> Jul19 -$750
> Aug19 - $1000
> 
> 2020 - $0 so far
> 
> It reads like I'm entitled to $750 a week from the beginning of the Jobseeker scheme as I can choose the March19 $280 comparison month.
> 
> I just can't get my head around that it appears like nearly $20k of free money now for those of us who were just driving for pocket money last year.
> 
> Please tell me I'm not missing anything!


You're not missing anything.


----------



## duracell

Jack Malarkey said:


> You're not missing anything.


Thanks Jack. I'm certainly not used to such free money. I'm going to earn 2x more from Jobkeeper than I EVER earned from Uber!

Somebody who earned as little as $6.40 in March, $12.12 in April etc, would STILL qualify for $1500 a fortnight.

Oh well! :biggrin:


----------



## Boofhead

^^^

Be careful mate as you did say this a few pages back... I'm no expert but I have another business besides the RS gig and have to combine both...



duracell said:


> Thanks Jack.
> I have a little casual side income ($12k last year) besides Uber . I can't find anything about secondary sole trader income affecting this.
> Would you happen to know? Thanks


----------



## DannyM

duracell said:


> My rideshare earnings
> 
> Mar 19 - $280
> Apr19 -$800
> May19 -$850
> Jun19 -$2100
> Jul19 -$750
> Aug19 - $1000
> 
> 2020 - $0 so far
> 
> It reads like I'm entitled to $750 a week from the beginning of the Jobseeker scheme as I can choose the March19 $280 comparison month.
> 
> I just can't get my head around that it appears like nearly $20k of free money now for those of us who were just driving for pocket money last year.
> 
> Please tell me I'm not missing anything!
> [/QUOTE
> 
> Is Uber your second job??
> 
> If so, you might not qualify as Ato will have your detail of your earnings from other sources outside rideshare.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

duracell said:


> Thanks Jack. I'm certainly not used to such free money. I'm going to earn 2x more from Jobkeeper than I EVER earned from Uber!
> 
> Somebody who earned as little as $6.40 in March, $12.12 in April etc, would STILL qualify for $1500 a fortnight.
> 
> Oh well! :biggrin:


Permanent (but not casual) part-time or full-time work as an employee would make you ineligible.


----------



## Loop

If his other job is casual he's entitled to the JobKeeper payment.!


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Loop said:


> If his other job is casual he's entitled to the JobKeeper payment.!


Indeed he is.


----------



## duracell

Boofhead said:


> ^^^
> 
> Be careful mate as you did say this a few pages back... I'm no expert but I have another business besides the RS gig and have to combine both...


Thanks. Yes my other income is casual (and not GST income) so it looks like I'm ok.

Fingers crossed our country gets back to normal soon.


----------



## Gary81

Boofhead said:


> ^^^
> 
> Be careful mate as you did say this a few pages back... I'm no expert but I have another business besides the RS gig and have to combine both...


Is that the case though? From my understanding if you have a Sole Trader (Uber) business and are sole Director of a Company then you wouldn't need to combine those incomes as they are separate entities.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*EXCLUSION OF BANKRUPTS FROM
JOBKEEPER*

1. The Australian Taxation Office has included in the list of ineligible entities 'an individual who has entered bankruptcy'.

2. I am now satisfied that this exclusion DOES have a firm legal basis in the Treasurer's rules.

3. Section 7 of the rules is concerned with when entities qualify for the jobkeeper scheme.

4. Subsection 7(1) ensures that section 7 applies for the purposes of paragraphs 6(1)(b) and 11(1)(c). Paragraph 11(1)(c) is concerned with 'eligible business participants'.

5. Subsection 7(2) states that 'an entity does _not _qualify for the jobkeeper scheme at a time if:
...
(g) if the entity is an individual-a trustee in bankruptcy has been appointed to the individual's property'.

6. The accompanying explanatory statement deals with paragraph 7(2)(g) only in its application to employers and not eligible business participants. It states:

'Liquidators and bankruptcy

'For the purposes of JobKeeper payment, an employer is not a qualifying employer if a liquidator or trustee in bankruptcy had been appointed. This reflects the intention that the jobkeeper payment is intended to support entities that are continuing their operations through the Coronavirus period or wishing to recommence their operations following the period'.

7. The explanatory statement further down states:

'Entitlement to a JobKeeper payment as a business participant (under section 11 of the Rules) operates similarly to entitlement to the payment as an employer (under section 6)...'.

8. The explanatory statement is therefore consistent with the legislation it accompanies.

Treasurer's rules: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00419

Explanatory statement: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00419/Explanatory Statement/Text.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> *EXCLUSION OF BANKRUPTS FROM
> JOBKEEPER*
> 
> 1. The Australian Taxation Office has included in the list of ineligible entities 'an individual who has entered bankruptcy'.
> 
> 2. I am now satisfied that this exclusion DOES have a firm legal basis in the Treasurer's rules.
> 
> 3. Section 7 of the rules is concerned with when entities qualify for the jobkeeper scheme.
> 
> 4. Subsection 7(1) ensures that section 7 applies for the purposes of paragraphs 6(1)(b) and 11(1)(c). Paragraph 11(1)(c) is concerned with 'eligible business participants'.
> 
> 5. Subsection 7(2) states that 'an entity does _not _qualify for the jobkeeper scheme at a time if:
> ...
> (g) if the entity is an individual-a trustee in bankruptcy has been appointed to the individual's property'.
> 
> 6. The accompanying explanatory statement deals with paragraph 7(2)(g) only in its application to employers and not eligible business participants. It states:
> 
> 'Liquidators and bankruptcy
> 
> 'For the purposes of JobKeeper payment, an employer is not a qualifying employer if a liquidator or trustee in bankruptcy had been appointed. This reflects the intention that the jobkeeper payment is intended to support entities that are continuing their operations through the Coronavirus period or wishing to recommence their operations following the period'.
> 
> 7. The explanatory statement further down states:
> 
> 'Entitlement to a JobKeeper payment as a business participant (under section 11 of the Rules) operates similarly to entitlement to the payment as an employer (under section 6)...'.
> 
> 8. The explanatory statement is therefore consistent with the legislation it accompanies.
> 
> Treasurer's rules: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00419
> 
> Explanatory statement: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00419/Explanatory Statement/Text.


@Uberdrummoyne in the Sydney forum has disagreed with my interpretation. This is his reasoning:

I don't agree because when someone goes bankrupt they have an old entity and a new entity after they go bankrupt, the second line of the treasurers explanation sheet, states that "This reflects the intention that the jobkeeper payment is intended to support entities that are continuing their operations through the Coronavirus period or wishing to recommence their operations following the period" Which means if your entity that you are claiming the Jobkeeper payment for doesn't exist anymore than you can't claim the payment. I also read the whole legislation , if John was bankrupted and worked for someone else last year full time he would receive the Job keeper payment, Why would the government pay one bankrupt and not someone who works as sub contractor?

Bankrupts have caveats on earnings and directorships etc during their bankruptcy. But it is not a criminal offence and they are not regulated from receiving government handouts or claiming tax deductions etc.

I believe that the spirit of the legislation targets entities that fall over, not people who have started a new entity which meets the Jobkeeper legislation, otherwise all current bankrupts would be barred from receiving it.

Jack Malarkey comments:

I find it difficult to reconcile this approach with the plain words of the legislation.

It also seems to be inconsistent with the Tax Office's interpretation.

I do think that the current legislation (rightly or wrongly) does bar all bankrupts from receiving the jobkeeper payment.

I agree with @Uberdrummoyne from a policy perspective and think that the Government's policy is unfair and harsh.

In relation to bankruptcy, see the following question and answer in Treasury's frequently asked questions about the jobkeeper payment:

WHAT TYPE OF ENTITIES ARE ELIGIBLE?

All business types, including not-for-profits, will be eligible with the exception of those listed below. The following entities will not be eligible:
• Australian Government and its agencies,

• State and Territory governments and their agencies,

• Foreign governments and their agencies;
• Local council governments;

• Wholly-owned corporations of any of the above; and

• A business subject to the Major Bank Levy.

_*Additionally, a company that is in liquidation, or a partnership, trust or sole trader in bankruptcy, will not be eligible.*_

Some businesses may not be eligible if they are separately provided with support from the Government that explicitly requires them to forgo access to the JobKeeper Payment.

(Bold italics added)

(https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-04/JobKeeper_payment_frequently_asked_questions.pdf)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

[_None of the new material relates to sole traders without employees.]

Australian Taxation Office:_

JobKeeper - timeline of content updates

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment.

27 April









New content published:

Employers' frequently asked JobKeeper questions - This page provides answers to some common JobKeeper questions from employers.
We've added Hazaragilanguage content to the Information in other languages page.








We've added new questions to the page


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*MUSINGS ON HOW JOBKEEPER APPLIES TO EMPLOYERS *

It's not apparent to me why the Government has insisted that employers pay their employees at least $1,500 per fortnight ahead of the employer receiving the jobkeeper payment. The 'one in all in' rule then compounds the difficulties.

A small employer suffering a significant decline in turnover is going to find it difficult to borrow the large amounts at very short notice. This is especially so given that jobkeeper will boost many salaries and particularly so for part-time employees.

In my view, the employer should simply have continued to pay existing salaries and then provided salary top-ups after receiving the jobkeeper payment. It astounds me that this approach isn't permissible.

I have long thought it evident that the extension of the jobkeeper payment to sole traders without employees was made very late in an already compressed decision-making process.

The paradox is that a wages subsidy program for employees seems to be working best where there are no employees and no wages.









((_Canberra Times_, Wednesday 29 April 2020, page 17)


----------



## duracell

Jack Malarkey said:


> Indeed he is.


Hi Jack. Is this job keeper based solely on GST returns or would they take tax income into account? As an example

I've had a reduction in GST from the corresponding period last year. So far so good.

BUT I also have NO income for that tax year as I claimed the depreciation on a car.

With that in mind it means my taxable income hasn't technically dropped from the zero profit last year (but my GST has by >30%).

Thanks


----------



## Jack Malarkey

duracell said:


> Hi Jack. Is this job keeper based solely on GST returns or would they take tax income into account? As an example
> 
> I've had a reduction in GST from the corresponding period last year. So far so good.
> 
> BUT I also have NO income for that tax year as I claimed the depreciation on a car.
> 
> With that in mind it means my taxable income hasn't technically dropped from the zero profit last year (but my GST has by >30%).
> 
> Thanks


@duracell, the decline in turnover test is based solely on gross GST turnover and has no regard to anything else including expenses, GST credits on expenses, depreciation or taxable income.



Gary81 said:


> Is that the case though? From my understanding if you have a Sole Trader (Uber) business and are sole Director of a Company then you wouldn't need to combine those incomes as they are separate entities.


A company director in certain circumstances is an employee of the company. This is the case typically where the director acts as an officer of the company or has direct control over operational matters. See:
https://wattsnext.com.au/is-an-owner-or-director-considered-an-employee/.

A sole trader (including a rideshare driver) who is also a permanent (non-casual) part-time or full-time employee (including as a director employee) is ineligible for the jobkeeper payment as a sole trader.

Aggregating or non-aggregating of income is irrelevant to this.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office updates to guidance material:

JobKeeper - timeline of content updates

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment.

29 April











Employers - frequently asked Jobkeeper questions - new question added 'Can the ATO provide me a letter for my bank confirming I have enrolled in the JobKeeper Payment scheme?'
Applying the turnover test- we updated our information for the Basic test Step 3: work out the relevant GST turnover for Cash or accruals basis.
We updated the following guides with advice on using the 'Printer Friendly function' to save information when you enrol, including your JobKeeper receipt number:

JobKeeper guide - employers not reporting through STP

JobKeeper guide - employers reporting through STP

JobKeeper guide - sole traders

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/)



*NEW AND SEPARATE POST:

AUSTRALIAN TAXATION OFFICE'S UPDATED FAQs AS MOST RELEVANT TO SOLE TRADERS WITHOUT EMPLOYEES:*

Employers' frequently asked JobKeeper questions

On this page:


General
Employee nomination notice
Turnover
General

*Question: What's the difference between JobKeeper and JobSeeker?*

Answer: The JobKeeper scheme supports businesses to retain their employees by contributing to their salary and wages and is administered by the ATO. Eligible businesses are required to register with the ATO to receive these payments for their eligible employees.

JobSeeker payments are a form of income support available to eligible individuals and are administered by Services Australia. These payments are paid directly to the individuals and not to their employers.

See also:


Services AustraliaExternal Link
...

*Question: Do I need to be registered for GST to qualify for JobKeeper?*

Answer: No, you don't need to be registered for GST, but there are other requirements. See Employers.

*Question: I run a business but do not have employees. Am I eligible for JobKeeper payments?*

Answer: Yes, you may be eligible for JobKeeper payments where certain conditions are satisfied. See Sole traders and other entities.

*Question: Does an employer have to be assessed by the ATO as being eligible before any payments are made?*

Answer: Eligibility for JobKeeper payments is a self-assessment process, with the ATO administering the payment. However, if a payment is made and we later determine that the entity was not entitled to that payment (or was entitled to a lesser amount) the entity will be required to repay the overpaid amount.

...

*Question: Can the ATO provide me a letter for my bank confirming I have enrolled in the JobKeeper Payment scheme?*

Answer: The ATO cannot provide a letter saying you have enrolled in the JobKeeper Payment scheme.

Instead you could provide your bank with the following information that was provided during the JobKeeper enrolment process:


JobKeeper receipt number
Your BSB and account number
Your number of eligible employees.
If you did not retain your JobKeeper receipt number you will need to contact the ATO on 13 28 66 to get it.

...

*Turnover

Question: Can businesses qualify for JobKeeper payments after April, for example, if my business experiences a downturn in the future?*

Answer: Yes. If you do not satisfy the turnover test for the current month or quarter, you can still assess your eligibility at a later date. To qualify later, the turnover month can be May, June, July, August or September 2020, provided the fortnight you are qualifying for has ended that month or an earlier month. If the turnover for a quarter is being used, it can be the quarter:


from 1 April 2020 to 30 June 2020
from 1 July 2020 to 30 September 2020, but only if first seeking to qualify for fortnights ending in July 2020 or later.
Once you satisfy the decline in turnover test, you do not need to retest again.

*Question: Do I have to show that it is COVID-19 that caused the decline in the turnover of my business?*

Answer: No. It does not matter whether it is COVID-19 or the subsequent effect on the economy that has caused the drop in turnover, provided the turnover has fallen by the required percentage and you satisfy the other eligibility criteria.

*Question: My business suffered a steep decline in turnover in March, but I've changed to a new business model and I may build the business up again soon. Does this mean I lose JobKeeper?*

Answer: No. You only need to satisfy the decline in turnover test once to be entitled to JobKeeper. For example, satisfying it for March 2020 (compared in March 2019) is sufficient, even if your business recovers to previous levels after this.

There are ongoing reporting obligations for current and projected GST turnover, but even where these show a recovery of turnover they don't affect eligibility.

*Question: What happens if my predicted fall in turnover happens to be incorrect, so that the fall ends up being less than the 30% or 50%?*

Answer: This does not necessarily mean you are ineligible for JobKeeper.

Your projected GST turnover is a point-in-time test and needs to be a reasonable assessment of what was likely at the time you calculated the test. If, at a later stage, it eventuates that your actual turnover for your test period is greater than your prediction of your projected turnover, you do not lose access to JobKeeper. We will accept your assessment of these turnovers unless we have reason to believe that your calculation of your projected GST turnover was not reasonable.

If there is a significant difference between your projected turnover and what eventuates, we may need to assess whether your assessment was reasonable, so you need to keep good records of your calculations.

Integrity rules are in place to deny or reduce an entitlement to JobKeeper payments if schemes are contrived to ensure payment conditions are satisfied, such as temporarily reducing or deferring turnover. Exceeding your turnover predictions by itself does not trigger these integrity rules.

Our compliance focus will be particularly directed toward schemes where there has not been a genuine fall in turnover in substance, but arrangements are contrived to ensure the turnover test is satisfied.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobK...loyers--frequently-asked-JobKeeper-questions/)


----------



## Gary81

Jack Malarkey said:


> @duracell, the decline in turnover test is based solely on gross GST turnover and has no regard to anything else including expenses, GST credits on expenses, depreciation or taxable income.
> 
> 
> A company director in certain circumstances is an employee of the company. This is the case typically where the director acts as an officer of the company or has direct control over operational matters. See:
> https://wattsnext.com.au/is-an-owner-or-director-considered-an-employee/.
> 
> A sole trader (including a rideshare driver) who is also a permanent (non-casual) part-time or full-time employee (including as a director employee) is ineligible for the jobkeeper payment as a sole trader.
> 
> Aggregating or non-aggregating of income is irrelevant to this.


Hi Jack,
Thanks for this.
This example provided by ATO implies that you can apply if you're a Sole Trader and also have a business. No mention of a Director being an employer. I agree with what you've said and your link, but the person in the example published would be classed as an 'employee' based on the definition you provided, but is still eligible:

*"Example - Sole trader with more than one business*

Mathew is a sole trader and actively manages two businesses:


Matt's Sculptures, which sells Mathew's handmade art sculptures at markets and galleries, and
Matt's Designs, which is Mathew's graphic design business.
Both businesses are operated in Australia and have annual turnovers between $60,000 to $80,000. Mathew has an ABN, is 43 years old and is an Australian resident.

Matt's Sculptures and Matt's Designs have both experienced a fall in turnover as a result COVID-19. Matt's Sculptures has ceased selling at markets and galleries while they are closed, but continues to operate selling art sculptures online and using a delivery service. Matt's Designs continues to operate through an online platform.

Mathew forecasts that his turnover will fall by 45% in April 2020 compared with April 2019, due to a reduction in work contracts and discretionary spending by customers.

Mathew is an eligible business participant for the purpose of the JobKeeper Payment scheme, satisfying all requirements. Mathew cannot however, qualify for the JobKeeper payment twice on the basis that he runs two businesses. He can only nominate under the JobKeeper Payment scheme himself as the eligible business participant for the one entity (himself as sole trader).
*
If Mathew instead operated Matt's Designs through a company, Matt's Designs Pty Ltd, the outcome would still be the same in that only one JobKeeper payment can be claimed.

This is because only one entity (Mathew as sole trader, or Matt's Designs Pty Ltd) may be entitled to the JobKeeper payment for the one individual who is the eligible business participant (that is, Mathew).

If both Mathew in his capacity as a sole trader and shareholder or director of Matt's Designs Pty Ltd satisfies the eligibility conditions for a JobKeeper payment, Mathew would need to decide in which capacity he will be an eligible business participant and therefore whether he becomes entitled to the JobKeeper payment as a sole trader, or Matt's Designs Pty Ltd becomes entitled to the JobKeeper payment."*


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office:

*Top calls about COVID-19

https://www.ato.gov.au/General/COVID-19/Top-calls-about-COVID-19/?=redirected_Topcalls*
The answers to these three questions are of particular interest:

*I am a sole trader and included 1 employee, not 0, on the form when I enrolled. How do I amend it?*

You do not need to correct this information at this stage, it will be updated at step 2 in the process when you identify and maintain your eligible employees.

*I provided the wrong bank details when I enrolled. How do I amend this information?*

You do not need to correct this information at this stage, it will be updated at step 2 in the process when you identify and maintain your eligible employees.

*I have selected the wrong month that my business experienced, or is likely to experience, a reduction in turnover. How do I amend this information?*

You do not need to correct this information at this stage. You will still be able to nominate employees for earlier months (such as April) at step 2 in the process when you identify and maintain your eligible employees.

However, you do need to ensure you meet the requirements about reduction in turnover and keep records.


(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/COVID-19/Top-calls-about-COVID-19/?=redirected_Topcalls)

(The answers to the first two questions have raised doubts in my mind about whether I have been correct in suggesting that we will receive payment on Friday 1 May 2020. I now suspect we will receive the first payment by the end of the first week in May. I apologise if I have misled anyone.)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

I now understand that the jobkeeper payments will be made from Monday 4 May 2020 but we need first to complete steps 2 and 3 of the application process. We can do this also from Monday 4 May 2020.

So it may be prudent to set aside some time early on Monday before demand on the system becomes very heavy to do this.


----------



## Elatte

Jack Malarkey said:


> I now understand that the jobkeeper payments will be made from Monday 4 May 2020 but we need first to complete steps 2 and 3 of the application process. We can do this also from Monday 4 May 2020.
> 
> So it may be prudent to set aside some time early on Monday before demand on the system becomes very heavy to do this.


hopefully we can access these steps on Sunday to avoid the rush. I'm assuming we complete both steps via myGov?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Elatte said:


> hopefully we can access these steps on Sunday to avoid the rush. I'm assuming we complete both steps via myGov?


Yes, just go to your jobkeeper page on myGov.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Gary81 said:


> Hi Jack,
> Thanks for this.
> This example provided by ATO implies that you can apply if you're a Sole Trader and also have a business. No mention of a Director being an employer. I agree with what you've said and your link, but the person in the example published would be classed as an 'employee' based on the definition you provided, but is still eligible:
> 
> *"Example - Sole trader with more than one business*
> 
> Mathew is a sole trader and actively manages two businesses:
> 
> 
> Matt's Sculptures, which sells Mathew's handmade art sculptures at markets and galleries, and
> Matt's Designs, which is Mathew's graphic design business.
> Both businesses are operated in Australia and have annual turnovers between $60,000 to $80,000. Mathew has an ABN, is 43 years old and is an Australian resident.
> 
> Matt's Sculptures and Matt's Designs have both experienced a fall in turnover as a result COVID-19. Matt's Sculptures has ceased selling at markets and galleries while they are closed, but continues to operate selling art sculptures online and using a delivery service. Matt's Designs continues to operate through an online platform.
> 
> Mathew forecasts that his turnover will fall by 45% in April 2020 compared with April 2019, due to a reduction in work contracts and discretionary spending by customers.
> 
> Mathew is an eligible business participant for the purpose of the JobKeeper Payment scheme, satisfying all requirements. Mathew cannot however, qualify for the JobKeeper payment twice on the basis that he runs two businesses. He can only nominate under the JobKeeper Payment scheme himself as the eligible business participant for the one entity (himself as sole trader).
> *
> If Mathew instead operated Matt's Designs through a company, Matt's Designs Pty Ltd, the outcome would still be the same in that only one JobKeeper payment can be claimed.
> 
> This is because only one entity (Mathew as sole trader, or Matt's Designs Pty Ltd) may be entitled to the JobKeeper payment for the one individual who is the eligible business participant (that is, Mathew).
> 
> If both Mathew in his capacity as a sole trader and shareholder or director of Matt's Designs Pty Ltd satisfies the eligibility conditions for a JobKeeper payment, Mathew would need to decide in which capacity he will be an eligible business participant and therefore whether he becomes entitled to the JobKeeper payment as a sole trader, or Matt's Designs Pty Ltd becomes entitled to the JobKeeper payment."*


Thanks. That example does support your point.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> Thanks. That example does support your point.





Gary81 said:


> Hi Jack,
> Thanks for this.
> This example provided by ATO implies that you can apply if you're a Sole Trader and also have a business. No mention of a Director being an employer. I agree with what you've said and your link, but the person in the example published would be classed as an 'employee' based on the definition you provided, but is still eligible:
> 
> *"Example - Sole trader with more than one business*
> 
> Mathew is a sole trader and actively manages two businesses:
> 
> 
> Matt's Sculptures, which sells Mathew's handmade art sculptures at markets and galleries, and
> Matt's Designs, which is Mathew's graphic design business.
> Both businesses are operated in Australia and have annual turnovers between $60,000 to $80,000. Mathew has an ABN, is 43 years old and is an Australian resident.
> 
> Matt's Sculptures and Matt's Designs have both experienced a fall in turnover as a result COVID-19. Matt's Sculptures has ceased selling at markets and galleries while they are closed, but continues to operate selling art sculptures online and using a delivery service. Matt's Designs continues to operate through an online platform.
> 
> Mathew forecasts that his turnover will fall by 45% in April 2020 compared with April 2019, due to a reduction in work contracts and discretionary spending by customers.
> 
> Mathew is an eligible business participant for the purpose of the JobKeeper Payment scheme, satisfying all requirements. Mathew cannot however, qualify for the JobKeeper payment twice on the basis that he runs two businesses. He can only nominate under the JobKeeper Payment scheme himself as the eligible business participant for the one entity (himself as sole trader).
> 
> *If Mathew instead operated Matt's Designs through a company, Matt's Designs Pty Ltd, the outcome would still be the same in that only one JobKeeper payment can be claimed.
> 
> This is because only one entity (Mathew as sole trader, or Matt's Designs Pty Ltd) may be entitled to the JobKeeper payment for the one individual who is the eligible business participant (that is, Mathew).
> 
> If both Mathew in his capacity as a sole trader and shareholder or director of Matt's Designs Pty Ltd satisfies the eligibility conditions for a JobKeeper payment, Mathew would need to decide in which capacity he will be an eligible business participant and therefore whether he becomes entitled to the JobKeeper payment as a sole trader, or Matt's Designs Pty Ltd becomes entitled to the JobKeeper payment."*


@Gary81, this is all very interesting. As I said in the immediately preceding post, this example from the Australian Taxation Office's guidance material does support the point you make.

I find the example difficult to reconcile with the Treasurer's rules.

Under the Treasurer's rules, a sole trader must be an 'eligible business participant' as defined in section 12.

Subparagraph 12(4)(b)(ii) stipulates that 'the individual is not an employee (other than a casual employee) of another entity)'.

(https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00419)

The example also seems to be inconsistent with another Tax Office example dealing with the non-casual employee exclusion from eligibility:

_'Sole trader and employee

'Example - Sole trader and employee

'Zora is a sole trader and actively manages her florist business, Flowers by Zora. She is also employed in another business owned by another entity on a permanent part-time basis_ a_s an administrative assistant.

'The Flowers by Zora business has suffered a significant downturn due to COVID-19. Zora's hours at her office job have been cut as a result of COVID-19, causing a decline in the business of her employer.

'Zora is an eligible employee for the purpose of the JobKeeper Payment scheme for her her employment.

'Zora, in her capacity as a sole trader, is not eligible for the JobKeeper payment because she is a permanent (not casual) employee of another enitity. This conclusion would be the same whether her employer qualifies for JobKeeper payments or not.'

(https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobkeeper-payment/sole-traders-and-other-entities/#Examples)_

The exclusion from eligibility as business participants of non-casual employees came very late in an already compressed decision-making process.

I wonder if the example you cite was prepared ahead of the decision about non-casual employees and wasn't updated in the way required by the Treasurer's rules as made.

That said, it's what the Tax Office says that counts and not what I say!


----------



## Wild Colonial Boy

It sounds to me as though the ATO has taken the treasurers rules and overlaid more rules to prevent imaginary things, and in the process created more problems than they solved.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Update of Australian Taxation Office jobkeeper guidance:

JobKeeper - timeline of content updates

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment.

30 April











Sole traders and other entities - Updated information about the timing of enrolment for JobKeeper.
Tax and BAS agents - Updated information about the timing of enrolment for JobKeeper and the eligibility of sovereign entities.


(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/)


----------



## Boofhead

Question for Jack - thanks in advance - this from the Alternative Turnover test requirements - what is a "Class of Entities"???

*The Commissioner can also only determine a test for a class of entities, and cannot make discretionary decisions for individual entities. *


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Boofhead said:


> Question for Jack - thanks in advance - this from the Alternative Turnover test requirements - what is a "Class of Entities"???
> 
> *The Commissioner can also only determine a test for a class of entities, and cannot make discretionary decisions for individual entities. *


@Boofhead, a 'class of entities' is a group of entities with common characteristics as distinct from an individual entity.

So the Tax Office can't determine a test or make relevant discretionary decisions for, say, Jack BeNimble MALARKEY but can for, say, the class of 'sole traders without employees'.


----------



## Boofhead

Thanks Jack - so in my case they will make a determination under the Alternative Turnover Test based on assuming all Rideshare drivers who started last September have likely tanked this April?

If ti's all too much don't worry :biggrin:


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Boofhead said:


> Thanks Jack - so in my case they will make a determination under the Alternative Turnover Test based on assuming all Rideshare drivers who started last September have likely tanked this April?
> 
> If ti's all too much don't worry :biggrin:


It would be up to them to determine the relevant class. All that matters is that you're a member of the designated class so that any determination is capable of applying to you.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*SETTING ASIDE AMOUNTS FOR INCOME TAX ON JOBKEEPER PAYMENTS*

1. Jobkeeper payments are subject to income tax but not GST.

2. No tax will be withheld from jobkeeper payments.

3. It may be prudent, therefore, to set aside in a 'provision for tax' account an appropriate proportion of the jobkeeper payments received to ensure you can meet your income tax liability.

4. We can expect to receive $6,000 in the 2019-20 income year and $13,500 in 2020-21. Treat these amounts as the 'top slice' of your income.

5. I normally set aside 30% of the net rideshare amounts credited to my bank account to make provision for both GST and income tax. This is normally more than enough.

6. For jobkeeper, I'll set aside 34.5% (my marginal tax rate of 32.5% plus Medicare levy of 2%) even though the payments aren't subject to GST.

7. This is because, unlike with rideshare, there are no (or only minimal) deductible expenses incurred in receiving the jobkeeper payments.

8. Below are the current resident individual tax rates to which you need to add 2% for Medicare levy:

Resident tax rates 2019-20


Taxable incomeTax on this income0 - $18,200Nil$18,201 - $37,00019c for each $1 over $18,200$37,001 - $90,000$3,572 plus 32.5c for each $1 over $37,000$90,001 - $180,000$20,797 plus 37c for each $1 over $90,000$180,001 and over$54,097 plus 45c for each $1 over $180,000

The above rates do not include the Medicare levy of 2%.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/rates/individual-income-tax-rates/)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Update of Australian Taxation Office jobkeeper payment guidance:

JobKeeper - timeline of content updates

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment.

1 May










New content:

JobKeeper - easier to understand information - We have developed some products to help everyone in the community understand more about JobKeeper.
Tax inVoice episode - JobKeeper Payment (part 1) - Deputy Commissioner James O'Halloran, the ATO Program lead for the JobKeeper Payment, discusses the JobKeeper Payment program, what eligible employers and employees need to do, key dates for the program and where to go for more information.









JobKeeper payment - religious practitioner nomination notice - Complete this form to notify eligible religious practitioners that you intend to claim the JobKeeper payment and ask them if they agree to be nominated by you.








We've updated the page Top calls about COVID-19 with 3 new questions:

I can't select March as the month my business experienced a reduction in turnover when I enrol online. What do I do?
I lodge quarterly and for the June quarter I am predicting my turnover will be down 30%, which month should I select?
When will I receive my cash flow boost?


(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/)

*I can't select March as the month my business experienced a reduction in turnover when I enrol online. What do I do?*

In order to enrol you can select April. You will still be able to nominate employees for earlier months (such as March) at step 2 in the process when you identify and maintain your eligible employees.

However, you do need to ensure you meet the requirements about reduction in turnover and keep records.

*I lodge quarterly and for the June quarter I am predicting my turnover will be down 30%, which month should I select?*

You should select the first month of the quarter you predict your turnover will be down (for example, select April for the June quarter, select July for the September quarter).

If you selected June for the June quarter (instead of April) when you enrolled, you do not need to call us. You can correct it at step 2 in the process when you identify and maintain your eligible employees.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/COVID-19/Top-calls-about-COVID-19/)


----------



## Wild Colonial Boy

I thought that the total quarterly for the June quarter turnover would be compared to the same period last year to establish a JobKeeper entitlement?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Wild Colonial Boy said:


> I thought that the total quarterly for the June quarter turnover would be compared to the same period last year to establish a JobKeeper entitlement?


This has been the Tax Office advice:

*How to calculate a fall in turnover for the first fortnight starting 30 March 2020*

To work out your fall in turnover, you can compare either:


GST turnover for March 2020 with GST turnover for March 2019
projected GST turnover for April 2020 with GST turnover for April 2019
projected GST turnover for the quarter starting April 2020 with GST turnover for the quarter starting April 2019.
(https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobk...neinturnover#Howtodetermineadeclineinturnover)

(It would be helpful if the Tax Office had a consistent way of referring to quarters.)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jobkeeper step 2 can be done NOW (Sunday 3 May 2020) on myGov (one day early).

You need to complete this step even if you’re a sole trader without employees. Despite its title, step 2 has more than identifying employees (if any).

Get in now and avoid the rush.


----------



## kooljp

Assume we use FN 1and 2 to answer this: 
JobKeeper status *
_If you are eligible, select the applicable JobKeeper status to confirm and nominate to the ATO that you are an eligible business participant._


----------



## Jack Malarkey

kooljp said:


> Assume we use FN 1and 2 to answer this:
> JobKeeper status *
> _If you are eligible, select the applicable JobKeeper status to confirm and nominate to the ATO that you are an eligible business participant._


Yes.

*NEW AND SEPARATE POST *

Australian Taxation Office: latest update of jobkeeper payment guidance:

JobKeeper - timeline of content updates

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment.

2 May










We've added information on the alternative test including how to:

work out the right comparison period to determine a decline in turnover
apply the alternative test for each eligible circumstance.








We've updated the Top calls about COVID 19 page with a new question:
When will I receive the early access payment from my super fund?







New content:
JobKeeper key dates - a summary of key dates for the JobKeeper Payment scheme.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/)

Jack Malarkey comments:

'Key dates' doesn't advise the first date of payment.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Elatte said:


> hopefully we can access these steps on Sunday to avoid the rush.


@Elatte, it was only because of this post of yours that I snuck a quick look into myGov early this morning just in case we could complete the remaining parts of the application a day early: not that I was expecting to be able to do so.

And sure enough we could! Just as we previously could enrol one day early.

So a big thank you to you!


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*CALCULATION OF GST TURNOVER
*
_*Is GST turnover the total of relevant amounts credited to your bank account?*_

Jack Malarkey:

Strictly speaking no because the amount credited to your bank account has had the service fee and certain other expenses deducted.

GST turnover is the amount shown as the FIRST step in the business activity statement before reduction by GST credits on expenses.

GST turnover for a rideshare driver would be gross fares (including GST) PLUS tips (including cash tips) PLUS split fare fees PLUS tolls PLUS state government levies PLUS airport fees PLUS booking fees PLUS referral and incentive payments.

Do not reduce by ANY expenses or GST credits on those expenses.

That said, it doesn't really matter if drivers simply use the amounts credited to their bank accounts provided they do so consistently for BOTH comparison periods.

What you need to able to demonstrate to be eligible for the jobkeeper payment is that you have had a decline in turnover of at least 30% and not the precise drop in turnover or constituent amounts.

Just satisfy yourself that you are eligible and be able to demonstrate (if ever asked) that you are eligible.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office: latest updates to jobkeeper payment guidance:

JobKeeper - timeline of content updates

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment.

3 May










We've updated the following guides to include information on how to identify and maintain your employees and how to make a business declaration each month:

JobKeeper guide - sole traders
JobKeeper guide - employers reporting through STP
JobKeeper guide - employers not reporting through STP








We've updated the following pages to reflect the changes which came into effect on 1 May 2020 with the introduction of Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Amendment Rules (NO 2) 2020:

Enrol for the JobKeeper payment
Tax and BAS agents
Sole traders and other entities
Eligible employers


(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office: PCG 2020/4 (1 May 2020)

https://www.ato.gov.au/law/view/pdf/cog/pcg2020-004.pdf


----------



## Jack Malarkey

As per @Mulder99 in the Sydney forum:

'Treasurer was on 2GB 20 mins ago:
Jobkeeper payments rolling out from today [Wednesday 6 May 2020];
will depend on each bank's clearing system when it hits our account'.

Jack Malarkey comments: 
The interview is available here: https://www.2gb.com/treasurer-reveals-how-covid-19-debt-will-be-paid-off/.

The statement about the timing of jobkeeper payments is at 2:18.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office: latest updates to jobkeeper payment guidance:

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment.

*6 May*










We've published a video about JobKeeper eligibility for sole traders.

*5 May*










New content:

Tax inVoice episode - JobKeeper Payment (part 2) - Deputy Commissioner James O'Halloran and Assistant Commissioner Sally Bektas discuss eligibility, key dates and more information or assistance for sole traders.


(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Posts in the Sydney forum indicate that some have now received their first jobkeeper payment of $3,000 in their accounts.


----------



## Wild Colonial Boy

Yep, I got my $ 3,000.00, so it looks like I’ve qualified, even though I didn’t start driving until late August last year.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

I’m with CBA (Commonwealth) and have not received payment overnight.

I phoned the Tax Office a few minutes ago and they confirmed that my application had been processed and approved for payment but the funds hadn’t been released yet due to system constraints.

They expect I will receive payment soon.

By the way, if you need to phone the Tax Office and they already have your ‘unique voiceprint’, you’re better off phoning 13 28 61 rather than 1800 806 218 as the voice recognition identification is available on the former number and not on the latter number.

The voice recognition identification speeds things up.


----------



## Hussyboy81

@Jack Malarkey - Why would a part time UBER driver not be eligible to receive this? There are so many of my mates who are in low paid jobs and used to drive RS to supplement their income. Obviously for the past two months, they have stopped driving and are not receiving that income - shouldn't they be eligible cause technically their income has reduced as well?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Hussyboy81 said:


> @Jack Malarkey - Why would a part time UBER driver not be eligible to receive this? There are so many of my mates who are in low paid jobs and used to drive RS to supplement their income. Obviously for the past two months, they have stopped driving and are not receiving that income - shouldn't they be eligible cause technically their income has reduced as well?


I agree with you, @Hussyboy81. There are several drivers in the lunch group I convene in the same position.

Part-time or full-time employment (other than casual employment) makes you ineligible to receive jobkeeper as a sole trader (business participant) even if you cannot benefit from jobkeeper through that employment.

Such an exclusion makes no sense to me.

There's a provision for long-term casuals saying that they can't benefit twice. The same approach could (and should) have been extended to all employees.


----------



## Hussyboy81

Jack Malarkey said:


> Such an exclusion makes no sense to me.


A few of them did not know the rule so they applied for the JK and have already received it. I guess they will have to return it at the end of the year once they file their tax return.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Hussyboy81 said:


> A few of them did not know the rule so they applied for the JK and have already received it. I guess they will have to return it at the end of the year once they file their tax return.


The tax return only provides for the taxation of the payment rather than its repayment in full.

They really need to advise the Tax Office as soon as reasonably practicable and repay the incorrectly received amounts.

Repayments may attract general interest charge, which is at a very high compound-interest rate (although tax deductible): https://www.ato.gov.au/Rates/General-interest-charge-(GIC)-rates/.


----------



## WhogivesAF?

X



Jack Malarkey said:


> The tax return only provides for the taxation of the payment rather than its repayment in full.
> 
> They really need to advise the Tax Office as soon as reasonably practicable and repay the incorrectly received amounts.
> 
> Repayments may attract general interest charge, which is at a very high compound-interest rate (although tax deductible): https://www.ato.gov.au/Rates/General-interest-charge-(GIC)-rates/.


Recipients of both jobseeker and jobkeeper, are required to report the jobkeeper payment ( when asked for income earned) on their next reporting date ( for the jobseeker payment). Centrelink will then raise and overpayment. If you do this voluntarily, no penalties apply.

You must declare your income on every jobseeker reporting date (that will prevent any overpayments).There is no requirement to cancel jobseeker. Once the jobkeeper payment ceases, you will automatically revert back to jobseeker payments. Should you be eligible for the benefit.

For those who think they can double dip and get way with it, the very best of luck with that plan.



Beepbeep41 said:


> so even if I was earning like earning $150 a week after expenses from Uber would I still be eligible for the $750?. Ubers my only income & my partner earns 55k a year


For the purpose of eligibility for the one off payment and jobkeeper, you are assessed as an individual entity. Therefore you are eligible for both, as your partners income is well under the threshold.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

WhogivesAF? said:


> X
> 
> 
> Recipients of both jobseeker and jobkeeper, are required to report the jobkeeper payment ( when asked for income earned) on their next reporting date ( for the jobseeker payment). Centrelink will then raise and overpayment. If you do this voluntarily, no penalties apply.
> 
> You must declare your income on every jobseeker reporting date (that will prevent any overpayments).There is no requirement to cancel jobseeker. Once the jobkeeper payment ceases, you will automatically revert back to jobseeker payments. Should you be eligible for the benefit.
> 
> For those who think they can double dip and get way with it, the very best of luck with that plan.


This isn't a case of applicants receiving both jobkeeper and jobseeker.

Rather, it's a case of applicants receiving only jobkeeper but in circumstances where they were in fact ineligible because they were also an employee (other than a casual employee).


----------



## WhogivesAF?

Jack Malarkey said:


> This isn't a case of applicants receiving both jobkeeper and jobseeker.
> 
> Rather, it's a case of applicants receiving only jobkeeper but in circumstances where they were in fact ineligible because they were also an employee (other than a casual employee).


How can that happen Ole chap, when the status of the applicant will be verified before payment ? With people on the jobseeker getting the jobkeeper, the initial overpayment is more likely to occur. But I am not disputing it won't happen given the haphazard way the bureaucracy operates.

Also, let me compliment you on your outstanding efforts.

By the way mate, what is a trophy point, how do you get one, and what benefit does a person derive from it ? And, why is losing a trophy point considered a penalty ? If you can answer those questions, I will give you five Uber platinum stars.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

WhogivesAF? said:


> How can that happen Ole chap, when the status of the applicant will be verified before payment ? With people on the jobseeker getting the jobkeeper, the initial overpayment is more likely to occur. But I am not disputing it won't happen given the haphazard way the bureaucracy operates.
> 
> Also, let me compliment you on your outstanding efforts.
> 
> By the way mate, what is a trophy point, how do you get one, and what benefit does a person derive from it ? And, why is losing a trophy point considered a penalty ? If you can answer those questions, I will give you five Uber platinum stars.


Many thanks, @WhogivesAF?, for your kind compliments.

JOBKEEPER PAYMENTS

The Australian Taxation Office uses a self-assessment system for the jobkeeper payment whereby it makes only cursory checks before payment but follows up later in greater detail in selected cases identified as having a higher risk profile.

This approach is reflected in the following frequently asked question:

*'Question: Does an employer have to be assessed by the ATO as being eligible before any payments are made?*

'Answer: Eligibility for JobKeeper payments is a self-assessment process, with the ATO administering the payment. However, if a payment is made and we later determine that the entity was not entitled to that payment (or was entitled to a lesser amount) the entity will be required to repay the overpaid amount.'

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobK...loyers--frequently-asked-JobKeeper-questions/)

[end of frequently asked question]

Although the frequently asked question is expressed in terms of employers, it's equally applicable to applicants as business participants with no employees.

The Tax Office records will not be able to identify in many cases whether an employee is casual or not. This is because the tax rules don't vary depending on whether or not an employee is engaged on a casual basis.

UBERPEOPLE TROPHY POINTS

See this information page about trophy points and trophies: https://uberpeople.net/help/trophies/.

The maximum number of points a contributor can have is 113 as this is the cumulative total of the various trophies listed.

I strongly suspect that hardly any contributors even notice these details.

There is no benefit from having a high score apart perhaps from a feeling of 'honour'. The trophies and associated points are very similar in concept to the Uber badges.

Having a trophy point removed would be akin to a schoolchild having their cherished collection of elephant stamps desecrated by a teacher placing a large red cross on one of the stamps.

There could surely be no greater dishonour.


----------



## WhogivesAF?

Jack Malarkey said:


> Many thanks, @WhogivesAF?, for your kind compliments.
> 
> JOBKEEPER PAYMENTS
> 
> The Australian Taxation Office uses a self-assessment system for the jobkeeper payment whereby it makes only cursory checks before payment but follows up later in greater detail in selected cases identified as having a higher risk profile.
> 
> This approach is reflected in the following frequently asked question:
> 
> *'Question: Does an employer have to be assessed by the ATO as being eligible before any payments are made?*
> 
> 'Answer: Eligibility for JobKeeper payments is a self-assessment process, with the ATO administering the payment. However, if a payment is made and we later determine that the entity was not entitled to that payment (or was entitled to a lesser amount) the entity will be required to repay the overpaid amount.'
> 
> (https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobK...loyers--frequently-asked-JobKeeper-questions/)
> 
> [end of frequently asked question]
> 
> Although the frequently asked question is expressed in terms of employers, it's equally applicable to applicants as business participants with no employees.
> 
> The Tax Office records will not be able to identify in many cases whether an employee is casual or not. This is because the tax rules don't vary depending on whether or not an employee is engaged on a casual basis.
> 
> UBERPEOPLE TROPHY POINTS
> 
> See this information page about trophy points and trophies: https://uberpeople.net/help/trophies/.
> 
> The maximum number of points a contributor can have is 113 as this is the cumulative total of the various trophies listed.
> 
> I strongly suspect that hardly any contributors even notice these details.
> 
> There is no benefit from having a high score apart perhaps from a feeling of 'honour'. The trophies and associated points are very similar in concept to the Uber badges.
> 
> Having a trophy point removed would be akin to a schoolchild having their cherished collection of elephant stamps desecrated by a teacher placing a large red cross on one of the stamps.
> 
> There could surely be no greater dishonour.


As you can see, I have had the ignominy of being reduced to Member for an unintentional misdemeanour with the loss of two trophy points. I was wondering if I should feel proud, chastised or depressed. I didn't think not giving a stuff was sufficient emotion. I suppose it is the Uber equivalent of patting a driver on the head and telling them how great they are for reaching Diamond status after working an 84 hr week.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

WhogivesAF? said:


> As you can see, I have had the ignominy of being reduced to Member for an unintentional misdemeanour with the loss of two trophy points. I was wondering if I should feel proud, chastised or depressed. I didn't think not giving a stuff was sufficient emotion. I suppose it is the Uber equivalent of patting a driver on the head and telling them how great they are for reaching Diamond status after working an 84 hr week.


I couldn't possibly comment in view of the following statement in the terms and rules of UberPeople:

'_Moderators actions and discussions are not topics to be posted about on the forums. Such issues can be taken up with moderators directly or by contacting us at [email protected].'

(https://uberpeople.net/help/terms/)_

Lest I lose a beloved and cherished trophy point myself.


----------



## WhogivesAF?

Yippee !!! Got my jobkeeper this morning.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Latest updates to Australian Taxation Office guidance about the jobkeeper payment:

JobKeeper - timeline of content updates

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment.

7 May










New content:

Tax inVoice episode - JobKeeper Payment (part 3) - Deputy Commissioner James O'Halloran and Assistant Commissioner Sally Bektas discuss eligibility, key dates and more information or assistance for employers, not-for-profits and charities.
Turnover test for universities - information on how universities satisfy the fall in turnover test.
Religious institutions - If you are a religious institution, you can qualify for the JobKeeper payment if you pay a minister of religion or a full-time member of a religious order who is not an employee, to perform religious activities.









Sole traders and other entities - added information and link to JobKeeper application for Commisisioner's discretion in respect of an eligible business participant.
Applying the turnover test- Modified basic test for group employer and entities added. If you do not satisfy the basic test and you supply employee labour services to members of your consolidated, consolidatable or GST group, you may be eligible to apply this modified test.


(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/)


----------



## Hussyboy81

Well, I am with NAB and I still haven't got it... waiting waiting....


----------



## WhogivesAF?

Hussyboy81 said:


> Well, I am with NAB and I still haven't got it... waiting waiting....


Hello Mr Hussy Boy,

This is the ATO. We have been informed by Uber that you are the highest earning Uber partner in Australia. With substantial assets, including, a hitherto undeclared seven million dollar mansion in the United States. Therefore we have decided to pay the poor and desperate such as WhogivesAF first. We trust you have sufficient champagne and caviar to survive on.

F u too,

Sincerely

Mr ATO

P.S. We hate Uber. They keep making a loss and don't pay any taxes.


----------



## Hussyboy81

WhogivesAF? said:


> This is the ATO. We have been informed by Uber that you are the highest earning Uber partner in Australia. With substantial assets, including, a hitherto undeclared seven million dollar mansion in the United States. Therefore we have decided to pay the poor and desperate such as WhogivesAF first. We trust you have sufficient champagne and caviar to survive on.


Hey.. that's my hard earned money - those base trips and 10$ / hour earnings have helped me build that mansion. And you forgot to mention about the badges that adorn all the walls of my mansion! Your information is incomplete...

and quite honestly.. I don't GAF


----------



## WhogivesAF?

Hussyboy81 said:


> Hey.. that's my hard earned money - those base trips and 10$ / hour earnings have helped me build that mansion. And you forgot to mention about the badges that adorn all the walls of my mansion! Your information is incomplete...
> 
> and quite honestly.. I don't GAF


Mate go back to My Gov and check that you have got all three boxes ticked.


----------



## Hussyboy81

Thanks mate, Yes, I checked today morning. All three boxes were ticked. I guess there is just so much to process that it might take a few more days.


----------



## WhogivesAF?

Hussyboy81 said:


> Thanks mate, Yes, I checked today morning. All three boxes were ticked. I guess there is just so much to process that it might take a few more days.


Yep I didn't have second box ticked. Took three days after I fixed problem.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Hussyboy81 said:


> Well, I am with NAB and I still haven't got it... waiting waiting....


@Hussyboy81, I'm also waiting but I'm with the Commonwealth Bank.

Earlier today, @Uberdrummoyne advised as follows in the Sydney forum:

_'I just rang the ATO and was told mine was approved and waiting to be paid as well. She also told me they have until the 15th this month to pay as the government extended the time by a week for businesses to pay staff so they can claim for April. The system randomly picks up only so many a day at 5pm and start transfers.'_

I received similar information when I phoned the Tax Office yesterday.

The Tax Office does legally have until 15 May 2020 to make the payment. This is in accordance with paragraph 15(a) of the Treasurer's rules.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*JobKeeper - application form for Commissioner's discretion in respect of an eligible business participant*

The Australian Taxation Office recently released a form for prospective applicants for the jobkeeper payment who require the Tax Office to exercise its discretion to allow a later date than 12 March 2020 for having an ABN or lodging relevant tax returns or business activity statements. See
https://www.ato.gov.au/Forms/JobKee...-respect-of-an-eligible-business-participant/.

The Tax Office has stated that the discretion can apply only in 'limited' circumstances. This may be misleading.

When the Tax Office acts in relation to a discretion, it is taking administrative rather than the legislative action it takes when making and applying a legislative instrument.

Principles of administrative law require the Tax Office as an administrator not to fetter its exercise of the discretion and to consider each case on its individual merits.

The Tax Office can have regard to administrative guidelines but they must be treated as guidelines and not rules.

The Tax Office's statement that the discretion can apply only in 'limited' circumstances is not supported by the legislation conferring the discretion (ie, the Treasurer's rules).

If legislation contemplated that a discretion is be exercised in only the most limited of circumstances, it will qualify the discretion with words such as 'in special circumstances'. There is no such expressed limitation here.

Those who find that the Tax Office declines to exercise its discretion should consider lodging an objection and, if still necessary, having the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) review the case.

The AAT 'stands in the shoes' of the Tax Office and considers the case on its merits and not simply based on whether the Tax Office's decision was reasonably open to it.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office:

*May 2020 phone scam - requesting bank account details for the JobKeeper payment*

We're receiving reports of scammers pretending to be from the ATO calling members of the public and asking them to provide their bank account details. They are telling them that their employer has registered them for the JobKeeper Payment, but that the ATO needs their bank account details to deposit the funds into their account.

Do not provide the information requested. Employees that are eligible for JobKeeper payments will be paid by their employer and the ATO will reimburse their employer for these payments. The ATO does not need the bank account details of individual employees.

If you are not sure whether an ATO call is legitimate, hang up and phone us on 1800 008 540 to check.

Scammers are constantly developing new ways to steal from the community, and will often try to take advantage of people when they are most vulnerable.

You can help us stop scammers in their tracks by warning your friends and family to stay alert.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/general/online-services/identity-security/scam-alerts/#May2020phonescam)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_The Australian _(News.com.au):

https://www.news.com.au/finance/wor...t/news-story/0ebefb2dff2a92d6949f46f51f026bea
*Coronavirus Australia: JobKeeper shock as PM considers shake-up of $1500 fortnightly payment*

MAY 11, 2020 6:26 am

Samantha Maiden

EXCLUSIVE

Scott Morrison is considering slashing the $1500 JobKeeper payment or phasing it out faster than expected amid fears it's creating "zombie" companies that don't exist without the wage subsidy.

Just days after the first payments started hitting employers' bank accounts, news.com.au has confirmed options are under consideration to end the one-size-fits-all approach of paying $1500 a fortnight to each employee regardless of the size of the business, or whether workers are part-time or casual and previously earned less.

The current JobKeeper scheme is legislated to end on September 27, but new options under examination include: reducing the $1500 subsidy, targeting it at smaller businesses, or limiting it to particular industries that are hardest hit by COVID restrictions.

Australia's success in flattening the curve of COVID-19 is triggering a major rethink of the most expensive wage subsidy in the nation's history.

The Prime Minister has outlined a three-stage plan for businesses to end hibernation but with thousands of cafes and restaurants set to reopen by June, there are real questions over whether all businesses need the $1500 a fortnight until September 27.

Despite predictions the scheme would cost $130 billion, news.com.au also understands JobKeeper is running at least $20 billion under budget as Treasury officials consider plans to slash the cost of the scheme even further.

The JobKeeper underspend is a result of the fact only 5 million workers are covered by JobKeeper, instead of the 6 million workers it was originally designed to cover.

Each worker costs the scheme $19,500 for the duration of the scheme with one million fewer workers signing up delivering the $20 billion-plus in savings.

One option under consideration draws on the New Zealand experience of Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, who is tipped to announce her own redesign of the nation's wage subsidy scheme in Thursday's budget, including potentially retargeting the payment at specific industries.

Unlike Australia, NZ does not pay a flat rate regardless of whether workers are full-time or part-time. Instead it offers employers $585.80 per week for full-time employees and $350 for part-timers.

In New Zealand, employers must pass the full amount received onto the employee, except where a person's income is normally less than the subsidy amount, in which case they can be paid their normal salary.

This leftover amount can be used for the wages of other affected staff including casuals not eligible for the scheme.

It is this option - no longer forcing employers to pay part-time staff a flat rate greater than the usual salary, but allowing bosses to use the leftover cash for other expenses including casual workers not covered by the scheme - that is being examined by the Morrison Government.

The Prime Minister has been criticised for excluding casuals from the scheme unless they have worked for a company for 12 months or longer.

The second option under consideration involves redesigning the scheme to simply cover 80 per cent of wage costs, ending the policy of paying all eligible workers a flat rate of $1500 regardless of whether they previously earned less.

This plan would involve a substantial redesign of the scheme to bring it more in line with Boris Johnson's wage subsidy scheme, a proposal Treasurer Josh Frydenberg has previously resisted.

Mr Morrison flagged the Treasury review of JobKeeper on Friday, refusing twice to rule out changes to the wage subsidy or winding back the $550-a-week JobSeeker payments.

"The JobKeeper and the JobSeeker program, as you note, have a legislative life which was set out over a six-month time frame,'' he said.

"There's a review built into JobKeeper to be done before the end of June. Treasury will be doing that, they've been doing a lot of work on that just over the last week or so.

"So, look, we'll take that one step at a time. But I need to stress again that that was a temporary lifeline put in place to help Australians through the worst of this crisis. It comes at a very significant cost, not just to current but to future generations as well. And it will be there to get us, to meet that objective, but it's not envisaged - never was - to be a longer term arrangement."

The Prime Minister was also offering no guarantees that the doubling of the JobSeeker allowance to $550-a-week will remain at that level for the entire six-month period and not phased down earlier to a smaller amount.

"I give them the certainty that I want them to be back in their jobs where they don't need it; that's what we want,'' he said.

Proposals to phase out JobKeeper are also canvassed in Deloitte Access Economics Budget monitor to be released today, entitled "The virus sprint and the recovery marathon".

"JobKeeper should be phased out rather than cut out. And ditto the increase in the unemployment benefit seen in JobSeeker,'' Deloitte's Chris Richardson said.

"There may also need to be a scaled-down wage subsidy for some small businesses in the six months after JobKeeper is phased out.

"Where a one-size-fits-all approach on the way into economic hibernation worked well, one size will not fit as well on the way out. Supports that create a sustainable reopening pathway will be complex, because the impacts are complex and non-uniform."

Critically, he also warns JobKeeper is creating "Zombie firms" that will disappear as soon as the wage subsidy is removed, forcing workers onto the dole.

"One pandemic is enough for a lifetime and there is a risk that JobKeeper, as a measure designed to preserve jobs, could eventually create 'zombie firms' that neither fully recover but don't go bankrupt. This would slow the broader recovery,'' he said.

Deloitte is also warning the nation not to expect the economy to "snap back" any time soon as the Prime Minister has predicted, suggesting it is likely to remain above pre-crisis levels until late 2024.

"Yes, budgets should eventually return to normal once life returns to normal. But that will take time, and there are urgent tasks ahead. Until then, federal and state governments should be in 'kitchen sink' mode. Full steam ahead, and damn the debt,'' Dr Richardson said.

Opposition treasury spokesman Jim Chalmers urged the Morrison Government to come clean with employers and workers over its plans for JobKeeper.

"Scott Morrison and Josh Frydenberg's reluctance to level with the Australian people, to present a plan for what's next or to include more workers in the otherwise-welcome support packages shows how little they understand about the challenges facing real people in the real economy,'' he said.

_Samantha Maiden is news.com.au's national political editor | __@samanthamaiden_


----------



## everythingsuber

Jack Malarkey said:


> _The Australian _(News.com.au):
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/finance/wor...t/news-story/0ebefb2dff2a92d6949f46f51f026bea
> *Coronavirus Australia: JobKeeper shock as PM considers shake-up of $1500 fortnightly payment*
> 
> MAY 11, 2020 6:26 am
> 
> Samantha Maiden
> 
> EXCLUSIVE
> 
> Scott Morrison is considering slashing the $1500 JobKeeper payment or phasing it out faster than expected amid fears it's creating "zombie" companies that don't exist without the wage subsidy.
> 
> Just days after the first payments started hitting employers' bank accounts, news.com.au has confirmed options are under consideration to end the one-size-fits-all approach of paying $1500 a fortnight to each employee regardless of the size of the business, or whether workers are part-time or casual and previously earned less.
> 
> The current JobKeeper scheme is legislated to end on September 27, but new options under examination include: reducing the $1500 subsidy, targeting it at smaller businesses, or limiting it to particular industries that are hardest hit by COVID restrictions.
> 
> Australia's success in flattening the curve of COVID-19 is triggering a major rethink of the most expensive wage subsidy in the nation's history.
> 
> The Prime Minister has outlined a three-stage plan for businesses to end hibernation but with thousands of cafes and restaurants set to reopen by June, there are real questions over whether all businesses need the $1500 a fortnight until September 27.
> 
> Despite predictions the scheme would cost $130 billion, news.com.au also understands JobKeeper is running at least $20 billion under budget as Treasury officials consider plans to slash the cost of the scheme even further.
> 
> The JobKeeper underspend is a result of the fact only 5 million workers are covered by JobKeeper, instead of the 6 million workers it was originally designed to cover.
> 
> Each worker costs the scheme $19,500 for the duration of the scheme with one million fewer workers signing up delivering the $20 billion-plus in savings.
> 
> One option under consideration draws on the New Zealand experience of Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, who is tipped to announce her own redesign of the nation's wage subsidy scheme in Thursday's budget, including potentially retargeting the payment at specific industries.
> 
> Unlike Australia, NZ does not pay a flat rate regardless of whether workers are full-time or part-time. Instead it offers employers $585.80 per week for full-time employees and $350 for part-timers.
> 
> In New Zealand, employers must pass the full amount received onto the employee, except where a person's income is normally less than the subsidy amount, in which case they can be paid their normal salary.
> 
> This leftover amount can be used for the wages of other affected staff including casuals not eligible for the scheme.
> 
> It is this option - no longer forcing employers to pay part-time staff a flat rate greater than the usual salary, but allowing bosses to use the leftover cash for other expenses including casual workers not covered by the scheme - that is being examined by the Morrison Government.
> 
> The Prime Minister has been criticised for excluding casuals from the scheme unless they have worked for a company for 12 months or longer.
> 
> The second option under consideration involves redesigning the scheme to simply cover 80 per cent of wage costs, ending the policy of paying all eligible workers a flat rate of $1500 regardless of whether they previously earned less.
> 
> This plan would involve a substantial redesign of the scheme to bring it more in line with Boris Johnson's wage subsidy scheme, a proposal Treasurer Josh Frydenberg has previously resisted.
> 
> Mr Morrison flagged the Treasury review of JobKeeper on Friday, refusing twice to rule out changes to the wage subsidy or winding back the $550-a-week JobSeeker payments.
> 
> "The JobKeeper and the JobSeeker program, as you note, have a legislative life which was set out over a six-month time frame,'' he said.
> 
> "There's a review built into JobKeeper to be done before the end of June. Treasury will be doing that, they've been doing a lot of work on that just over the last week or so.
> 
> "So, look, we'll take that one step at a time. But I need to stress again that that was a temporary lifeline put in place to help Australians through the worst of this crisis. It comes at a very significant cost, not just to current but to future generations as well. And it will be there to get us, to meet that objective, but it's not envisaged - never was - to be a longer term arrangement."
> 
> The Prime Minister was also offering no guarantees that the doubling of the JobSeeker allowance to $550-a-week will remain at that level for the entire six-month period and not phased down earlier to a smaller amount.
> 
> "I give them the certainty that I want them to be back in their jobs where they don't need it; that's what we want,'' he said.
> 
> Proposals to phase out JobKeeper are also canvassed in Deloitte Access Economics Budget monitor to be released today, entitled "The virus sprint and the recovery marathon".
> 
> "JobKeeper should be phased out rather than cut out. And ditto the increase in the unemployment benefit seen in JobSeeker,'' Deloitte's Chris Richardson said.
> 
> "There may also need to be a scaled-down wage subsidy for some small businesses in the six months after JobKeeper is phased out.
> 
> "Where a one-size-fits-all approach on the way into economic hibernation worked well, one size will not fit as well on the way out. Supports that create a sustainable reopening pathway will be complex, because the impacts are complex and non-uniform."
> 
> Critically, he also warns JobKeeper is creating "Zombie firms" that will disappear as soon as the wage subsidy is removed, forcing workers onto the dole.
> 
> "One pandemic is enough for a lifetime and there is a risk that JobKeeper, as a measure designed to preserve jobs, could eventually create 'zombie firms' that neither fully recover but don't go bankrupt. This would slow the broader recovery,'' he said.
> 
> Deloitte is also warning the nation not to expect the economy to "snap back" any time soon as the Prime Minister has predicted, suggesting it is likely to remain above pre-crisis levels until late 2024.
> 
> "Yes, budgets should eventually return to normal once life returns to normal. But that will take time, and there are urgent tasks ahead. Until then, federal and state governments should be in 'kitchen sink' mode. Full steam ahead, and damn the debt,'' Dr Richardson said.
> 
> Opposition treasury spokesman Jim Chalmers urged the Morrison Government to come clean with employers and workers over its plans for JobKeeper.
> 
> "Scott Morrison and Josh Frydenberg's reluctance to level with the Australian people, to present a plan for what's next or to include more workers in the otherwise-welcome support packages shows how little they understand about the challenges facing real people in the real economy,'' he said.
> 
> _Samantha Maiden is news.com.au's national political editor | __@samanthamaiden_


I'm not reading anything too threating to drivers in any review. In fact if drivers aren't going as well as hoped they may benefit from some form of longer subsidies. All I see is looking closer to see that the system isn't being exploited. Don't think the government wants sole traders going from jobkeeper to jobseeker which would happen on masse if they made the call too soon.


----------



## WhogivesAF?

Jack Malarkey said:


> _The Australian _(News.com.au):
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/finance/wor...t/news-story/0ebefb2dff2a92d6949f46f51f026bea
> *Coronavirus Australia: JobKeeper shock as PM considers shake-up of $1500 fortnightly payment*
> 
> MAY 11, 2020 6:26 am
> 
> Samantha Maiden
> 
> EXCLUSIVE
> 
> Scott Morrison is considering slashing the $1500 JobKeeper payment or phasing it out faster than expected amid fears it's creating "zombie" companies that don't exist without the wage subsidy.
> 
> Just days after the first payments started hitting employers' bank accounts, news.com.au has confirmed options are under consideration to end the one-size-fits-all approach of paying $1500 a fortnight to each employee regardless of the size of the business, or whether workers are part-time or casual and previously earned less.
> 
> The current JobKeeper scheme is legislated to end on September 27, but new options under examination include: reducing the $1500 subsidy, targeting it at smaller businesses, or limiting it to particular industries that are hardest hit by COVID restrictions.
> 
> Australia's success in flattening the curve of COVID-19 is triggering a major rethink of the most expensive wage subsidy in the nation's history.
> 
> The Prime Minister has outlined a three-stage plan for businesses to end hibernation but with thousands of cafes and restaurants set to reopen by June, there are real questions over whether all businesses need the $1500 a fortnight until September 27.
> 
> Despite predictions the scheme would cost $130 billion, news.com.au also understands JobKeeper is running at least $20 billion under budget as Treasury officials consider plans to slash the cost of the scheme even further.
> 
> The JobKeeper underspend is a result of the fact only 5 million workers are covered by JobKeeper, instead of the 6 million workers it was originally designed to cover.
> 
> Each worker costs the scheme $19,500 for the duration of the scheme with one million fewer workers signing up delivering the $20 billion-plus in savings.
> 
> One option under consideration draws on the New Zealand experience of Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, who is tipped to announce her own redesign of the nation's wage subsidy scheme in Thursday's budget, including potentially retargeting the payment at specific industries.
> 
> Unlike Australia, NZ does not pay a flat rate regardless of whether workers are full-time or part-time. Instead it offers employers $585.80 per week for full-time employees and $350 for part-timers.
> 
> In New Zealand, employers must pass the full amount received onto the employee, except where a person's income is normally less than the subsidy amount, in which case they can be paid their normal salary.
> 
> This leftover amount can be used for the wages of other affected staff including casuals not eligible for the scheme.
> 
> It is this option - no longer forcing employers to pay part-time staff a flat rate greater than the usual salary, but allowing bosses to use the leftover cash for other expenses including casual workers not covered by the scheme - that is being examined by the Morrison Government.
> 
> The Prime Minister has been criticised for excluding casuals from the scheme unless they have worked for a company for 12 months or longer.
> 
> The second option under consideration involves redesigning the scheme to simply cover 80 per cent of wage costs, ending the policy of paying all eligible workers a flat rate of $1500 regardless of whether they previously earned less.
> 
> This plan would involve a substantial redesign of the scheme to bring it more in line with Boris Johnson's wage subsidy scheme, a proposal Treasurer Josh Frydenberg has previously resisted.
> 
> Mr Morrison flagged the Treasury review of JobKeeper on Friday, refusing twice to rule out changes to the wage subsidy or winding back the $550-a-week JobSeeker payments.
> 
> "The JobKeeper and the JobSeeker program, as you note, have a legislative life which was set out over a six-month time frame,'' he said.
> 
> "There's a review built into JobKeeper to be done before the end of June. Treasury will be doing that, they've been doing a lot of work on that just over the last week or so.
> 
> "So, look, we'll take that one step at a time. But I need to stress again that that was a temporary lifeline put in place to help Australians through the worst of this crisis. It comes at a very significant cost, not just to current but to future generations as well. And it will be there to get us, to meet that objective, but it's not envisaged - never was - to be a longer term arrangement."
> 
> The Prime Minister was also offering no guarantees that the doubling of the JobSeeker allowance to $550-a-week will remain at that level for the entire six-month period and not phased down earlier to a smaller amount.
> 
> "I give them the certainty that I want them to be back in their jobs where they don't need it; that's what we want,'' he said.
> 
> Proposals to phase out JobKeeper are also canvassed in Deloitte Access Economics Budget monitor to be released today, entitled "The virus sprint and the recovery marathon".
> 
> "JobKeeper should be phased out rather than cut out. And ditto the increase in the unemployment benefit seen in JobSeeker,'' Deloitte's Chris Richardson said.
> 
> "There may also need to be a scaled-down wage subsidy for some small businesses in the six months after JobKeeper is phased out.
> 
> "Where a one-size-fits-all approach on the way into economic hibernation worked well, one size will not fit as well on the way out. Supports that create a sustainable reopening pathway will be complex, because the impacts are complex and non-uniform."
> 
> Critically, he also warns JobKeeper is creating "Zombie firms" that will disappear as soon as the wage subsidy is removed, forcing workers onto the dole.
> 
> "One pandemic is enough for a lifetime and there is a risk that JobKeeper, as a measure designed to preserve jobs, could eventually create 'zombie firms' that neither fully recover but don't go bankrupt. This would slow the broader recovery,'' he said.
> 
> Deloitte is also warning the nation not to expect the economy to "snap back" any time soon as the Prime Minister has predicted, suggesting it is likely to remain above pre-crisis levels until late 2024.
> 
> "Yes, budgets should eventually return to normal once life returns to normal. But that will take time, and there are urgent tasks ahead. Until then, federal and state governments should be in 'kitchen sink' mode. Full steam ahead, and damn the debt,'' Dr Richardson said.
> 
> Opposition treasury spokesman Jim Chalmers urged the Morrison Government to come clean with employers and workers over its plans for JobKeeper.
> 
> "Scott Morrison and Josh Frydenberg's reluctance to level with the Australian people, to present a plan for what's next or to include more workers in the otherwise-welcome support packages shows how little they understand about the challenges facing real people in the real economy,'' he said.
> 
> _Samantha Maiden is news.com.au's national political editor | __@samanthamaiden_


"Jack Malarkey" I don't think I have ever seen a subject covered more comprehensively by anyone. A sincere thanks for your fantastic effort.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

This afternoon, I found out why my jobkeeper payment hadn't arrived: there was a problem with the bank account details that I had supplied.

At 2.24 pm today, I received the following text message from the Australian Taxation Office:

'Hi JACK MALARKEY

'JobKeeper payment for ABN: ....: MALARKEY, JACK B. cannot be deposited because the bank account details are incorrect.

'To update the bank account details, phone us on 13 28 66 between 8.00am and 8.00pm, Monday to Friday.

Australian Taxation Office

[end of text message]

I have now phoned through the correct details and expect to receive payment soon.

I've learnt something about the need for attention to detail in such matters. At least the payment didn't end up in someone else's account.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office frequently asked question:

_*When will I receive the payment? *

On average most payments issue within five business days from when your submit your application form (when you identify and maintain your employees). However, it may take longer if there are additional checks required or any errors made on your form.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/COVID-19/Top-calls-about-COVID-19/?COVID_homepage_banner)_

*NEW AND SEPARATE POST:

KIWIS IN AUSTRALIA *

There are some statements about New Zealanders in Attachment B (Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights) of the explanatory statement for the Treasurer's rules that may be of interest:

_'National origin_

'The Rules may also engage the rights of equality and non-discrimination contained in Articles 2 and 26 of the ICCPR [International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights] as the Rules broadly limit participation in the JobKeeper scheme to employees who are either Australian citizens, permanent residents or specified New Zealand citizens living in Australia. This includes New Zealand citizens living in Australia who may not be eligible for assistance under the social security system.

'The differentiation of treatment is considered legitimate as it supports to the unique arrangements between Australia and New Zealand under the Trans-Tasman Travel Arrangement. To the extent that differentiation of treatment on the basis of national origin is applied to this cohort, it is considered reasonable and proportionate as it reaffirms the important role of the bilateral relationship between Australia and New Zealand.

'For these reasons, the Rules do not unnecessarily restrict the rights of equality and non-discrimination based on national origin.'

(https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L00419/Explanatory Statement/Text)


----------



## Hussyboy81

Jack Malarkey said:


> I've learnt something about the need for attention to detail in such matters. At least the payment didn't end up in someone else's account.


Neither have I received such a message nor have I received the money yet. I will wait till 15th May before giving them a call to find out what's happening.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Hussyboy81 said:


> Neither have I received such a message nor have I received the money yet. I will wait till 15th May before giving them a call to find out what's happening.


Have you confirmed that your banking details are correct? The Tax Office telephone staff can check for you if you didn't print the details.


----------



## Wild Colonial Boy

Hussyboy81 said:


> Neither have I received such a message nor have I received the money yet. I will wait till 15th May before giving them a call to find out what's happening.


Well, I'll check my bank account and if I've got an extra payment, I'll go to the front door and whisper that I've found yours. That should do it surely! :biggrin:


----------



## everythingsuber

Hussyboy81 said:


> Neither have I received such a message nor have I received the money yet. I will wait till 15th May before giving them a call to find out what's happening.


Still waiting as well so no orphan still.
Should be tomorrow by the time frame I was given Friday when I spoke to them. Bad timing really my partners birthday and she has an apple watch in mind.&#128577;


----------



## Hussyboy81

Jack Malarkey said:


> Have you confirmed that your banking details are correct?


I had confirmed the bank details when I first submitted the application. I am pretty sure (99.95%) that the details were correct at that time.



everythingsuber said:


> she has an apple watch in mind.&#128577;


You think she might like this latest model?


----------



## everythingsuber

Hussyboy81 said:


> I had confirmed the bank details when I first submitted the application. I am pretty sure (99.95%) that the details were correct at that time.
> 
> You think she might like this latest model?
> 
> View attachment 460421


She has no sense of humour.&#129300;


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Finance Minister, Senator Mathias Cormann, just said on 7.30 on ABC Television:

'_We are committed to this program for a six-month period'._


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...payment-could-be-adjusted-scott-morrison-says
Jobkeeper payment could be adjusted, Scott Morrison says

PM suggests government may also have to alter jobseeker benefits, based on economic and employment factors

Paul Karp and Luke Henriques-Gomes

Mon 11 May 2020 18.56 AEST

Scott Morrison has suggested the jobkeeper wage subsidy could be "adjusted" to provide more targeted support, as Labor signals it could support trimming the payment for some workers in return for expanded eligibility.

Discussions of amending the $130bn program comes as the government restarts early access to superannuation, paused over the weekend to make integrity improvements after an alleged fraud, and Labor's plan to reverse changes to consultation on workplace pay deals appears to have fallen flat due to opposition from One Nation.

The jobkeeper program currently supports 5m workers, despite having capacity to help 6m, which has added to Labor and union calls to expand the payment to 1m casuals with 12 months or less service with the one employer and 1.1m temporary visa workers.

After the prime minister refused to rule out changes to the payment on Friday, news.com.au has reported Treasury is considering options including retargeting the payment at specific industries or scrapping the flat rate, which has allowed some workers who usually earn less than $1,500 a fortnight to receive more from the subsidy than their wages.

Asked about potential changes on Monday, Morrison warned against speculation, given "we're six weeks into a six-month program".

"How that program can be adjusted to provide better support over that period, or if there are sectors that come under strain over a longer period of time, these are all things the government is fully aware of," he told reporters in Canberra.

Morrison said the government might also have to adjust the wage subsidy and jobseeker unemployment benefits "based on advice and the strength of the economy and how many people we are getting back to jobs".

Employer groups have not yet been consulted on possible changes, but are wary that scrapping the flat rate of $1,500 per worker a fortnight may restore the incentive for employees to return to work but lose the simplicity of its design.

The Australian Tax Office currently requires only the number of eligible employees claiming the payment at each business, but scaling back the payment for workers who usually earn less than $1,500 a fortnight would require employers reporting employees' hours and verification from the ATO.

But Labor signalled it is open to discussing the option. Labor's industrial relations spokesman, Tony Burke, told Guardian Australia: "We called for the government to subsidise wages, not multiply them. From day one we've said the scheme should be better targeted, so that the people who really need it can get it but we don't waste taxpayers' money.

"It's not fair that a single woman working to support three children misses out because she's only been in her casual job for 11 months, but a uni student who lives at home and works a few hours a week for pocket money gets a massive pay rise.

"Labor will consider any proposals to better target the scheme so that it reaches more people who need it."

The debate over the program's design comes amid claims some employers have taken advantage of the program, while other eligible workers remain locked out of the subsidy.

Victorian Trades Hall Council's JobScammer website has received more than 400 complaints from workers about potential rorting of the scheme, the union peak body said.

Luke Hilakari, the VTHC secretary, said the complaints included serious claims such as bosses breaching the scheme's rules by refusing to pay the subsidy in full or demanding workers increase their usual hours to the value of $1,500 a fortnight.

Other businesses had been accused "picking and choosing" which employess to include in what is supposed to be a "one-in, all-in" scheme, Hilakari said.

The complaints relayed to trades hall included a childcare company that told workers they would have to increase their hours to earn the $1,500 a fortnight worth of work, and a juice company franchise accused of refusing to backpay staff back to 30 March.

Other examples included a major streetwear retailer who was said to have told their casual employees they were ineligible for the subsidy if they had taken any time off.

...


----------



## Hussyboy81

I did get on the phone with them today and they confirmed that the payment date is 14/05/2020 which is tomorrow and it could take a day or two more to hit my account. I called them on 132 861 as suggested by Jack and it took less than 3 minutes to speak to them. Thanks @Jack Malarkey for all your help!


----------



## Jack Malarkey

SmartCompany:









*ATO tweet suggests SMEs could be looking at 14-day delay to JobKeeper payments - SmartCompany*

The ATO has nonchalantly dropped a JobKeeper bombshell, suggesting in a tweet last week that JobKeeper payments might not flow until the second half of May.







www.smartcompany.com.au

ATO tweet suggests SMEs could be looking at 14-day delay to JobKeeper payments

STEPHANIE PALMER-DERRIEN

MAY 11, 2020

The ATO has nonchalantly dropped a JobKeeper bombshell, suggesting in a tweet last week that JobKeeper payments might not actually be paid to businesses until the second half of May, rather than in the first week, as was originally suggested.

Since the JobKeeper wage stimulus subsidy was first announced, the messaging has strongly suggested payments would start flowing in the first week of May.

As the process dragged, the deadline to pay employees ⁠- an eligibility requirement ⁠- was extended to May 8.

Last week, on May 7, in a friendly tweet reminding business owners to make those payments, the tax office said if businesses have completed the process, they will see their JobKeeper funding "within 14 days".

That means some businesses may not see any cash until May 21.

In subsequent tweets, an ATO spokesperson said if a business completed the process by the end of April, and hasn't received payment by May 15, "we suggest that you phone us".

This suggests that even if a business had its application completed by the original deadline, there may still be a delay on payment.

More than 75,000 businesses have enrolled in the JobKeeper program, so it's perhaps unsurprising that processing could take a while.

The ATO said on Thursday it has already paid out more than $1 billion in payments.

But, for those that haven't seen a cent yet, the prospect of waiting even longer is, understandably, less than welcome.

One Twitter user called on the tax office to "hurry up and take the pressure off".










Another noted that getting through March was a struggle enough, suggesting that sole traders are "not surviving this".

_Have you seen a JobKeeper payment yet? Get in touch to share your experience._


----------



## frank.grimes

Has anyone received anything resembling an invoice of jobkeeper payment? I've received a payment, but no records beyond that.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

frank.grimes said:


> Has anyone received anything resembling an invoice of jobkeeper payment? I've received a payment, but no records beyond that.


No, my understanding is that there is no invoice or other documentation.

I expect the amounts will be prefilled in tax returns.

The amounts are not subject to GST.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily:_

https://www.accountantsdaily.com.au...ocumentation-absolutely-critical-in-ato-audit
Jotham Lian

13 May 2020 - 2 min read

*JobKeeper documentation 'absolutely critical' in ATO audit*

_Practitioners have been advised to keep contemporaneous documentation of their calculations and advice around the JobKeeper payment scheme to avoid inevitable audit scrutiny in the near future._

While the ATO has declared that it will take an "understanding and sympathetic" compliance approach when reviewing JobKeeper turnover projections, practitioners have now been urged to document their work as much as possible to cover all the bases when the ATO comes knocking.

"[The payments are going to flow] without much testing going on; in other words, the Tax Office isn't going to be able to sit there and scrutinise everybody's JobKeeper application now," the Tax Institute's senior tax counsel, Professor Robert Deutsch, said on Accountants Daily Insider.

What will happen is that some months from now, probably three to six months from now, they will start to look at a number of claims, particularly the larger ones, and start to investigate in a sort of audit way to try to understand if everyone has been doing the right thing, whether there have been people who have been claiming when they shouldn't be.

"It is very important that taxpayers who are now claiming the JobKeeper payment document exactly what it is that they have worked out that enabled them to confidently say they are entitled to the JobKeeper payment.

"In particular, the turnover issue: How did you establish your turnover for a particular period in 2020? How did you show that the turnover was down 30 per cent on last year?"

The ATO's recently published LCR 2020/1 has stated that the Tax Office will allow for some tolerance around turnover projection predictions.

Likewise, the Tax Practitioners Board has now confirmed that tax agents will not necessarily be in breach of the Code of Professional Conduct if there is a mistake in their client's turnover projection.

"Where information provided by a client seems credible (and, for existing clients, is consistent with previous statements) and you have no basis on which to doubt the information supplied, you may discharge your responsibility under the code by accepting the statement provided by the client without further checking," the TPB said.

"However, if the information does not seem credible or appears to be inconsistent with a previous statement, further enquiries would be required. In this case, taking reasonable care may mean asking questions of your client or examining the client's records, or both."

Professor Deutsch believes "coherent and cogent" documentation will be a practitioner's best defence should the ATO start asking for information.

"Practitioners should be helping clients to do that documentation because that's really the vital part in this whole jigsaw puzzle - it is being able to say to an auditor six months from now, 'Here's a piece of paper that explains the whole thing'," Professor Deutsch said.

"If it is coherent and cogent, the auditors will probably say, 'Thank you very much, I'll take a copy of this', go away and leave you alone.

"A mistake that a lot of taxpayers make is saying I'll worry about that when I get there.

"The problem of worrying about it when you get there is that when you get there, you can't remember much about this because so much has happened in the interim, so document it now."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

For those who revel in the details:










Available at https://www.ato.gov.au/law/view/pdf/pbr/lcr2020-001.pdf.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Canberra Times_, 14 May 2020, page 3:

*Call for HECS-style loan scheme to ease businesses off JobKeeper*

Concerns have been raised about businesses' viability once JobKeeper dries up.

MAY 14 2020 - 12:00AM

JobKeeper transition should be through HECS style loans

Sally Whyte
Katie Burgess

The government should allow businesses to take out revenue-contingent loans to help them transition out of the JobKeeper wage subsidy scheme, according to leading economists.

At a price tag of $130 billion, the wage subsidy program has been the big ticket item of the government's response to the economic impacts of coronavirus, but experts are warning that if the program was to end suddenly, it would only delay the closure of businesses and loss of thousands of jobs.

More than 835,000 businesses and 5.5 million workers are enrolled in the program, which pays businesses a $1500 fortnightly subsidy for each eligible employee if revenue has dropped by 30 per cent.

Under the current legislation the program will be in place until late September, but there are concerns that many businesses will not be financially stable by then to survive without the payment.

Economists Bruce Chapman at the Australian National University and John Piggott at the University of New South Wales have called for businesses to be allowed to transition out of the scheme by using revenue-contingent loans, similar to the HECS loans taken out by university students. The loan system would also prevent the government taking on even more debt.

"For many organisations, without a buffer of this type, the withdrawal of JobKeeper could be very harsh, and might mean increased job shedding, further demand reductions, and heightened uncertainty at a time when insecurity is already at a historic high," Professor Chapman said.

Economists and commentators are concerned that a transition away from the JobKeeper scheme must strike the balance between avoiding unnecessary economic pain without endlessly subsiding businesses that won't ever become viable.

"Our results imply that a sensibly-based RCL design, in combination with a reduction of the grants-based component of JobKeeper to around 15 per cent of the original policy, are able to deliver the same level of initial financial support to businesses in a three-month period," Professor Chapman said.

"For example, with the suggested settings, a firm with two employees and a pre-COVID-19-crisis annual revenue of $150,000 would incur a debt of $13,000. When annual revenue regains its pre-crisis level, five per cent of this has the debt paid off in less than two years."

JobKeeper has been welcomed by business, but its introduction has not been without teething issues.
...


----------



## Boofhead

From the SMH online at 12.14pm...

_Asked whether JobKeeper would be changed in light of the new job figures revealing that almost 600,000 Australians lost their jobs last month, Prime Minister Scott Morrison said the government would stay the course.

"It's a demand driven program," Mr Morrison said.

"We will continue the program as we set it out. When you move a program as quickly as this then you anticipate that there will be some anomalies and issues along the way, and we have indeed been doing that."_


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily:_

https://www.accountantsdaily.com.au...nderstanding-ato-confirms-compliance-approach
*'Sympathetic and understanding': ATO confirms compliance approach*

Jotham Lian

08 May 2020 - 1 min read

_Senior executives at the Tax Office have committed to adopting a "sympathetic and understanding" compliance approach when reviewing JobKeeper turnover estimates._

With JobKeeper requiring businesses to work out their projected turnover decline to determine eligibility, there have been concerns from employers that the ATO might come knocking when their actual turnover reveals a healthier figure.

ATO second commissioner Jeremy Hirschhorn told a Senate inquiry he was aware of community concerns that the ATO might be "nit-picking" when it comes to the decline in turnover test.

"In the legislation, it asks people to make a reasonable estimate and a reasonable estimate is what is sufficient," Mr Hirschhorn said.

"If it ultimately turns out that the estimate was overly pessimistic and a business only went down 29 per cent, instead of an estimated 35 per cent, that is OK; what the legislation requires is a reasonable estimate.

"Obviously, there are a range of consequences if people apply and they are not eligible, but where people make a good-faith estimate to comply and a good-faith decision that they are eligible, the commissioner will be very understanding and sympathetic to their position, particularly where they have passed the benefit of the JobKeeper payment to their employees.

"What the legislation and what we are asking of businesses is to make a good-faith effort and that when we consider their good-faith effort, even if it is a little bit wrong, we'll be very sympathetic and understanding of their position."

ATO COVID-19 taskforce chair Jeremy Geale also reaffirmed the agency's approach, as documented in its recently published LCR 2020/1.

"In terms of our attitude to compliance, this program is about helping Australians who are experiencing financial difficulty and it is not drawn at the hard line in terms of 30 per cent where I go out and investigate the person who is sitting at 29.95 per cent," Mr Geale said.

"The focus is on people who will be deliberately rorting the system."

More than 768,000 businesses, covering 5 million employees, have now enrolled for the JobKeeper payment.

Treasury deputy secretary Jenny Wilkinson told the inquiry that the enrolments were broadly in line with its expectations, while defending its use of GST turnover as an eligibility metric.

"One of the things important to do to ensure the integrity of the scheme was to use metrics already available to the ATO," Ms Wilkinson said.

"Using GST turnover comparing either April this year with April last year, or the June quarter this year with the June quarter last year, made a big difference to the integrity issues when designing a scheme like this because the data that is already available is well defined and the historic data exists.

"There are well-defined processes for how you actually measure GST turnover and any move away from existing measures or existing metrics would raise some integrity issues."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Those eligible for the jobkeeper payment but who have not yet applied need to do so by Sunday 31 May 2020 if they want payment backdated to 30 March 2020.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/)

Procrastination could cost you thousands of dollars (literally).


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Treasury:

*JobKeeper update*

Date
22 May 2020

*Joint media release with the Australian Taxation Office*​Late yesterday, the ATO and Treasury advised the Government of a reporting error in estimates of the number of employees likely to access the JobKeeper program.

The enrolment forms completed by 910,055 businesses who have self‑assessed as eligible under the scheme had indicated that this program would cover around 6.5 million eligible employees.

The ATO's review of these forms has found that around 1,000 of those businesses appear to have made significant errors when reporting the estimate of eligible employees on their enrolment form.

The most common error was that instead of reporting the number of employees they expected to be eligible, they reported the amount of assistance they expected to receive. For example, over 500 businesses with '1' eligible employee reported a figure of '1,500' (which is the amount of JobKeeper payment they would expect to receive for each fortnight for that employee).

This reporting error has come to light as the ATO and Treasury have been analysing the amounts being paid out under the scheme, reconciling these with the estimates provided by enrolled businesses of the likely number of eligible employees.

It was not picked up by the ATO earlier as their primary focus in the first fortnight of JobKeeper payments was on ensuring that JobKeeper payments were paid promptly to those eligible for them, and not paid to those who were ineligible. These initial estimates from businesses of employees covered are not linked to payments, and so were not as carefully analysed.

Importantly this reporting error has no consequences for JobKeeper payments that have already been made to eligible businesses, as payments under the scheme depend on the subsequent declaration that an eligible business makes in relation to each and every eligible employee.

This declaration does not involve estimates and requires an employer to provide the tax file number for each eligible employee. By contrast, the only use of the information collected in respect of the reporting error was to provide an early estimate of the number of expected employees likely to access the JobKeeper program.

As of 20 May 2020, 910,055 businesses had enrolled in the JobKeeper program. Of these, 759,654 had made claims in relation to their eligible employees and had their applications processed.

This resulted in $8.7 billion of approved payments to those 759,654 businesses, covering around 2.9 million employees. Around 97 per cent of claims have been paid to employers within three business days of employers making the employee declaration.

Around 150,000 enrolled businesses are yet to complete their employee declaration, which is required before payments can be made. Employers can still apply up to 31 May for payments made in April. Moreover the program will remain open to businesses that meet the eligibility criteria at any time over the 6 months it is in operation.

In light of the take‑up of the scheme to date, remaining enrolments, and that the scheme remains open to new registrations, Treasury now expects the number of employees likely to be covered under the JobKeeper program to be around 3.5 million.

JobKeeper is a demand driven program which was designed to support eligible employees in businesses that have experienced a significant fall in their turnover. At the time the JobKeeper program was developed, Treasury estimated that around 6.5 million employees would access the program.

This estimate was developed at a time when Coronavirus cases were growing significantly in Australia and restrictions were being tightened across Australia and much of the world.

The difference between Treasury's estimates at the time and the number of employees now accessing the JobKeeper program partly reflects the level and impact of health restrictions not having been as severe as expected and their imposition not having been maintained for as long as expected at the time.

This has been reflected in some improvement to the outlook for the economy since the original estimate was developed as a consequence of these and other factors.

The variation in estimates also reflects the inherent uncertainty associated with estimating the take‑up of a demand driven program in the current circumstances.

Treasury's overall view of the labour market is unaffected by this reporting error. The JobKeeper program is providing important support to employers and employees through these unprecedented economic times.

It remains the case that in the absence of the JobKeeper program, Treasury expects the unemployment rate would have been around 5 percentage points higher.

Treasury continues to expect the unemployment rate to reach around 10 per cent, although as indicated by last week's Labour Force survey, the measured level of the unemployment is highly uncertain given the impact of social distancing restrictions on the participation rate.

Treasury's revised estimate of the cost of the JobKeeper program is around $70 billion.

Updated economic forecasts will be reported in the Government's June economic and fiscal update.

The ATO reminds all eligible employers who have enrolled but not yet made their employee declaration to ensure that they complete their April declaration by 31 May 2020.

The ATO also reminds employers that on an on‑going basis they must declare their eligible employees monthly, with May declarations having to be made by the 14th of June.

(https://treasury.gov.au/media-release/jobkeeper-update)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_*Extract from the joint Treasury and Tax Office media release:*_

'The ATO's review of these forms has found that around 1,000 of those businesses appear to have made significant errors when reporting the estimate of eligible employees on their enrolment form.

'The most common error was that instead of reporting the number of employees they expected to be eligible, they reported the amount of assistance they expected to receive. For example, over 500 businesses with '1' eligible employee reported a figure of '1,500' (which is the amount of JobKeeper payment they would expect to receive for each fortnight for that employee).'

_*The question in the online enrolment form that confused some employers:*_


----------



## UberDriverAU

Jack Malarkey said:


> _*Extract from the joint Treasury and Tax Office media release:*_
> 
> 'The ATO's review of these forms has found that around 1,000 of those businesses appear to have made significant errors when reporting the estimate of eligible employees on their enrolment form.
> 
> 'The most common error was that instead of reporting the number of employees they expected to be eligible, they reported the amount of assistance they expected to receive. For example, over 500 businesses with '1' eligible employee reported a figure of '1,500' (which is the amount of JobKeeper payment they would expect to receive for each fortnight for that employee).'
> 
> _*The question in the online enrolment form that confused some employers:*_


If someone can somehow manage to stuff that question up, I have to wonder how much longer they'll be in business for. &#129318;&#127995;‍♂


----------



## Jack Malarkey

UberDriverAU said:


> If someone can somehow manage to stuff that question up, I have to wonder how much longer they'll be in business for. &#129318;&#127995;‍♂


I too find it surprising and all the more so given the word 'employees' is so prominently located to the immediate right of the answer.

I understand there were also cases of answering 3,000 instead of 2 employees and 4,500 instead of 3 employees and so on.

The reference to $1,500 in the question appears to have been a red herring that has distracted some from the scent and sent them completely in the wrong direction:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring.

Perhaps it would have been better simply to have asked the number of eligible employees without reference to any specific eligibility requirement.

That said, I wonder if the Tax Office has unnecessarily put their own head on the block on this one by the way they have so emphasised that particular error in the way the question was answered by a few.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Recent updates to the Australian Taxation Office's guidance on the jobkeeper payment:

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:


May
April
*May*


22 MayNew content:
JobKeeper Payment for not-for-profits - Not-for-profits (NFPs) may be entitled to JobKeeper payments to help them pay their employees. This information will help you understand how the rules apply to NFPs.


Update: Key dates have been added for after May and early June in our JobKeeper guides:

JobKeeper guide - sole traders
JobKeeper guide - employers reporting through STP
JobKeeper guide - employers not reporting through STP


(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/)

Here are the updates for key dates for sole traders for after May and early June:

*Key dates*

From 20 April: complete Step 1: Enrol for the JobKeeper payment.
From 4 May: complete Step 2: Identify and maintain your eligible employees and eligible sole trader or eligible business participant.
By 8 May: you must have paid your eligible employees at least $1,500 (before tax) for each JobKeeper fortnight to claim JobKeeper payments for April.
By 31 May: you must complete steps 1 and 2 if you want to claim for JobKeeper fortnights in April and May.
After May: If you are enrolling and identifying your employees and business participant for the first time after May, you must complete these steps in the month you wish to claim for.
By 14 June: complete Step 3: Make a business monthly declaration for May.
By the 14th of each month: complete Step 3: Make a business monthly declaration to claim JobKeeper payments for the previous month.
You should also make any updates to your employees' eligibility using the 'Maintain' function as part of your business monthly declaration.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobk...uide---sole-traders/?anchor=keydates#keydates)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Canberra Times_: Tuesday 26 May 2020, page 3:

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/st...-why-it-didnt-check-jobkeeper-numbers-sooner/
MAY 26 2020 - 2:30 am

*Tax Office explains why it didn't check JobKeeper numbers sooner*

*Kirsten Lawson*

The Tax Office has admitted that it didn't check the JobKeeper numbers earlier partly because they matched the Treasury forecasts of how many people would be paid under the scheme.

The 6.5 million people wrongly thought to be receiving JobKeeper matched the number that Treasury originally forecast for the scheme when it was announced on March 30.

The correlation appears to have led the Tax Office into a false sense of security about its numbers.

In fact, only 2.9 million people have been receiving the wage subsidy, as revealed on Friday when the Tax Office and Treasury announced the miscount.

Asked how the mistake wasn't picked up earlier, a Tax Office spokesperson said officials had done some integrity checks on the information provided by businesses.

"However, we decided to not perform a full data and analytical review on this information, for the following reasons," the spokesman said in a statement.

One of those reasons was that "the employee estimates were tracking broadly in line with the Treasury forecasts".
The agency had also expected a lag in the final paperwork, with a spike expected especially for big employers in the week leading up to the deadline (for April and May payments) of May 31.









_A screenshot of the JobKeeper form._

The Tax Office had been focused on getting ready to make payments and in any case the full data was to be available by the end of May, the spokesperson said.

"Our data and analytics focus was on the payment phase, making sure we could pay valid claims quickly, and suspend suspicious claims for manual intervention, and we have delivered on this."

On Friday, Tax Office second commissioner Jeremy Hirschhorn said the mistake had occurred because 1000 businesses had filled in the form incorrectly - stating the amount they expected to receive in a field that asked for the number of employees.

Mr Hirschhorn said about 550 of those firms had entered "1500", which is the amount of the fortnightly wage subsidy, instead of the number of employees. That would account for about 800,000 of the over-count.

Another 450 firms had entered "a range of numbers" that overstated their employee numbers, a spokesman said. The Tax Office has not given more detail, other than saying some had entered multiples of 1500 and some had not.

A simple calculation suggests that for those 450 incorrect forms to account for the rest of the 3.5 million wrongly included workers, they would have had to entered an average of more than 5000 employees apiece.

The Tax Office said about 638,000 of the businesses had between one and four workers on the wage subsidy. About 2300 had more than 100 workers on the payment.

Businesses have been able to apply for JobKeeper since April 20, using an online form in what the Tax Office says is an automated process, but with controls and checks. Officials check that businesses are eligible - and have rejected about 10,000 enrolments on this basis. They also monitor some enrolments as they move through to verify the information.

The scheme will now cost $60 billion less than the $130 billion budgeted, and Labor and the Greens are pushing for it to be extended to university staff - the only sector to be excluded - and to other workers such as casuals who have worked for less than 12 months with their employer, and overseas workers. But the government rejects the call.


----------



## Boofhead

While we're here this may apply to a few of us - the last BAS statement Jan-Mar 2020 - is due to be paid up by Thursday the 28th if in fact you owe the ATO anything from that period.

I'm doing mine now just to make sure the next JK payment sails through smoothly...


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*DON'T DELAY; DO IT TODAY!*

Are you intending to apply for the jobkeeper payment as a business participant (including as a sole trader without employees) but haven't yet enrolled? (Enrolling is NOT the same as registering interest.)

You have only until *Sunday 31 May 2020* to enrol if you want to be paid for jobkeeper payment fortnights ending in April and May 2020. Meeting this deadline will make a difference of $6,000 (before tax) to the total amounts you receive.

Don't delay; do it today!

For guidance, start here:
https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobkeeper-payment/In-detail/JobKeeper-guide---sole-traders/.

Check that you have a MyGov account and that it's linked to the Australian Taxation Office. If you don't, make getting this a priority. See:
https://www.ato.gov.au/general/online-services/.

If you need help or information, phone the Australian Taxation Office on 1800 806 818 (8.00 am to 8.00 pm Monday to Friday and 10.00 am to 4.00 pm on weekends).


----------



## Jack Malarkey

SmartCompany:










*JobKeeper declarations: Businesses have 14 days to declare for May or risk missing payments - SmartCompany*

The ATO is preparing its systems for a flood of firms looking to get in early on May JobKeeper declarations from next Monday.







www.smartcompany.com.au

JobKeeper declarations: Businesses have 14 days to declare for May or risk missing payments

MATTHEW ELMAS

MAY 28, 2020

The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) is preparing its online systems ahead of the window for JobKeeper declarations opening next week, with hundreds of thousands of businesses expected to rush in to be reimbursed for May wages.

Some online systems will be shut down over the weekend ahead of the May declarations opening next Monday morning, the ATO has confirmed.

More than 900,000 employers currently signed up for the $70 billion scheme will be keen to have their declarations - requiring them to re-confirm eligible employees and turnover projections - completed as soon as possible to bolster cashflow heading into June.

Businesses will have until June 14 to make their declarations or risk missing out on payments for May JobKeeper fortnights, including April 26 to May 10 and May 11 to May 24.

The ATO has been processing most JobKeeper forms within three to five days, so essentially the faster declarations are made, the faster businesses receive wage reimbursements for JobKeeper recipients.

Under JobKeeper rules, businesses must make declarations for payments in the first 14 days of the month after those payments are claimed for. So, May JobKeeper payments are tied to declarations made in the first half of June.

But the timing of the declaration window against the JobKeeper fortnights creates some potential cashflow pitfalls if firms aren't fast enough to process their requests. For instance, if a business declares for May on June 14, they might not receive payments until the end of the second JobKeeper fortnight in June.

This means the business would likely need to pay minimum wage entitlements for these fortnights without having been reimbursed for May wages yet.

This will be the first test of the monthly declaration process for firms that are already receiving payments, following the enrollment period that started on April 20 and will run to 31 May for payments in those months.

Businesses which have not yet enrolled or declared for payments in April or May, covering the first eight weeks of the scheme, will have until the end of next Sunday to do so, or lose the ability to claim for this period altogether.

Last Friday the ATO revealed about 150,000 firms are stuck in limbo between the enrolment and declaration process for April and May payments, raising concern many firms will miss out ahead of the deadline.

The tax office has been investing in outbound communications to these firms, encouraging them to complete the process if they're still interested in receiving wage subsidy payments.

Businesses stuck in JobKeeper limbo covered about 600,000 workers, or 17% of the total 3.5 million enrolled in the scheme, as at last Friday.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Just a reminder that if you still need to enrol for the jobkeeper payment and want payments backdated to cover jobkeeper fortnights ending in April and May ($6,000 in total before tax), you need to enrol by 6.00 pm AEST TODAY (Sunday 31 May 2020).


----------



## Jack Malarkey

MyGov is up and running as at 6.00 am on Monday 1 June and we can complete step 3 (the reporting requirements) for the second payment (jobkeeper fortnights 3 and 4).

I have just done this.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*Latest update to Australian Taxation Office guidance for the jobkeeper payment:*

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:


June
May
April
*June*


1 JuneUpdate: JobKeeper key dates - updated to reflect that enrolments have now closed for April and May fortnights for JobKeeper payments.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/)

*Jobkeeper key dates (as updated on 1 June 2020):*

*JobKeeper key dates*

*20 April - enrolments opened*

On 20 April 2020, enrolments for the JobKeeper payment opened.

*31 May - enrolments closed for April and May fortnights*

31 May 2020 was the final date to enrol for JobKeeper to claim for wages paid for JobKeeper fortnights in April and May.

*Each month*

You must make a business monthly declaration each month to:


re-confirm your business and employee eligibility
provide your business's current and projected GST turnover.
You need to do this between the 1st and 14th of the following month (for example, to be reimbursed for JobKeeper payments in May you need to complete your declaration by 14 June).

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper-key-dates/)


----------



## Westside Rider

Jack Malarkey said:


> MyGov is up and running as at 6.00 am on Monday 1 June and we can complete step 3 (the reporting requirements) for the second payment (jobkeeper fortnights 3 and 4).
> 
> I have just done this.


I originally made a mistake with my first declaration which was April, the mistake being that I under reported my GST turnover.

However I fixed it with my May declaration by including the income from April which I forgot to declare for April on top of my GST turnover for the month of May.

When I do my June declaration I'll be able to simply report my GST turnover for that month since I've corrected my previous error.

So my question to you is, as long as my gross income reported in my combined monthly jobkeeper declarations for Q4 adds up to and matches my gross income I report in my Q4 BAS then I have nothing to worry about?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Westside Rider said:


> I originally made a mistake with my first declaration which was April, the mistake being that I under reported my GST turnover.
> 
> However I fixed it with my May declaration by including the income from April which I forgot to declare for April on top of my GST turnover for the month of May.
> 
> When I do my June declaration I'll be able to simply report my GST turnover for that month since I've corrected my previous error.
> 
> So my question to you is, as long as my gross income reported in my combined monthly jobkeeper declarations for Q4 adds up to and matches my gross income I report in my Q4 BAS then I have nothing to worry about?


I fully expect you'll be fine.

The monthly declarations of actual and projected GST revenue under the Treasurer's rules (in their current form) don't retest eligibility and are essentially for statistical purposes to help the Government assess the extent of economic recovery.


----------



## Boofhead

I did ask this in another thread but has anyone/know anyone who's gone down the "Alternative Turnover Test" route?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*Services Australia:*

*Reporting income from JobKeeper payment*

7 May 2020

If you or your partner get income from JobKeeper payment, you must report it to us if you also get an income support payment [including the jobseeker payment].

...

*If you're a sole trader or self employed*

If you're a sole trader or self employed, you must report JobKeeper payment as business income. You'll have to submit an updated Profit and Loss statement if there's a change to your overall business profit.

If you don't do this, you may owe us money that you'll need to pay back.

*Cancelling or withdrawing your payment*

Generally, you'll earn over the income cut off point if you get income support and JobKeeper income for the same period. This means you may get a nil payment.

If you already get an income support payment from us, you can cancel your payment.

(https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/individuals/news/reporting-income-from-jobkeeper-payment)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The second payments ($3,000) are starting to come through. Mine hit my account at 1.00 am today (Thursday 4 June).


----------



## kooljp

Yes Big Shout Out to Scotty from Marketing!


----------



## WhogivesAF?

Jack Malarkey said:


> The second payments ($3,000) are starting to come through. Mine hit my account at 1.00 am today (Thursday 4 June).


So did mine. Yippee Yi Yo Kiyay !!! Cheers and down the hatch !!!!



WhogivesAF? said:


> So did mine. Yippee Yi Yo Kiyay !!! Cheers and down the hatch !!!!


**** I even love dumb ass moderators at the moment.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The Treasury website now allows you to subscribe for updates about the jobkeeper program (as well as for updates about the recently announced homebuilder grants program):

https://treasury.gov.au/coronavirus/homebuilder









I have subscribed in view of the foreshadowed review of the jobkeeper payment program.

*NEW AND SEPARATE POST:*

_Accountants Daily

Jotham Lian _

Friday 5 June 2020

*JobKeeper changes set for 23 July: Frydenberg*

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg will announce significant changes to the JobKeeper scheme in July, including a possible change to the flat-rate payment of $1,500.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg will announce significant changes to the JobKeeper scheme in July, including a possible change to the flat-rate payment of $1,500.

Speaking at Parliament House, Mr Frydenberg said he would now announce the outcome of its midway review of the $70 billion JobKeeper program as well as a detailed economic and fiscal update on 23 July.

The Treasury has since commenced its review of the JobKeeper program, and it is expected to be finalised by the end of June.

Despite Prime Minister Scott Morrison dismissing drastic changes to the program last month, Mr Frydenberg has now hinted that the $1,500 flat-rate payment could be overhauled to prevent overpayments to some employees.

"We want to understand whether the quantum, that $1,500 payment, continues to be the right amount, also bearing in mind that some people are getting paid more than they would otherwise get by virtue of having a flat payment," Mr Frydenberg said.

The Treasurer also flagged that the review would consider the viability of continuing the JobKeeper payments to businesses that have recovered sufficiently.

He said: "But, in the context of an economy, where the restrictions are being eased, and people are getting back into work, we need to assess - and particularly paying a focus to certain sectors as well - we need to assess the continuation of that JobKeeper program in that context.

"It's too early to pre-empt what the outcomes of that review will be, but any government decisions about the review will be incorporated into that statement that the Finance Minister and I will make in July."

Australia in 'recession'

Revealing that the economy has contracted by 0.3 of a percentage point in the March quarter, Mr Frydenberg declared that Australia was now in its first recession in close to three decades, despite the June quarter GDP figures yet to be realised.

A technical recession requires two consecutive quarters of GDP contraction, but Mr Frydenberg said that was inevitable following the Treasury's advice on where the June quarter would be following COVID-19 shutdowns.

"Clearly, with this once-in-a-century pandemic, the impact on the economy has been very severe, the impact in the June quarter will be even more severe," Mr Frydenberg said.

"We've climbed this mountain before, we'll climb it again."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*Latest changes to Australian Taxation Office's guidance on the jobkeeper payment:

JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:


June
May
April
June


5 JuneUpdate: Applying the turnover test - we have added information to the Test for a business affected by drought or natural disaster to advise what a declared drought zone includes.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/)

*Additional text included:*

Your entity was affected by drought or other declared natural disaster during the relevant comparison period

Test for a business affected by drought or natural disaster

You can use this test if:


your entity conducted business or some of your business in a declared drought or natural disaster zone during the relevant comparison period in 2019, and
the drought or natural disaster changed your entity's turnover.
For the purposes of this test, a declared drought zone includes an area subject to a formal declaration of drought by a Commonwealth, State, Territory or local government agency. It also includes an area for which there has been a public identification or acknowledgment that the area is drought affected by such an agency.

For example, the following public information sources provide declarations, acknowledgments, statistics, maps and other guidance as to what are declared drought zones and drought affected areas for the purposes of this test:


the National Drought Map
Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology Monthly Drought Statements, maps, rainfall and rainfall deficiency statistics
in Queensland - the drought situation map
in NSW - the Combined Drought Indicator map
in South Australia - the Drought Affected Areas map


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Australian Financial Review_

https://www.afr.com/politics/federa...could-lose-jobkeeper-payments-20200604-p54zc3
*Healthy businesses could lose JobKeeper payments*








Phillip Coorey Political editor

Jun 5, 2020 - 12.01 am

Businesses whose turnovers recover sooner than expected could lose their JobKeeper wage supplements before the scheme expires, under changes that will be looked at by Treasury.

(This article is behind a paywall. Please see below for a photograph of a hard copy.)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

News.com.au:

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp...s/news-story/43e48a6be32b59f9b9ca0b85eaf22e86
*JobKeeper: $1500 payment could be slashed for casuals*

JUNE 5, 2020 7:01PM

Samantha Maiden

*Scott Morrison has offered a guarantee that the JobKeeper payment will not be scrapped before September but he's not ruling out slashing the $1500 wage subsidy for casuals who previously earned less.*

Despite announcing that less than half of the workers expected to sign up for the wage subsidy will now secure the JobKeeper allowance, the Morrison Government could reduce JobKeeper payments to some workers.

A Treasury review is examining changes to the amount paid to some casuals following confirmation that Australian teenagers are securing the flat-rate $1500 payment regardless of whether they previously earned substantially less.

But thousands of other new casuals, including single mothers and parents have missed out on the payments because they have not worked for a single employer for 12 months or longer.

The Morrison Government is also examining whether companies that have bounced back should still be eligible for the cash for the entire duration of the program.

Asked whether JobKeeper will be reduced for those earning more than they previously earned as casuals, the Prime Minister declined to rule it out on Friday.

"Around the world, whether in New Zealand or Canada or the United Kingdom or other places, we knew that this would hit hard and it would hit long," he said.

"And so we took the early step to put in place a program twice as long as those in other comparable jurisdictions, we set it up with a review to be undertaken in those first three months and that is what is happening and I don't plan to prejudice that review.

"We will take that advice as we prepare the statement which the Treasurer will hand down in July and that will take into account that review.

"The six months provision of JobKeeper has been set out in legislation and people can count on that."

Asked again if he could "guarantee" the wage subsidy will remain in place in September, the Prime Minister replied, "Yes."

But guaranteeing the payment will remain in place for most companies does preclude the option of reducing the payment for some workers or companies.

When the scheme was first announced in March, it was proposed that companies could qualify simply by establishing a downturn of more than 30 per cent in revenue.

However, companies have been required to post monthly updates to the Australian Taxation Office on revenue, which could be used to overhaul the scheme before the September 27 end date.

News.com.au first revealed exclusively on May 11 that a Treasury review was considering the current JobKeeper scheme with a view to reducing the $1500 subsidy, targeting it at smaller businesses, or limiting it to particular industries that were hardest hit by COVID restrictions.

The Prime Minister subsequently confirmed that he was examining "anomalies" in the $1500 payment.

On May 25, News.com.au revealed that workers who scored a coronavirus pay rise under the $1500 JobKeeper scheme were the target of a secret audit to discover how many winners were getting "overpaid" under the handouts.

Teenagers are the only workers in the country to secure a pay-rise during the coronavirus pandemic and the flat-rate $1500 JobKeeper allowance is widely believed to be the main factor.

The Treasury review of the scheme has sought advice on how to drill down and find out how many workers were legally getting more cash under JobKeeper than they previously earned.

Earlier this week, Treasurer Josh Frydenberg hinted that the $1500 flat-rate payment could be reduced for some casuals who previously earned less than the handout and are currently securing a pay rise under the COVID-19 wage subsidies.

"We want to understand whether the quantum, that $1500 payment, continues to be the right amount, also bearing in mind that some people are getting paid more than they would otherwise get by virtue of having a flat payment," Mr Frydenberg said.

The Treasurer also hinted that some companies that were no longer struggling might be reconsidered for eligibility for JobKeeper payments.

"In the context of an economy, where the restrictions are being eased, and people are getting back into work, we need to assess - and particularly paying a focus to certain sectors as well - we need to assess the continuation of that JobKeeper program in that context," he said.

"It's too early to pre-empt what the outcomes of that review will be, but any government decisions about the review will be incorporated into that statement that the Finance Minister and I will make in July."

Finance Minister Mathias Cormann said the Morrison Government will have more to say on the potential changes in late July.

"We are in a much stronger position today than we had feared when we put this scheme in place towards the end of March," he said. "But we will be reviewing the data, reviewing the information, reviewing the advice and make decisions at a time when all of that is in front of us."

Liberal backbencher Jason Falinski has called for the $70 billion JobKeeper scheme to be phased out as parents return to work and children return to school.


----------



## everythingsuber

Jack Malarkey said:


> News.com.au:
> 
> https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp...s/news-story/43e48a6be32b59f9b9ca0b85eaf22e86
> *JobKeeper: $1500 payment could be slashed for casuals*
> 
> JUNE 5, 2020 7:01PM
> 
> Samantha Maiden
> 
> *Scott Morrison has offered a guarantee that the JobKeeper payment will not be scrapped before September but he's not ruling out slashing the $1500 wage subsidy for casuals who previously earned less.*
> 
> Despite announcing that less than half of the workers expected to sign up for the wage subsidy will now secure the JobKeeper allowance, the Morrison Government could reduce JobKeeper payments to some workers.
> 
> A Treasury review is examining changes to the amount paid to some casuals following confirmation that Australian teenagers are securing the flat-rate $1500 payment regardless of whether they previously earned substantially less.
> 
> But thousands of other new casuals, including single mothers and parents have missed out on the payments because they have not worked for a single employer for 12 months or longer.
> 
> The Morrison Government is also examining whether companies that have bounced back should still be eligible for the cash for the entire duration of the program.
> 
> Asked whether JobKeeper will be reduced for those earning more than they previously earned as casuals, the Prime Minister declined to rule it out on Friday.
> 
> "Around the world, whether in New Zealand or Canada or the United Kingdom or other places, we knew that this would hit hard and it would hit long," he said.
> 
> "And so we took the early step to put in place a program twice as long as those in other comparable jurisdictions, we set it up with a review to be undertaken in those first three months and that is what is happening and I don't plan to prejudice that review.
> 
> "We will take that advice as we prepare the statement which the Treasurer will hand down in July and that will take into account that review.
> 
> "The six months provision of JobKeeper has been set out in legislation and people can count on that."
> 
> Asked again if he could "guarantee" the wage subsidy will remain in place in September, the Prime Minister replied, "Yes."
> 
> But guaranteeing the payment will remain in place for most companies does preclude the option of reducing the payment for some workers or companies.
> 
> When the scheme was first announced in March, it was proposed that companies could qualify simply by establishing a downturn of more than 30 per cent in revenue.
> 
> However, companies have been required to post monthly updates to the Australian Taxation Office on revenue, which could be used to overhaul the scheme before the September 27 end date.
> 
> News.com.au first revealed exclusively on May 11 that a Treasury review was considering the current JobKeeper scheme with a view to reducing the $1500 subsidy, targeting it at smaller businesses, or limiting it to particular industries that were hardest hit by COVID restrictions.
> 
> The Prime Minister subsequently confirmed that he was examining "anomalies" in the $1500 payment.
> 
> On May 25, News.com.au revealed that workers who scored a coronavirus pay rise under the $1500 JobKeeper scheme were the target of a secret audit to discover how many winners were getting "overpaid" under the handouts.
> 
> Teenagers are the only workers in the country to secure a pay-rise during the coronavirus pandemic and the flat-rate $1500 JobKeeper allowance is widely believed to be the main factor.
> 
> The Treasury review of the scheme has sought advice on how to drill down and find out how many workers were legally getting more cash under JobKeeper than they previously earned.
> 
> Earlier this week, Treasurer Josh Frydenberg hinted that the $1500 flat-rate payment could be reduced for some casuals who previously earned less than the handout and are currently securing a pay rise under the COVID-19 wage subsidies.
> 
> "We want to understand whether the quantum, that $1500 payment, continues to be the right amount, also bearing in mind that some people are getting paid more than they would otherwise get by virtue of having a flat payment," Mr Frydenberg said.
> 
> The Treasurer also hinted that some companies that were no longer struggling might be reconsidered for eligibility for JobKeeper payments.
> 
> "In the context of an economy, where the restrictions are being eased, and people are getting back into work, we need to assess - and particularly paying a focus to certain sectors as well - we need to assess the continuation of that JobKeeper program in that context," he said.
> 
> "It's too early to pre-empt what the outcomes of that review will be, but any government decisions about the review will be incorporated into that statement that the Finance Minister and I will make in July."
> 
> Finance Minister Mathias Cormann said the Morrison Government will have more to say on the potential changes in late July.
> 
> "We are in a much stronger position today than we had feared when we put this scheme in place towards the end of March," he said. "But we will be reviewing the data, reviewing the information, reviewing the advice and make decisions at a time when all of that is in front of us."
> 
> Liberal backbencher Jason Falinski has called for the $70 billion JobKeeper scheme to be phased out as parents return to work and children return to school.


Kids will be spending the money at the pubs and clubs etc. For the sake of a couple of months payment I think they are making too much of the causals doing a little better than they normally would.


----------



## Boofhead

^^^
And half of that goes straight back to the Gubbermint through booze and pokie taxes - gotta keep the wheels turning...


----------



## Cil

I hope they are buying what they need most


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_The New Daily_

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/the...20/06/04/jobkeeper-fraud-rorts-employers/amp/
10:00pm, Jun 4, 2020 Updated: 9:54pm, Jun 4

*JobKeeper: Accountants warn of 'pop-up' fraud linked to wage subsidy*








Matt Johnson

The Australian Taxation Office has received thousands of tip-offs related to the suspected abuse of the federal government's JobKeeper program.

As of May 31, 3338 complaints linked to JobKeeper were made to the ATO's hotline, an ATO spokesperson told _The New Daily. _

The tax office will cross check the information it has received in these tip-offs and "assess whether further action is required".

Employers found guilty of knowingly rorting the system could face fines of up to $126,000, or 10 years prison in extreme cases.

Chartered Accountants ANZ tax leader Michael Croker told _The New Daily_ businesses gutted by the pandemic, including cafes, tourism operators and retailers, have largely adhered to ATO guidelines.

But some companies have willingly misled the tax office by manipulating turnover and accelerating the payment of suppliers.



> Some employers are also delaying their invoicing to not derive income, so it doesn't figure in turnover calculations," Mr Croker said.


"But they can usually be caught out because accountants can see their normal billing practices have changed and start asking questions.

"What's been more troubling for the accounting profession recently have been so-called pop-up employer schemes and employee arrangements."

Mr Croker said a 'pop-up employer scheme' is when an employer submits applications for JobKeeper despite not being in business before the pandemic.

Employers were required to lodge an income tax return or evidence of making taxable supplies before the pandemic in their application.

Consequently, the ATO's integrity unit is now targeting applicants that have struggled to prove they were trading before March.

On the other side of the coin, 'a pop-up employee scheme' is when an employee's tax file number has been used on multiple applications, or when a contractor is treated like an employee.

Mr Croker noted, however, that this type of rort is less common than others.

The COVID-19 senate select committee heard two weeks ago that major construction firm Mirvac was using poor-performing subsidiaries to artificially lower its profits to make the $8 billion company eligible for JobKeeper payments.

Independent journalist Michael West has also revealed major aged-care property owners Lendlease and Blue Care told employees to register for the wage subsidy scheme despite neither company suffering the required 50 per cent drop in revenue.

The report came a week after Treasury and the ATO released a joint statement explaining how three million fewer workers than forecast would be receiving the JobKeeper payments.

Authorities attributed the bungle to "significant errors" made by roughly 1000 businesses when filling out application forms.

The scheme will now cost $60 billion less than the original $130 billion estimate.

*Workers 'unlikely' to double dip *

As for misuse of JobSeeker, H&R Block director of tax communications Mark Chapman believes it is "feasible" some workers have inadvertently - and in some cases willingly - received the unemployment benefit in addition to JobKeeper.

But he said this type of fraud was probably rare, as JobKeeper payments are under the control of their employer.

"There's not a long-term risk of people getting away with that, and those cases will become clear," Mr Chapman told _The New Daily_.

You could have had people at the start of this crisis who could have applied for JobSeeker before JobKeeper was announced and are now receiving both payments.

"[Those cases] will come out in the wash. There will be data matching and co-ordination between Services Australia and the ATO, so it will become clear where people have done that."

Meanwhile, the ATO's COVID Taskforce chair Jeremy Geale told the COVID-19 select committee last month that the tax office had organised an "extensive compliance program" and "post-payment audit activity" to address eligibility and employee underpayment issues.

The ATO has also released a practical compliance guide explaining 10 scenarios applicable to JobKeeper.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jobkeeper will be withdrawn with effect from 20 July 2020 from employees in the childcare sector and sole traders operating a childcare service:

Release type: Media Release

Date: 8 June 2020

A return to the Child Care Subsidy

Ministers:
The Hon Dan Tehan MP, Minister for Education

As Australians return to their workplace, businesses re-open and children return to classroom learning, the Government will resume the Child Care Subsidy (CCS) to support families to access affordable child care.

Minister for Education Dan Tehan said the temporary Early Childhood Education and Care Relief Package, introduced on 6 April, had done its job and would be turned off on 12 July.

From 13 July, the CCS will return, along with new transition measures to support the sector and parents as they move back to the subsidy.

To ensure Government support is appropriately targeted, JobKeeper will cease from 20 July for employees of a CCS approved service and for sole traders operating a child care service.

...

(https://ministers.dese.gov.au/tehan/return-child-care-subsidy)

See also:

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/p...2/news-story/54c56a22c9f5310f3c62a8485002ed03.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

SmartCompany:

https://www.smartcompany.com.au/finance/tax/jobkeeper-business-limbo-ato/
*What happened to those 150,000 firms in JobKeeper limbo? The ATO can't say*

MATTHEW ELMAS

JUNE 10, 2020

When the Australian Tax Office (ATO) admitted to a $60 billion "reporting error" in JobKeeper estimates last month a curious detail was noted midway through the statement: 150,000 businesses were stuck between enrolment and declaration, or the final step before payments start flowing.

In the face of a startling administration error that saw hundreds of sole traders complete their enrolments after declaring they had more than 1000 workers on their forms, the revelation received little attention in the media.

But those 150,000 businesses in JobKeeper limbo -40% of which were sole traders- were against the clock to make declarations for an estimated 600,000 workers before the deadline for crucial March and April payments on May 30.

Those payments, covering the first two JobKeeper fortnights when many businesses were suffering through the worst of the COVID-19 lockdowns, would equate to as much as $1.8 billion in subsidies.

And while employers are now approaching the deadline for May declarations, the ATO says its still unable to say how many of these businesses made it in to the program or gave up. The tax office also declined to provide up-to-date figures on the total number of employers currently accessing wage subsidies when SmartCompany asked.

"At this stage, due to our general end of month reporting processes, we are unable to provide an update on how many more businesses completed their applications for April," an ATO spokesperson said.

As at May 20, 10 days before the deadline for April declarations, about 910,000 businesses were receiving JobKeeper payments, but it is also unclear how many of these businesses have made their May declarations, the deadline for which is June 14.

"We are unable to provide assured data at this stage for how many businesses have completed declarations so far for May," an ATO spokesperson said.

Interestingly, in his opening statement to the COVID-19 Senate Committee on Tuesday, ATO Commissioner Chris Jordan said $12.96 billion in JobKeeper payments had been made to about 872,000 businesses by June 4, covering about 3.3 million workers.

Those figures suggest at least some of the 150,000 businesses made the declaration deadline for April, as about 759,000 businesses had received $8.7 billion in payments by May 20.

However, without data on how many new employers have entered the system for JobKeeper fortnights in May, or up-to-date numbers on employers currently accessing the program, it's impossible to determine where the businesses in JobKeeper limbo and their workers went.

*JobKeeper limbo: Where did they go?*

The lack of transparency about the ongoing operation of the wage subsidy scheme comes amid concerns that many businesses have struggled to access JobKeeper payments, perhaps because they were not immediately aware there was a two-stage verification process, or because they did not have the cashflow to front-up wages during April.

There have been suggestions, including from the ATO, that those in JobKeeper limbo may have realised they were ineligible for the payments because economic conditions did not deteriorate as much as feared, although businesses are required to make declarations about their eligibility when they enroll, and the turnover test is only applied once.

Cashflow concerns were a key focus among federal cabinet Ministers in April, so much so it was reported Prime Minister Scott Morrison had a growl at Australia's bank bosses, which culminated in hastily launched JobKeeper "bridging finance" hotlines, designed to extend debt to SMEs struggling to pay wage bills ahead of reimbursement.

Launched in late April, three days after JobKeeper enrolments opened, the hotlines were spruiked by Treasurer Josh Frydenberg as a lifeline to struggling firms. However, it soon emerged the loans were the same as those already being offered by the banks, and the hotline itself was the only material addition.

It appears businesses didn't flood the phones either. SmartCompany asked the major banks how many firms contacted the hotlines, and it appears only a few thousand firms have made inquiries.

National Australia Bank had received about 1000 calls by late May, while ANZ's hotline has averaged about 75 calls per day since launch, peaking at 250 towards the end of April.

While there were no shortage of anecdotal reports about business owners struggling to pay wages heading into JobKeeper in April, an Australian Bureau of Statistics survey found only 8% of small businesses reported giving the scheme a miss because they couldn't afford to pay staff.

Others SmartCompany has spoken to, particularly sole traders, said they were not aware there was a secondary declaration process after enrolment, instead believing they would be contacted by the ATO about their acceptance into the program after enrolling.

*Enrolments and ATO scrutiny*

While enrolling in JobKeeper was on the minds of many businesses heading into April, it has since emerged the tax office wasn't closely scrutinising what businesses submitted on those forms, instead focusing its analytical tools on the secondary declaration process.

This much was evident after the ATO and Treasury came clean about sole traders submitting forms claiming they had 1,500 workers. These numbers subsequently informed estimates about the uptake of the program, and were only discovered as errant after several weeks.

"We did not build rigorous analytics behind the field that asked for the estimated number of employees a business had, instead focusing our integrity measures on questions that related directly to payments," Commissioner Jordan told the Senate on Thursday.

It also became clear during Tuesday's Senate hearing that many large employers had enrolled in JobKeeper but not declared, even after the first rounds of payments had started to flow in May.

"In the first few weeks the number of employees reported seemed to be on a trajectory consistent with the Treasury estimates. But once employers began to confirm the actual employees covered as part of stage two, we identified within a fortnight that the numbers were less than expected," Jordan said.

"This appeared to us to be because many large employers had not lodged their stage two applications. This understanding was reinforced when we conducted outreach with some large employers who confirmed they hadn't yet finalised their applications."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Top 20 postcodes for businesses receiving jobkeeper:










(https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/au....keeper-postcodes-claiming-most-223952219.html)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Sunday 14 June 2020 (ie, this Sunday) is the last day you can make the monthly declaration required to claim the jobkeeper payment in June (ie, the second payment) for the two jobkeeper fortnights that ended in May 2020:

*JobKeeper key dates*
Key dates for the JobKeeper Payment.







www.ato.gov.au
.

Don't allow procrastination to put a payment of $3,000 (before tax) at risk.

ATO online services (including myGov) may be fully or partly affected by scheduled weekly maintenance from 11.00 pm AEST on Saturday 13 June to 7.00 am AEST on Sunday 14 June:

*System maintenance*
This page contains information about planned maintenance windows and how to be alerted.







www.ato.gov.au
.

Don't delay; do it today.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> Sunday 14 June 2020 (ie, this Sunday) is the last day you can make the monthly declaration required to claim the jobkeeper payment in June (ie, the second payment) for the two jobkeeper fortnights that ended in May 2020:
> 
> *JobKeeper key dates*
> Key dates for the JobKeeper Payment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ato.gov.au
> .
> 
> Don't allow procrastination to put a payment of $3,000 (before tax) at risk.
> 
> ATO online services (including myGov) may be fully or partly affected by scheduled weekly maintenance from 11.00 pm AEST on Saturday 13 June to 7.00 am AEST on Sunday 14 June:
> 
> *System maintenance*
> This page contains information about planned maintenance windows and how to be alerted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ato.gov.au
> .
> 
> Don't delay; do it today.


Note that the Tax Office no longer staffs its phones on Sundays:

JobKeeper payment and superannuation enquiries: Phone numbers and operating hours


Phone numberEnquiry typeExtended hours1800 806 218- Emergency Support Infoline
Enquiries about the recently announced JobKeeper payment and superannuation measures
8.00am-8.00pm
Monday-Friday
10.00am-4.00pm (AEST)
Saturday

https://www.ato.gov.au/about-ato/contact-us/phone-us/


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*Treating jobkeeper payments as part of the net business income*

Yahoo News!

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/au....obkeeper-jobseeker-early-super-021702267.html
*ATO's warning to Aussies getting JobKeeper, JobSeeker, early super*

Tony Yoo
Yahoo Finance AU. 12 June 2020, 12:17 pm

Extracts:

The Australian Taxation Office has warned taxpayers receiving unusual income this year due to the coronavirus downturn to be careful when submitting their tax returns.

The loss of jobs or working hours mean many Australians have had to draw on government assistance like JobKeeper and JobSeeker, or withdraw some of their superannuation early.

...

*JobKeeper: how to treat in tax return*

JobKeeper payments are taxed as regular income.

Australians that have received JobKeeper payments from their employer don't need to do anything different to other "normal" years.

"The payments will be included as salary and wages and/or allowances, in their regular income statement, which their employer provides directly to the ATO," stated the tax office.

The income statement sent to the ATO can be viewed in MyGov, or a tax agent acting on your behalf can also access it.

*Sole traders that have received the payments need to include them as income for the business.*

...

(Emphasis added)

*Jack Malarkey comments:*

(1) The Tax Office's approach is consistent with that of Services Australia:

https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/individuals/news/reporting-income-from-jobkeeper-payment
(2) It enables the jobkeeper payments to benefit from the small business income tax offset:

https://www.ato.gov.au/business/inc...ss/in-detail/small-business-income-tax-offset
(3) Jobkeeper payments count towards the $20,000 assessable income threshold to prevent quarantining of business losses under the non-commercial losses rules:









Non-commercial losses


See how you may be able to offset your business loss against other income if you're a sole trader or in a partnership.




www.ato.gov.au





(4) This approach makes it more likely that a driver will need to pay PAYG quarterly instalments of income tax and will increase the amount payable each quarter based on previous business income:

https://www.ato.gov.au/General/PAYG-instalments/


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> *Treating jobkeeper payments as part of the net business income*
> 
> Yahoo News!
> 
> https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/au....obkeeper-jobseeker-early-super-021702267.html
> *ATO's warning to Aussies getting JobKeeper, JobSeeker, early super*
> 
> Tony Yoo
> Yahoo Finance AU. 12 June 2020, 12:17 pm
> 
> Extracts:
> 
> The Australian Taxation Office has warned taxpayers receiving unusual income this year due to the coronavirus downturn to be careful when submitting their tax returns.
> 
> The loss of jobs or working hours mean many Australians have had to draw on government assistance like JobKeeper and JobSeeker, or withdraw some of their superannuation early.
> 
> ...
> 
> *JobKeeper: how to treat in tax return*
> 
> JobKeeper payments are taxed as regular income.
> 
> Australians that have received JobKeeper payments from their employer don't need to do anything different to other "normal" years.
> 
> "The payments will be included as salary and wages and/or allowances, in their regular income statement, which their employer provides directly to the ATO," stated the tax office.
> 
> The income statement sent to the ATO can be viewed in MyGov, or a tax agent acting on your behalf can also access it.
> 
> *Sole traders that have received the payments need to include them as income for the business.*
> 
> ...
> 
> (Emphasis added)
> 
> *Jack Malarkey comments:*
> 
> (1) The Tax Office's approach is consistent with that of Services Australia:
> 
> https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/individuals/news/reporting-income-from-jobkeeper-payment
> (2) It enables the jobkeeper payments to benefit from the small business income tax offset:
> 
> https://www.ato.gov.au/business/inc...ss/in-detail/small-business-income-tax-offset
> (3) Jobkeeper payments count towards the $20,000 assessable income threshold to prevent quarantining of business losses under the non-commercial losses rules:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Non-commercial losses
> 
> 
> See how you may be able to offset your business loss against other income if you're a sole trader or in a partnership.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ato.gov.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (4) This approach makes it more likely that a driver will need to pay PAYG quarterly instalments of income tax and will increase the amount payable each quarter based on previous business income:
> 
> https://www.ato.gov.au/General/PAYG-instalments/


My reading is that jobkeeper WON'T be prefilled for business participants: it will be up to the business participant to include the jobkeeper payment themselves in the calculation of net business income.

The income year in which the business participant includes the July payment depends on whether they return their income on a receipts (cash) or accruals basis.

On the other hand, my understanding is that those drivers who return their rideshare income on the basis of when they completed the trip giving rise to payment are still (in a strict legal sense) returning their income on a receipts basis.

This is because income tax law treats amounts constructively received as received. This includes cases where the taxpayer has a payment made on their behalf or as they direct:

*Legal Database*
Taxation Ruling







www.ato.gov.au

The agreements between drivers and Uber (and other rideshare companies) treat the rider as paying the driver with the rideshare company relevantly being treated as the driver's collection agent.

On this basis, the driver constructively receives the fare when the rider pays the rideshare company.

A consequence of this is that a driver should return the jobkeeper payment made in July for the two jobkeeper fortnights ended in June in the 2020-21 income year and not 2019-20.

Most drivers in practice return the income either on the basis of when Uber issues its weekly statement or when the amounts are credited to the driver's bank account.

The Australian Taxation Office is in practice happy to accept any of the three possible timings (date of trip, date of weekly payment statement or date of crediting to the bank account) provided the driver is consistent in their approach.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

It's interesting how the Tax Office guidance material in one respect reflects a misunderstanding of the jobkeeper legislative underpinnings:

'_8 June 2020 - announcement

'On 8 June, the Government announced that JobKeeper payments will cease from 20 July for employees of a child care subsidy approved service and for sole traders operating a child care service.

'The announced change is subject to amendments being made to the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefit) Rules 2020 *through Parliament.*

'We are working through the details of the announcement and will share more information as soon as we can.'_

(Emphasis added)

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/JobKeeper-key-dates/)

The Treasurer's rules are a form of delegated legislation and are amended by the Treasurer himself and not by Parliament.

This error no doubt reflects the Tax Office treating the updating task as routine without adequate checking by more senior and knowledgeable staff.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*Recent updates to Australian Taxation Office guidance material on jobkeeper:

JobKeeper - timeline of content updates
A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:*


June
May
April
June

18 JuneUpdate: [relevant only to employers]17 JuneNew: Exercise of the Commissioner's discretion - Information about applying for the Commissioner's discretion to receive an extension in time for the JobKeeper payment application.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

A new Australian Taxation Office data matching program

*COVID-19 economic response support - 2019-20 to 2020-21 data-matching program*

COVID-19 economic response support 2019-20 to 2020-21 data-matching program protocol.







www.ato.gov.au

Media article:

IT News










*ATO to match data for early access super scheme, JobKeeper crackdown*
Three million Aussies in the crosshairs.
www.itnews.com.au

*ATO to match data for early access super scheme, JobKeeper crackdown*

By Justin Hendry on Jun 23, 2020 1:36 pm

The Australian Taxation Office will match the data of more than 3 million people to crackdown on inappropriate access to the government's early access superannuation and JobKeeper schemes.

The national revenue office issued a notice for the new 'COVID-19 Economic Response Support 2020' data matching program on Monday as part of its investigation into fraudulent activity.

It comes just days after the ATO said it was looking into cases where individuals had drawn down on their super without having suffered any reduction in their salary.

The investigation is also looking at whether the individuals have used the scheme as a tax dodge, by contributing money to their super at a reduced tax rate before withdrawing it.

The hardship scheme allows Australians to access up to $10,000 of their super this financial year and a further $10,000 in 2020-21, while JobKeeper gives eligible workers a fortnightly $1500 wage subsidy.

It has already been the target of fraudulent activity after a third-party system intrusion saw a small number of individuals had their personal details unlawfully used between April and May.

Under the new data matching program, the ATO will source data from Services Australia to confirm whether government payments were made to scheme applicants between 19 April and 24 September.

The ATO said that "data collected from Services Australia is expected to relate to approximately 3 million individuals". The data will be collected on a monthly basis between June and October.

It will also source data from state and territory correctional facility regulators to understand whether early release super or JobKeeper applicants were incarcerated between 1 March and 27 September.

The data collected from the state and territory correctional facility regulators is expected to relate to approximately 45,000 individuals," the ATO said.

Other data to be sourced will include identification details, including names, addresses and dates of birth.

Data will be obtained under the Taxation Administration Act 1953, which "obligates the data providers to provide the information requested". It will be held by the ATO for up to six years.

The ATO said the program will allow it to "verify eligibility" for the JobKeeper payments, temporary early access to super or the cash flow boost to understand whether payments were falsely obtained.

It will also allow the agency to "implement treatment strategies to improve voluntary compliance, which may include educational and compliance activities as appropriate".

"We are committed to maintaining the integrity of the tax and superannuation system," the ATO said.

"This data matching program will enable to us to obtain data from Services Australia and state and territory correctional facility regulators to help us confirm eligibility for the measures.

"The data will also support post-issue compliance work, enabling us to follow up any potentially false or misleading declarations."

Like its other data matching programs, this new program follows data matching guidelines provided by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner.

"The guidelines include standards for the use data-matching as an administrative tool in a way that complies with the Australian Privacy Principles (APPs) and the Privacy Act 1988 (Privacy Act) and are consistent with good privacy practice," the ATO said.

However, due to "limited timeframes to provide the support measures", a pilot of the program was not conducted.

An ATO spokesperson told iTnews that the data matching program would allow it to "identify where there may be a risk requiring further investigation".

"The data matching program is being used to identify taxpayers who may be required to then demonstrate how they assessed their eligibility," the spokesperson said.

"In limited cases where individuals have not made genuine applications, we may apply penalties. The data matching processes being used are not new.

"People should be assured that across all of the stimulus measures, where they are trying to do the right thing, we will support them.

"For anyone who applied for early release of superannuation but has realised they were not eligible, we would recommend getting on the front foot and making a voluntary disclosure rather than waiting for an audit, and we will help you remedy your position.

"If you are unsure how to proceed, you should seek the assistance of a tax professional or call us directly."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The Australian Taxation Office has now provided information in its jobkeeper guidance about the 'actively engaged in the business' requirement.

My reading of the information is that the pausing of a continuing business does not prevent a sole trader from being relevantly actively engaged in their business.

The Tax Office information is below:

*Actively engaged*

As a sole trader - that is, you own your business and are not an employee of your business - you will be actively engaged in your business if you regularly:


perform or manage the performance of services the business provides
sell or manage the sale of goods of the business
perform other activities associated with managing the business
exercise control over activities related to business strategy and growth.
You will not be actively engaged in the business simply because you:


own an interest in the business or invest capital in it
provide advice or other assistance to the business from time-to-time.
*Example*

Annette owns a tourism business associated with Australian ski resorts.

During the ski season Annette works long hours managing all aspects of ski holidays for her clients.

During the off-season Annette works on marketing, building business partnerships, securing future bookings and bookkeeping.

Annette is actively engaged in the business.

(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/Sole-traders/)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

SmartCompany

https://www.smartcompany.com.au/coronavirus/ato-jobkeeper-claw-back/
"*Expect to hear from us": ATO sounds warning on dodgy JobKeeper applications, foreshadowing audits and clawbacks*

MATTHEW ELMAS

JUNE 24, 2020

The tax office says employers who suspect they've made an error on their JobKeeper applications should come forward voluntarily, or risk being caught in a forthcoming compliance push.

The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) will be combing through hundreds of thousands of JobKeeper applications in the coming months to identify where businesses may have went wrong with their eligibility assessments.

Under the $70 billion wage subsidy scheme, employers submitted self-assessed applications declaring their turnover had fallen by 30% or more against a suitable comparable period. Payments then started flowing once a secondary declaration process was completed.

But it's entirely possible many businesses were accepted into the program having either made mistakes on their enrolment forms, or having intentionally misrepresented their business circumstances to get access to the payments.

It became evident the ATO was not closely scrutinising enrolment forms in May, when it admitted hundreds of sole traders had filed applications saying they employed more than one thousand workers - mistakes discovered several weeks after the fact.

This is changing; ATO deputy commissioner Will Day says the tax office has already received intelligence reports about schemes designed to rort the program, and will be conducting audits of JobKeeper payments and other COVID-19 related stimulus measures.

"We will generally operate on the basis Australians are honest, meaning we will accept the information we are provided with as true and correct and make payments," Day said in a statement.

"However, we will be conducting checks later, so if you've received a benefit as part of the COVID-19 stimulus measures and we discover you are ineligible, you can expect to hear from us."

Day says businesses that may have broken the rules, intentionally or otherwise, should come forward voluntarily.

"It is much better to come forward to make a voluntary disclosure than waiting to be audited. If in doubt on how to proceed, we recommend seeking the advice of a tax professional," Day said.

In particular, the ATO said it wants to make sure businesses recieving JobKeeper payments are:

Eligible in relation to their business income (i.e. 30% turnover decline);
Claiming payments for eligible employees;
Making correct claims; and
Not manipulating their turnover to satisfy the 30% turnover test.

Penalty wise, the ATO is able to take businesses off JobKeeper if they identify an issue and claw back payments that have been issued.

Given the quantum of the wage subsidies, $1,500 per eligible worker each fortnight, back-payment claims could cripple a business, so the stakes are high.

The ATO has previously said it will not employ a punitive compliance approach for businesses that have made genuine mistakes on their JobKeeper applications.

Single Touch Payroll data, income tax returns and information reported via superannuation funds is being used to inform the ATO's investigations, which means they can essentially see everything they need to in order to work out whether a business has made an incorrect claim.

The ATO has published a detailed report about some of the schemes that businesses may be using to incorrectly access JobKeeper payments.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> SmartCompany
> 
> https://www.smartcompany.com.au/coronavirus/ato-jobkeeper-claw-back/
> "*Expect to hear from us": ATO sounds warning on dodgy JobKeeper applications, foreshadowing audits and clawbacks*
> 
> MATTHEW ELMAS
> 
> JUNE 24, 2020
> 
> The tax office says employers who suspect they've made an error on their JobKeeper applications should come forward voluntarily, or risk being caught in a forthcoming compliance push.
> 
> The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) will be combing through hundreds of thousands of JobKeeper applications in the coming months to identify where businesses may have went wrong with their eligibility assessments.
> 
> Under the $70 billion wage subsidy scheme, employers submitted self-assessed applications declaring their turnover had fallen by 30% or more against a suitable comparable period. Payments then started flowing once a secondary declaration process was completed.
> 
> But it's entirely possible many businesses were accepted into the program having either made mistakes on their enrolment forms, or having intentionally misrepresented their business circumstances to get access to the payments.
> 
> It became evident the ATO was not closely scrutinising enrolment forms in May, when it admitted hundreds of sole traders had filed applications saying they employed more than one thousand workers - mistakes discovered several weeks after the fact.
> 
> This is changing; ATO deputy commissioner Will Day says the tax office has already received intelligence reports about schemes designed to rort the program, and will be conducting audits of JobKeeper payments and other COVID-19 related stimulus measures.
> 
> "We will generally operate on the basis Australians are honest, meaning we will accept the information we are provided with as true and correct and make payments," Day said in a statement.
> 
> "However, we will be conducting checks later, so if you've received a benefit as part of the COVID-19 stimulus measures and we discover you are ineligible, you can expect to hear from us."
> 
> Day says businesses that may have broken the rules, intentionally or otherwise, should come forward voluntarily.
> 
> "It is much better to come forward to make a voluntary disclosure than waiting to be audited. If in doubt on how to proceed, we recommend seeking the advice of a tax professional," Day said.
> 
> In particular, the ATO said it wants to make sure businesses recieving JobKeeper payments are:
> 
> Eligible in relation to their business income (i.e. 30% turnover decline);
> Claiming payments for eligible employees;
> Making correct claims; and
> Not manipulating their turnover to satisfy the 30% turnover test.
> 
> Penalty wise, the ATO is able to take businesses off JobKeeper if they identify an issue and claw back payments that have been issued.
> 
> Given the quantum of the wage subsidies, $1,500 per eligible worker each fortnight, back-payment claims could cripple a business, so the stakes are high.
> 
> The ATO has previously said it will not employ a punitive compliance approach for businesses that have made genuine mistakes on their JobKeeper applications.
> 
> Single Touch Payroll data, income tax returns and information reported via superannuation funds is being used to inform the ATO's investigations, which means they can essentially see everything they need to in order to work out whether a business has made an incorrect claim.
> 
> The ATO has published a detailed report about some of the schemes that businesses may be using to incorrectly access JobKeeper payments.


This article includes a quote from the Australian Taxation Office's Will Day.

Will Day is the Deputy Commissioner, Integrated Compliance.

LinkedIn has the following article by him:

*COVID-19 stimulus integrity is a priority*

June 19, 2020 •









Will Day
Deputy Commissioner Integrated Compliance at Australian Taxation Office

The last few months has been challenging as we have all adapted to the impacts of COVID-19.

As you know, the Government introduced a stimulus package - the biggest economic package in Australia's history - to address the significant economic consequences the nation is facing as a result of COVID-19.

The ATO has been entrusted to implement a number of the stimulus measures, which is an enormous and very challenging undertaking.

At the heart of the package is protecting jobs and saving people's livelihoods in these unprecedented and uncertain times. As such, protecting the integrity of our tax and super systems has to be second to none. We are focusing on ensuring we deliver the measures with the level of integrity that Australians expect.

The measures are designed to help those who most need assistance, and quickly, and we need to balance expediency with integrity.

We expect most people will do the right thing, and we want to make it as easy as possible for them to receive the benefits they are entitled to.

However, for people who are trying to take advantage of the current situation and those who set out to deliberately rort the system, there will be serious consequences. We have a robust system to detect those who are taking more than what they are entitled to - extensive data analytics, IT and people capability, and we are good at monitoring what is happening and seeing unusual activity.

We've just released our COVID-19 approach to compliance, providing advice on how we apply our compliance measures in relation to the stimulus measures.

Staff have been working around the clock to deliver support, assist customers and protect the integrity of the system. We've been checking all enrolments, seeking further information where we need it and reviewing those that are of concern.

Those who have made an honest mistake will be supported and we will help fix the error. For those who have applied and should not have, we will be in touch as we don't want people to accidentally incur a debt.

This is all part of what we do to support our clients to get things right. Our compliance approach is based on a solid foundation of help and support - we don't rush to put people through an audit process.

However, there is no doubt there are a small proportion of people who deliberately set out to abuse the system. These people will be detected and dealt with accordingly, and this might include penalties, prosecution or, in extreme cases, imprisonment.

Serious financial crime affecting the integrity of the stimulus measures is now a priority for the ATO-led Serious Financial Crime Taskforce (SFCT), which harnesses the powers and capabilities of multiple agencies in the fight against tax crime.

We work hard to make sure people can get the help they need, and our compliance approach is an important part of ensuring there are enough resources to go around for all Australians. Our continued focus is on helping people get things right the first time, and assisting them to self-correct if there has been a genuine error.

If you see someone who is taking more than what they're entitled to, someone who's not being honest, you can confidentially call us on 1800 060 062.

To find out more about our compliance approach for COVID-19 visit www.ato.gov.au/covidcompliance


----------



## Jack Malarkey

According to David Speers on ABC Television’s ‘Insiders’ this morning (Sunday 28 June), Treasury has now handed over to the Government its report of its completed review of the jobkeeper program.

The Government is expected to announce its response to the review on 23 July.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> According to David Speers on ABC Television's 'Insiders' this morning (Sunday 28 June), Treasury has now handed over to the Government its report of its completed review of the jobkeeper program.
> 
> The Government is expected to announce its response to the review on 23 July.


ABC Australia:

*The JobKeeper review has landed - and Morrison has tough decisions to make*

With the future of the JobKeeper payment still in the balance, the Government has some tough decisions to make - but don't expect it before Saturday's by-election, writes David Speers.

Sunday 28 June 2020

A few weeks ago, Treasury Secretary Steven Kennedy told a Senate committee he would finish his review of the JobKeeper program by the end of this month.

True to his word, Dr Kennedy completed the report and it was handed to Treasurer Josh Frydenberg late on Friday; four days before deadline and eight days before a by-election in the highly marginal seat of Eden-Monaro.

Labor will now spend the final week of this by-election campaign demanding the government reveal the findings and give thousands of workers in the hard-hit electorate some certainty.

The government will insist it's still gathering information and weighing a difficult decision about how to end, phase-down or replace the JobKeeper payment.

The outcome of this by-election is extremely difficult to forecast. Strategists, pollsters and pundits on all sides can't say with certainty what might happen.

The bushfires and the economic impact of coronavirus have hit this part of Australia hard. Scott Morrison was seen to perform poorly during the fires, but well during the pandemic.

Throw in the departure of a popular local MP, a doubling of pre-poll and postal votes since last year's election, complicated preference flows and this contest is as unpredictable as, well, the rest of 2020.

*We're in for nearly another month of uncertainty*

The growing anxiety over job losses and the future of JobKeeper is another factor in the mix.

The Government doesn't plan to announce what it's doing with the JobKeeper and JobSeeker payments until a mini-budget due on July 23, which will also include detailed Treasury forecasts on economic growth, unemployment, deficit and debt ahead of a full budget in October.

We're in for nearly another month of uncertainty, where every word from the Prime Minister and Treasurer will be carefully interpreted by businesses and workers trying to read the tea leaves.

Two weeks ago, facing unease from some Coalition backbenchers about ever-rising debt levels, the Prime Minister signalled a hard-line.

He told 2GB's Ben Fordham "JobKeeper is there 'til the end of September". There was no talk of extension.

Morrison went on to tell a CEDA conference, "there will always be a case made for spending more and for spending longer, and there are plenty who are happy to make that case."

"But it is not a wise or responsible course," he said.

"Such a path is dangerous and will prejudice medium and longer term capacity to deliver on core essential services."

Since that speech, Deloitte has axed 700 jobs, Optus 480 jobs, PWC 400 jobs, Charles Sturt University around 145 jobs, Myer 90 jobs and Qantas a whopping 6,000 jobs.

Big employers are sending a message

These cuts can't all be blamed on uncertainty around JobKeeper.

Businesses are adjusting to the new reality of an economy that will take years to fully recover.

Still, from Qantas to Wesfarmers, big employers are making it clear they believe the Government needs to spend more.

On Friday, the Prime Minister had a more generous tone. He was back on 2GB, this time telling Ben Fordham: "We're going to keep ensuring we have policies to support people just like we did back in March".

He offered a general assurance that "there'll be a next step" once JobKeeper ends in September. Just what this "next step" will look like and exactly who will receive support is unclear.

Some suggest a gradual phasing out of JobKeeper over an extended period for all those receiving the payment.

Morrison's preferred approach appears to be targeting further support only to "sectors of the economy ... that will continue to be affected much longer than many other businesses".

*There are no easy decisions ahead*

Some sectors, like aviation and the arts, are clearly being hit harder than others, but as the Qantas decision reveals, there are limits to what the Government is willing to do.

It's not about to provide an ongoing wage subsidy while the aviation sector waits 12 months for international travel to resume and three years to fully recover.

Those airline workers can be put to better use elsewhere in the economy, at least in theory, even if it is a terrible environment to be looking for work.

Similarly, the Government must decide how to support the embattled tourism sector and for how long. This is particularly relevant for the 4,800 businesses relying on JobKeeper in the tourist towns of Eden-Monaro.

These decisions aren't easy and won't be announced before Saturday's by-election, even if the Government is now sitting on advice from Treasury.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

SmartCompany

https://www.smartcompany.com.au/coronavirus/jobkeeper-treasury-grattan/
*JobKeeper: Treasury considers monthly eligibility tests, as Grattan Institute pushes for an overhaul*

MATTHEW ELMAS

JUNE 29, 2020

The chorus of business advocates, unions, politicians and economists calling for the Morrison government to expand the JobKeeper program has grown over the weekend, with a new Grattan Institute report finding additional fiscal stimulus should be deployed now to curb growing unemployment.

The report came after News.com.au revealed on Friday that Treasury was canvassing a new monthly JobKeeper turnover test as part of its ongoing review of the $70 billion wage-subsidy scheme, which is widely expected to re-target payments to vulnerable industries.

Under current rules, firms only need to prove their turnover eligibility once, by showing that sales have fallen 30% or more against a suitable comparable period. But participating businesses have been providing the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) with monthly revenue projections as a feature of the current program.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg will hand down changes to JobKeeper on July 23 amid sustained pressure from interest groups across the economy for the payments to be tapered off rather than ended abruptly.

In a report published on Monday, the think-tank argues the federal government should drop an extra $70-$90 billion into the economy to help Australia recover from a likely COVID-19 recession, including by extending JobKeeper for struggling firms.

Grattan has warned a premature pullback of fiscal support could scupper Australia's recovery from the coronavirus, recommending the Morrison government doubles down on both JobKeeper and rent deferrals for businesses in hard-hit industries.

"With the cashflow of most businesses still squeezed, turning off these supports all at once would be a mistake," Grattan's report says. "Some can be removed as scheduled, but the JobKeeper program and rental codes should be extended for businesses that face a sustained hit to their revenues.

"The aim should be to preserve businesses that are likely to have a long-term future, and encourage restructuring of those that don't."

With firms across most industries still struggling with the impact of government-imposed trading restrictions in May, Grattan says the next six months will be a "high-risk" period for insolvencies, with many SMEs not expected to survive the winter as sales remain skint.

About $65 billion in income support handed out in the September quarter will be withdrawn by the end of October, with more than 900,000 firms to lose $1,500 fortnightly subsidies for each eligible worker on their books.

"Many businesses will face a 'triple threat': simultaneous withdrawal of government revenue support, falling demand as income support for households is also withdrawn, and rising costs because loan deferrals and rent relief agreements expire," Grattan says.

"The government should reconsider these timetables, especially for the businesses whose operations continue to be constrained by social-distancing restrictions."

*How should JobKeeper be changed?*

Despite initial commentary the Morrison government was remiss to extend wage subsidies, there appears to be growing consensus that some industries, notably tourism and events, will still need to be propped up in some way past September.

Last Friday, Prime Minister Scott Morrison said additional support would be extended to those industries still struggling with restrictions, such as tourism-reliant firms unable to take bookings from international travellers.

"As I assured, whether it be Qantas or those in the entertainment sector or the tourism, hospitality sector or regions like North Queensland, we get it, we understand that they are going to be hurting more for longer than other parts of the economy," Morrison said.

However, it's still not clear what type of support the government will consider. While federal MP Warren Entsch has pushed for JobKeeper to be extended past September for tourism-reliant firms, tourism Minister Simon Birmingham has floated domestic travel incentives.

Earlier this month, the Morrison government moved to pull about 120,000 childcare workers off JobKeeper from July 12, replacing it with a $708 million support package it argued was better targeted to the industry's needs.

Grattan has called for an overhaul of the wage-subsidy scheme, which it says has been a success despite being developed quickly during an emergency.

It wants short-term casuals, temporary migrants and university workers to be eligible for the wage payments, echoing calls from the Labor opposition.

The think-tank says JobKeeper should be reshaped, with businesses in vulnerable industries keeping the payments for three months after September, while businesses in recovering areas are pulled off.

A part-time rate could also be introduced to replace the current $1,500 flat-rate payment, which has in many cases significantly increased the pay packets of those working fewer hours, Grattan argues.

"Employees working less than 20 hours a week could receive $800 a fortnight. The saving would be about $2 billion on the cost of JobKeeper per quarter," Grattan says.

The Morrison government should also change how payments are made to businesses, Grattan says, noting the requirement to pay in advance has created cashflow issues for many businesses.

"JobKeeper payments remain in arrears, so many businesses need to borrow on an ongoing basis to fund their payroll," Grattan says. "Given it is now known how much will need to be paid for businesses that are in the scheme, it would be very easy to switch to payment in advance by paying double with the next payment."


----------



## Westside Rider

@Jack Malarkey when can we expect our next $3000?

2nd July or 9th July?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Westside Rider said:


> @Jack Malarkey when can we expect our next $3000?
> 
> 2nd July or 9th July?


The Tax Office has advised that it takes on average five business days. Last time, mine took four business days.

I expect we'll receive payment on either Monday 6 July or Tuesday 7 July.


----------



## duracell

Is anybody having issued with declaring on the ATO site?

Usually the site wouldn't allow me to declare a second time ie no option to even go in and declare at Step 3

Yesterday it allowed me to go in repeatedly and declare multiple times.

Today I go in an declare and receive this message:

"

*errorNot able to declare yet*

We are still processing the information you provided.
Return after 72 hours to complete your business monthly declaration.
"


----------



## Jack Malarkey

duracell said:


> Is anybody having issued with declaring on the ATO site?
> 
> Usually the site wouldn't allow me to declare a second time ie no option to even go in and declare at Step 3
> 
> Yesterday it allowed me to go in repeatedly and declare multiple times.
> 
> Today I go in an declare and receive this message:
> 
> "
> 
> *errorNot able to declare yet*
> 
> We are still processing the information you provided.
> Return after 72 hours to complete your business monthly declaration.
> "


Perhaps give the Tax Office a call on 13 72 26 or 13 28 65 and ask them to check whether or not they have your declaration. If they say they have received it, ask for a receipt number (13 numerical digits).

Double check that it's a receipt number for your July monthly declaration and not for your phone call.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

SmartCompany

https://www.smartcompany.com.au/finance/tax/ato-jobkeeper-audit-pay-back-subsidies/
*JobKeeper: Thousands of sole traders hit with audits and told they may need to repay wage subsidies*

MATTHEW ELMAS

JULY 2, 2020

Small business ombudsman Kate Carnell has urged the tax office to resolve questions about the eligibility of sole traders for JobKeeper payments after reports surfaced that thousands of business owners were warned they may need to repay wage subsidies.

Sole traders have been taking to social media and Australian Taxation Office (ATO) forums in recent days to express their frustration with correspondence notifying them of audits, and in some cases reportedly suspending their payments altogether.

Separate reports in The Guardian and the Sydney Morning Herald on Thursday cited cases of businesses being told by the ATO they were ineligible for JobKeeper because their business began operating after July 1 last year.

According to the SMH, some 8000 businesses have been told they may need to pay the wage subsidies back to the ATO.

It came after several sole traders took to Facebook earlier this week to report similar correspondence from the ATO. One business owner said they were told they would have to pay back about $6000 in wage subsidies.

"I was just informed today that i am no longer entitled to anymore jobkeeper, and that i have to pay back to ATO $6000 holy hell&#8230;.it took them since March to work this out now?" one business owner said in a thread with more than 100 comments.

Others have taken to the ATO forums, where there have been several complaints about heavy handed tactics.

"I received an email from ATO saying that I am ineligible as I don't have a comparison period in 2019. Hence I submitted an application objecting the outcome asking for a review with all my income details thus far," one sole trader said.

The enforcement action comes just over a week after the ATO published a statement on its website warning businesses about forthcoming reviews to their JobKeeper enrolment and declaration forms.

It appears in many cases sole traders have enrolled in JobKeeper under the headline turnover test, rather than alternative test criteria, which would allow them to access the program if they were trading less than 12 months.

Speaking to SmartCompany about the enforcement action on Thursday, Australian small business ombudsman Kate Carnell said the ATO must resolve the issue as quickly as possible.

"Certainly our view was that if a business could show it was up and running and that it was trading, e.g. they had some sales prior to March 1, that they were in," Carnell says.

"People are living on this money - this is food and rent and all the rest of it as they try to keep their businesses afloat.

"Instead of suspending, they [the ATO] should be investigating and only suspending if its found they are ineligible," Carnell says.


----------



## duracell

Jack Malarkey said:


> Perhaps give the Tax Office a call on 13 72 26 or 13 28 65 and ask them to check whether or not they have your declaration. If they say they have received it, ask for a receipt number (13 numerical digits).
> 
> Double check that it's a receipt number for your July monthly declaration and not for your phone call.


Thanks Jack. I'll do that if my payment hasn't been received by Tuesday.

Fingers crossed for July 23 that Uber drivers aren't thrown out with childcare workers.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Business Insider Australia

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/ato-jobkeeper-review-ineligible-penalties-2020-7
*The ATO has begun punting ineligible workers off JobKeeper, with its incoming audit expected to cause 'mayhem' for small businesses*

JACK DERWIN

JUL 3, 2020, 11:09 AM


The ATO has revealed it kicked 6,500 businesses off the government's JobKeeper after their claims were deemed fraudulent or ineligible.


8,000 people have been sent letters indicating they may need to repay wage subsidies they have already received.


As the ATO assigns 3,000 employees to the review process, those numbers could jump higher still - with some warning the audit process itself will cause "major problems" for honest small businesses.

The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) has got its work cut out for it as it begins auditing the businesses receiving payments from the $70 billion JobKeeper program.

The tax office has already stopped 6,500 business from receiving the $1,500 a fortnight wage subsidy after their claim was deemed either ineligible or fraudulent.

"[We] have an important role to ensure the integrity of the stimulus measures and when we uncover fraud or people seeking to exploit them, we'll take action, as we know the community would expect us to do," deputy commissioner Will Day said.

"If you've received a benefit as part of the COVID-19 stimulus measures and we discover you are ineligible, you can expect to hear from us. If you think this may apply to you, you should contact us or speak to your tax professional."

Designed to subsidise wages for businesses that have seen their turnover fall, the scheme is supporting some 3.3 million workers across 872,000 plus businesses.

As with the early access to super scheme the ATO also administers, JobKeeper applicants were mostly approved across the board straight away, with the intention of later reviewing their eligibility.

The sheer scale of the program has necessitated the assignment of 3,000 ATO employees to review each business.

"At any particular time, we are reviewing between 2 and 3% of JobKeeper applications," a spokeswoman told ABC News.

The review poses a herculean task for the tax office which relies on participants to self-assess, a model that is far from perfect.

The cost of the JobKeeper program, for example, was eventually revised down by a whopping $60 billion, with Treasury blaming businesses that misreported the size of their workforce.

Last week, Independent Contractors Australia Ken Phillips commended the ATO on the speed with which they set up JobKeeper but warned the audit process would be where it could all come tumbling down.

"They did a spectacular job of putting in place the JobKeeper scheme. This thing could have fallen over quite quickly, and they had extraordinarily short timelines in which to do this," he told the government's standing committee on taxation.

"But, the minute we start dealing with the audit and enforcement area of the ATO, we're dealing with the dark forces, to be dramatic about it. We haven't yet seen the ATO implementing the audit and enforcement areas, and this is, in our view and our experience, where we're going to have very major problems."

Specifically, Phillip took issue with the ATO's role as judge, jury and executioner in its review, potentially stinging honest operators with little avenue for appeal.

"If the ATO do an audit and they believe and form the opinion that you have committed fraud, that is effectively the end of the case; they are the sole arbitrator," he said.

"I am predicting a blow-up of enormous proportions here that is going to cause mayhem, particularly through the small business community."

Around 8,000 businesses have already received a letter from the tax office indicating they may need to repay JobKeeper payments.

For many, it's a debt they can't afford. An independent study of Australian businesses provided to Business Insider Australia found that one in four couldn't pay their taxes and GST upfront last year, largely for cash flow reasons.

To unexpectedly have to pay back months worth of wages during a recession may prove too much.

While the ATO remains of the belief that the "overwhelming majority" of applicants are honest, it now has to wade through $13 billion in payments to find which ones should never have been made.

With hundreds of thousands of businesses left to examine, the ATO has a long way to go yet.


----------



## Westside Rider

If you've got nothing to hide you've got nothing to worry about.

ATO can audit me if they want and I won't be scared, simply because I'm fully compliant and I have nothing to hide from them.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

My July payment arrived in my Commonwealth Bank account today (Sunday 5 July) at 12.31 am.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Tuesday 7 July 2020










*JobKeeper, cash-flow boost delays dominate Inspector-General of Taxation complaints list*

Over 200 complaints around COVID-19 tax issues have now been raised with the Inspector-General of Taxation, as JobKeeper and cash-flow boost payment delays knock debt collection complaints off its perch.

Over 200 complaints around COVID-19 tax issues have now been raised with the Inspector-General of Taxation, as JobKeeper and cash-flow boost payment delays knock debt collection complaints off its perch.

Debt collection issues are no longer the most common complaint the Inspector-General of Taxation (IGTO) receives, with delays to receiving COVID-19 payments from the ATO now taking the top spot.

IGTO Karen Payne has revealed that her agency has now received complaints relating to 214 issues around COVID-19, including 138 issues specifically on delays and other issues with receiving payments from the ATO.

Issues about the COVID-19 stimulus measures themselves, such as eligibility, make up 23 complaints.

Just eight complaints around the ATO's debt collection actions have been raised, pushing it down to the second most common issue raised in the last quarter - the first time it has happened since the IGTO took over the complaints handling function from the Commonwealth Ombudsman in 2015.

Ms Payne said her office has since commenced investigations for 90 of those complaints, with most complaints resolved within a 30-day time frame.

The new complaint figures come after a number of professional accounting bodies and public practitioners had highlighted the backlog around the ATO's processing of the cash-flow boostpayments in May.

The ATO has denied any systemic issues, noting that a "very small number" of businesses had been held up to confirm their eligibility.

JobKeeper payment delays have also occurred, with the ATO recently acknowledging that there are applicants still waiting for payments.

"Reasons for the delay include the eligibility of business participants and integrity issues affecting a small but significant number of cases. The ATO is contacting applicants who have shown no sign of life or recent engagement," said the ATO in its Tax Practitioner Stewardship Group meeting in late June.

Ms Payne has now encouraged practitioners and their clients to use her agency's free investigation services around any COVID-19 taxation issues, acknowledging that taxpayers may have been initially confused as to which government department they should raise their concerns to.

"One of the issues around COVID is, which is the right agency to take your complaint to," Ms Payne said.

"For example, a complaint about JobKeeper - is that a complaint that should go to the Tax Office, is it something that should go to the Fair Work Ombudsman or is it something that should come to us because it's about a tax administration matter that concerns the Tax Office?

"Sometimes finding the right agency or the right spot to lodge your complaint is in fact part of the art.

"Essentially, if you have a complaint about COVID-19-related matters around the way in which the tax administration rules are operating, then that's a complaint you can raise with us."

[end of article]

Inspector-General of Taxation and Taxation Ombudsman:

*Home | IGT*








www.igt.gov.au

*Contacting Us

Complaints*

You can lodge a complaint with us anytime by completing our online Complaint Form.

You may also call us on our complaints line on 1300 44 88 29 Monday to Friday, between 9am-4pm Sydney time.

We have information in languages other than English to help people from non-English speaking backgrounds understand the services we provide.

Office of the Inspector-General of Taxation

Postal Address:
GPO Box 551
Sydney, NSW 2001

Phone: (non complaint-related enquiries only)
(02) 8239 2111

Fax:
(02) 8239 2100

Email: (non complaint-related enquiries only)
[email protected]

(https://www.igt.gov.au/contacting-us)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

A reminder for the dilatory: tomorrow (Tuesday 14 July 2020) is the last day you can complete the required current and projected GST turnover declarations required to receive the July jobkeeper payment of $3,000 for the two jobkeeper fortnights that ended in June.

Don’t be in sorrow; declare by tomorrow!


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The Australian Taxation Office has now confirmed in one of its own publications that jobkeeper payments received by an individual or other entity carrying on business are included as business income:

*Is it income?*
Check what to report and include in your tax return.







www.ato.gov.au

_'Remember, if:
..,_

_you've received JobKeeper Payments, you need to report them as:_

_business income in your individual tax return if you're a sole trader_
_part of your business income if your business is a partnership, trust or company (you don't need to include the payments as assessable income in your individual tax return).'_


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Accountants Daily

14 July 2020

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www...-unfair-and-unequitable-jobkeeper-anomaly/amp
*Practitioners, clients disgruntled by 'unfair and inequitable' JobKeeper anomaly*

_Entities denied the JobKeeper payments because of their reporting cycle have continued to push back against the ATO as the government is urged to consider changes ahead of its economic update next week._

Late last month, the ATO began sending out letters to 8,000 businesses, warning them that the $1,500 per fortnight wage subsidy would cease because they were considered not to have satisfied the JobKeeper entitlement requirements.

The letters focused on scenarios affecting new businesses and start-ups, particularly where they failed the requirement of notifying the ATO of business activity through a tax return, activity statement or GST return by 12 March 2020.

These scenarios include new businesses that have commenced from 1 July 2019 who are registered for GST on an annual cycle; new businesses that have commenced from 1 January 2020, and who are not registered for GST or are registered for GST on a quarterly cycle; and businesses that have not included assessable income in their 2018-19 tax return or provided the ATO with notice of sales or supplies made in the relevant period.

The Institute of Public Accountants general manager of technical policy Tony Greco said he has been fielding plenty of calls around the issue, with practitioners and their clients unhappy with the inequitable outcome based on their reporting cycle.

"Every practice seems to have a few clients caught in this bucket," Mr Greco told Accountants Daily.

"There will be thousands of businesses who are now coming to terms with not receiving any stimulus and they are not happy and are writing to local MPs.

"Some practitioners have raised objections with the ATO to no avail, so best we can hope for is that the Treasury could incorporate a rule change as part of the upcoming review of JobKeeper."

A tax practitioner, who requested to remain anonymous, said he had relied on ATO phone advice in April confirming that his clients were eligible for JobKeeper, only to later receive the letter from the ATO advising that they were not because they fell into one of the abovementioned scenarios.

"The Treasurer has made tweaks to the rules but to date has ignored calls to address this issue which seems unfair and inequitable," Mr Greco said.

With Treasurer Josh Frydenberg set to provide an economic update next Thursday, together with plans for the future of the JobKeeper program, a joint submission by nine professional bodies was provided to the Treasury last month, calling for the restrictive tax period notice requirement to be amended.

They have called for the notice requirement to be amended by importing an assumption that either a monthly or quarterly tax period applies, and to allow the commissioner to use evidence of "making a taxable supply" in those notional tax periods up to 12 March 2020, in order to allow businesses to satisfy eligibility requirements.

The joint submission has also requested that entities that satisfy the amended rules should be able to retrospectively enrol for the JobKeeper payments.

*Jack Malarkey comments:*

For a copy of the joint submission from the accounting organisations as referred to in the above article, see:

https://www.cpaaustralia.com.au/-/m...df?la=en&rev=c89684a132f643e5a599881c8b1b7cc5


----------



## Westside Rider

ATO haven't cut me off from JK, but I know my turnover has declined at least 50% thanks to covid, and the ATO know it too with their data matching programs.

Nothing to hide, nothing to worry about.


----------



## Cil

Westside Rider said:


> ATO haven't cut me off from JK, but I know my turnover has declined at least 50% thanks to covid, and the ATO know it too with their data matching programs.
> 
> Nothing to hide, nothing to worry about.


You might be lucky and just get a prison sentence &#128514;


----------



## Jack Malarkey

MyBusiness

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www...ato-allays-jobkeeper-eligibility-concerns/amp
*'The law is really clear': ATO allays JobKeeper eligibility concerns*

Adrian Flores
14 July 2020

*EXCLUSIVE:* The Australian Taxation Office has addressed concerns that small businesses are needlessly dropping out of the JobKeeper scheme for fear of financial punishment or due to moral reasons, saying "the law is really clear".

Speaking exclusively on the MyBusiness webcast, ATO assistant commissioner for small business Andrew Watson responded to concerns that small businesses are dropping out of JobKeeper as COVID-19 restrictions gradually ease and businesses resume operations which may render them ineligible.

Further, he said the ATO's compliance approach to JobKeeper is that it's not setting out to punish businesses.

The law is really clear on this. Once you're in, you're in to the end of September. If you meet the eligibility test once, you're in it for the whole time," Mr Watson said.

MyBusiness recently reported that businesses across Australia that have seen revenue recovery in June are choosing to voluntarily pull out of the JobKeeper scheme, mostly to avoid any assumed compliance issues down the track.

The ATO has previously stated that once a small business qualifies for the JobKeeper allowance, it remains qualified for the entire duration of the scheme, which currently is set to finish at the end of September.

Mr Watson believed some of the concern has come from when businesses have to put in a declaration each month, the ATO asks for a form that includes their current projected GST turnover.

"Now part of the JobKeeper design, the government asks us to collect that for statistical purposes, but it is not a retesting of your eligibility," he said.

"If you came into JobKeeper on the basis that your month of April turnover in 2020 was dropping by more than 30 per cent compared to your month of April in 2019, you meet that part of the eligibility test and we we're not bothered by then what happens in July/August/September, because the law doesn't take account for that, so we are not looking for that at all."

However, Anderson Tax & Consulting founder Debra Anderson said the concern from small businesses regarding the ATO is a natural one.

"I think everybody is scared of the ATO. I mean, you get a letter and you've got ATO up in the corner of it and all of a sudden your anxiety levels up. I think you wouldn't be human if you weren't," she said.

"They're not the bad guys. If anything, they've been able to pull a rabbit out of the hat in these last few months, being able to disperse so much JobKeeper and cash-flow bonus to all these businesses.

"Small business wouldn't have survived without what the ATO had been able to achieve over the last few months."

Ms Anderson said small businesses have nothing to fear and echoed earlier comments from Mr Watson that no tax problem ever went away by ignoring it.

"If anything, now is the time. If you've got a problem, put your hand up. Get some help. They're willing to help. And I haven't had any experiences where the ATO has said, 'Nope, too bad', they're throwing it out," Ms Anderson said.

"They're here to help us survive. Us surviving helps the entire economy survive. We're all on the same team. We're all working towards the one goal.

"It's natural to be hesitant when the phone rings, or you get that letter, but don't be. Reach out, and they're just human just like us."


----------



## Westside Rider

Cil said:


> You might be lucky and just get a prison sentence &#128514;


They can see my numbers if they want to audit me, my revenue has declined significantly thanks to covid and that takes into account the fact I switched from Uber/Ola to Taxi/Ola in that time.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

News.com.au

https://www.news.com.au/finance/eco...d/news-story/2d8836820665488a1daebb74e4dea28f
*Coronavirus Australia: JobKeeper to be extended until Christmas; eligibility tightened*

JULY 20, 2020 6:17am

EXCLUSIVE

The JobKeeper wage subsidy will be extended until Christmas at a reduced rate of over $1000-a-fortnight for companies that qualify under a new, tighter, eligibility test.

News.com.au has confirmed that the long-awaited JobKeeper 2.0, to be announced this week, will reduce the current wage subsidy from $1500 a fortnight, but extend the wage support to COVID-19 impacted businesses until the end of the year.

The current JobKeeper scheme was due to expire in late September, but Treasurer Josh Frydenberg will now outline the new measures on Thursday.

Casuals will also no longer secure a flat-rate payment regardless of whether they are full-time or part-time under JobKeeper's second phase.

Instead, casuals and part-time workers will secure a part-time rate of the JobKeeper subsidy, ending the practice of 'overpaying' casuals.

The decision to phase out the JobKeeper wage subsidy over months rather than have support "fall off a cliff'' in September follows the shock decision to subject Victoria to a second lockdown that requires restaurants to close their doors and millions of Melburnians to stay at home.

It's understood the Morrison Government also considered tightening eligibility for sole traders, a proposal that got abandoned after the second lockdown.

A new turnover test will also apply to JobKeeper when the current scheme ends on September 27, to ensure that companies that have bounced back from COVID-19 shutdowns are removed from the program and it is targeted at the companies that most need support.

Companies that qualify for JobKeeper now are guaranteed support until the current scheme ends in September and will not be kicked off income support early.

While not confirming the specific figure for JobKeeper 2.0, which is understood to be worth over $1000 a fortnight, Mr Frydenberg said it was now clear that ongoing support will be required, particularly in Victoria.

"As we have highlighted there will be another phase of income support. It will stick to the principles that have guided us well. It will be targeted, it will be proportionate, it will be scalable, and it will be using existing systems,'' he told news.com.au.

"The JobKeeper payment is an economic lifeline to millions of Australians and hundreds of thousands of businesses.

"Barring the spread of the virus in significant numbers beyond Victoria, we expect to see the other state and territory economies continue their recovery towards a COVIDSafe economy."


----------



## Cil

Jack Malarkey said:


> News.com.au
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/finance/eco...d/news-story/2d8836820665488a1daebb74e4dea28f
> *Coronavirus Australia: JobKeeper to be extended until Christmas; eligibility tightened*
> 
> JULY 20, 2020 6:17am
> 
> EXCLUSIVE
> 
> The JobKeeper wage subsidy will be extended until Christmas at a reduced rate of over $1000-a-fortnight for companies that qualify under a new, tighter, eligibility test.
> 
> News.com.au has confirmed that the long-awaited JobKeeper 2.0, to be announced this week, will reduce the current wage subsidy from $1500 a fortnight, but extend the wage support to COVID-19 impacted businesses until the end of the year.
> 
> The current JobKeeper scheme was due to expire in late September, but Treasurer Josh Frydenberg will now outline the new measures on Thursday.
> 
> Casuals will also no longer secure a flat-rate payment regardless of whether they are full-time or part-time under JobKeeper's second phase.
> 
> Instead, casuals and part-time workers will secure a part-time rate of the JobKeeper subsidy, ending the practice of 'overpaying' casuals.
> 
> The decision to phase out the JobKeeper wage subsidy over months rather than have support "fall off a cliff'' in September follows the shock decision to subject Victoria to a second lockdown that requires restaurants to close their doors and millions of Melburnians to stay at home.
> 
> It's understood the Morrison Government also considered tightening eligibility for sole traders, a proposal that got abandoned after the second lockdown.
> 
> A new turnover test will also apply to JobKeeper when the current scheme ends on September 27, to ensure that companies that have bounced back from COVID-19 shutdowns are removed from the program and it is targeted at the companies that most need support.
> 
> Companies that qualify for JobKeeper now are guaranteed support until the current scheme ends in September and will not be kicked off income support early.
> 
> While not confirming the specific figure for JobKeeper 2.0, which is understood to be worth over $1000 a fortnight, Mr Frydenberg said it was now clear that ongoing support will be required, particularly in Victoria.
> 
> "As we have highlighted there will be another phase of income support. It will stick to the principles that have guided us well. It will be targeted, it will be proportionate, it will be scalable, and it will be using existing systems,'' he told news.com.au.
> 
> "The JobKeeper payment is an economic lifeline to millions of Australians and hundreds of thousands of businesses.
> 
> "Barring the spread of the virus in significant numbers beyond Victoria, we expect to see the other state and territory economies continue their recovery towards a COVIDSafe economy."


Jack what's the $50000 small business loan all about


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Cil said:


> Jack what's the $50000 small business loan all about


(It will be interesting to see if there is an announcement in the economic statement on Thursday 23 July 2020 that this scheme is to be extended beyond 30 September 2020.)

Business.gov.au:

https://business.gov.au/risk-manage...rt-for-business/supporting-the-flow-of-credit
*Coronavirus SME Guarantee Scheme*

The Coronavirus SME Guarantee Scheme will provide support for these businesses. Under the Scheme, the Government will provide a guarantee of 50 per cent to small and medium enterprise (SME) lenders for new unsecured loans to be used for working capital. This will enhance these lenders' willingness and ability to provide credit, which will result in SMEs being able to access additional funding to help support them through the upcoming months.

SMEs with a turnover of up to $50 million will be eligible to receive these loans.

The Government will provide eligible lenders with a guarantee for loans with the following terms:

Maximum total size of loans of $250,000 per borrower.
The loans will be up to 3 years, with an initial 6 month repayment holiday.
The loans will be in the form of unsecured finance, meaning that borrowers will not have to provide an asset as security for the loan.
Loans will be subject to lenders' credit assessment processes with the expectation that lenders will look through the cycle to sensibly take into account the uncertainty of the current economic conditions.

As part of the loan products available, the Government will encourage lenders to provide facilities to SMEs that only have to be drawn if needed by the SME. This will mean that the SME will only incur interest on the amount they draw down. If they do not draw down any funds from the facility, no interest will be charged, but they will retain the flexibility to draw down in the future should they need to.

*Timing*

The Scheme will commence by early April 2020 and be available for new loans made by participating lenders until 30 September 2020.

*How to apply*

If you're interested in the Coronavirus SME Guarantee Scheme you should approach your financial institution for more information. The Government is working with banks and other lenders to ensure loans are available as soon as possible.

Find out more about the Coronavirus SME Guarantee Scheme

THE TREASURY


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> (It will be interesting to see if there is an announcement in the economic statement on Thursday 23 July 2020 that this scheme is to be extended beyond 30 September 2020.)
> 
> Business.gov.au:
> 
> https://business.gov.au/risk-manage...rt-for-business/supporting-the-flow-of-credit
> *Coronavirus SME Guarantee Scheme*
> 
> The Coronavirus SME Guarantee Scheme will provide support for these businesses. Under the Scheme, the Government will provide a guarantee of 50 per cent to small and medium enterprise (SME) lenders for new unsecured loans to be used for working capital.
> 
> This will enhance these lenders' willingness and ability to provide credit, which will result in SMEs being able to access additional funding to help support them through the upcoming months.
> 
> SMEs with a turnover of up to $50 million will be eligible to receive these loans.
> 
> The Government will provide eligible lenders with a guarantee for loans with the following terms:
> 
> Maximum total size of loans of $250,000 per borrower.
> The loans will be up to 3 years, with an initial 6 month repayment holiday.
> The loans will be in the form of unsecured finance, meaning that borrowers will not have to provide an asset as security for the loan.
> Loans will be subject to lenders' credit assessment processes with the expectation that lenders will look through the cycle to sensibly take into account the uncertainty of the current economic conditions.
> 
> As part of the loan products available, the Government will encourage lenders to provide facilities to SMEs that only have to be drawn if needed by the SME.
> 
> This will mean that the SME will only incur interest on the amount they draw down. If they do not draw down any funds from the facility, no interest will be charged, but they will retain the flexibility to draw down in the future should they need to.
> 
> *Timing*
> 
> The Scheme will commence by early April 2020 and be available for new loans made by participating lenders until 30 September 2020.
> 
> *How to apply*
> 
> If you're interested in the Coronavirus SME Guarantee Scheme you should approach your financial institution for more information. The Government is working with banks and other lenders to ensure loans are available as soon as possible.
> 
> Find out more about the Coronavirus SME Guarantee Scheme
> 
> THE TREASURY


The Government earlier today (Monday 20 July 2020) announced an extension and expansion of the loan guarantee scheme.

Treasurer media release:

https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/m...ing-small-business-adapt-grow-and-create-jobs
20 July 2020

*Supporting small business to adapt, grow and create jobs*

Senator the Hon Michaelia Cash
Minister for Employment, Skills, Small and Family Business

The Morrison Government will help businesses as they move into the recovery phase of the coronavirus crisis by extending the Coronavirus SME Guarantee Scheme which supports small and medium sized businesses (SMEs) to get access to the funding they need to adapt and innovate during the coronavirus crisis.

Under the existing Scheme, the Government is providing an unprecedented level of support to SMEs in partnership with 44 approved lenders by guaranteeing 50 per cent of new unsecured loans to SMEs. The Scheme has already seen more than 15,600 businesses accept loans worth $1.5 billion.

The next phase of the Coronavirus SME Guarantee Scheme will help businesses move out of hibernation, successfully adapt to the new COVID-safe economy and invest for the future.

Key changes to the Scheme include:

Extending the purpose of loans able to be provided beyond working capital, such that a wider range of investment can be funded;
Permitting secured lending (excluding commercial or residential property);
Increasing the maximum loan size to $1 million (from $250,000) per borrower;
Increasing the maximum loan term to five years (from three years); and
Allowing lenders the discretion to offer a repayment holiday period.
The extended terms of the Scheme will enable lenders to continue supporting Australian small businesses when they need it most. The expanded Scheme will shift from providing access to working capital to helping businesses stay afloat during the crisis to now also enabling them to access more affordable and longer term credit so that they can invest for their future.

The initial phase of the Scheme remains available for new loans issued by eligible lenders until 30 September 2020. The second phase of the Scheme will start on 1 October 2020 and will be available until 30 June 2021.

The Morrison Government will continue to support small businesses as they seek to rebuild, adapt and create jobs on the other side of the coronavirus crisis.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*The jobkeeper announcement is now to be made tomorrow (Tuesday 21 July 2020) rather than on Thursday 23 July:

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.abc.net.au/article/12471956*
Separate post:

News.com.au

https://www.news.com.au/national/po...e/news-story/358073212f043f15c62e016646035faf
*Coronavirus Australia: Scott Morrison's new guarantee for JobKeeper package*

JULY 20, 2020 3:31pm

Samantha Maiden

Scott Morrison has guaranteed that every boss currently securing JobKeeper in Australia for their staff will hang on to the $1500 handout until September.

As the Prime Minister prepares to unveil the 'second phase' of the wage subsidy scheme, he has moved to reassure workers and employers the changes won't happen overnight.

News.com.au has confirmed the new JobKeeper payments will be reduced from the current rate but will still be worth more than $1000-a-fortnight until Christmas.

A part-time rate will also be offered to casuals, who will no longer secure a flat-rate subsidy that is the same as full-time workers.

"It will be phased and we will be announcing the next phase post September. It will be targeted, it will be temporary, it will be effective as the first round has been, we do know this first round has been very important,'' Mr Morrison said.

"I mean, almost one million businesses, around three and half million employees, and there is still two months to go on the current set of arrangements. What the treasurer and I will announce this week will not commence the day after we announced, it will be several months from them.

"There will be several months for businesses to adjust to the next phase. But the support that had been in place since April will be in place until September, and then we'll move into a new phase."

As expected, the Prime Minister also confirmed that to qualify for post September assistance, companies will need to requalify based on turnover.

"The way the economy is rebuilding and moving through the COVID recession is where their own turnover is lifted, whether their own business is growing and the business is in a stronger position to support people in jobs. And that's the way it should be,'' he said.

...


----------



## Cil

I hope we don’t have a lockdown November or December 
$1000 bucks not liveable allowance


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*Treasury advice*

_Guardian Australia_

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp...r-covid-19-subsidies-by-cutting-support-rates
*Extract*

*Coalition to overhaul jobkeeper and jobseeker Covid-19 subsidies by cutting support rates*

...

The long-telegraphed overhaul follows a review by the Treasury. The department examined the income support rolled out during the pandemic in May and June, and handed its recommendations to the government on 29 June. The Treasury advice has not been released, but the government circulated its own summary extracts of the advice ahead of Tuesday's announcement.

According to that summary, Treasury told the government there were "compelling arguments" to maintain jobkeeper in its current form until 27 September because businesses had made plans based on the availability of the wage subsidy for six months and "there are risks in withdrawing support from those that have begun to recover".

Treasury appears to have contemplated a transition where jobkeeper would be restricted to the sectors worst affected by the pandemic, but concluded it would be too difficult to define those in advance.

Instead, officials said the government should retest all businesses in October. Under the original scheme, most businesses had to project they would suffer a 30% drop in turnover to be eligible.

Treasury has suggested that system be replaced by measured or actual turnover change.

The department noted the wage subsidy had done its job in the opening months of the crisis, but the payment had a number of features that "create adverse incentives" including distorting wage relativities between lower and higher paid jobs, dampening incentives to work, hampering labour mobility and keeping businesses afloat that would not be viable without ongoing support.

While identifying the problems, Treasury's advice about reducing the payment was hedged, according to the summary. "It may &#8230; be appropriate at this juncture to consider reducing payments to wean off businesses from ongoing support."

Treasury, according to the curated extracts, was firm that the subsidy should continue, noting the case for extending jobkeeper beyond September was "strong, especially if coupled with a fresh eligibility test that targets support to those businesses and sectors that continue to need it".


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The Prime Minister is giving a press conference at 11.00 am. I suspect this will be the timing of the jobkeeper announcement.



Jack Malarkey said:


> The Prime Minister is giving a press conference at 11.00 am. I suspect this will be the timing of the jobkeeper announcement.


Now at 11.15 am to announce the jobkeeper changes.

On ABC News 24.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Treasury information on jobkeeper 2.0:

*JobKeeper payment | Treasury.gov.au*

_The Government's JobKeeper Payment will help keep more Australians in jobs and support businesses affected by the significant economic impact of the coronavirus. On 21 July 2020, the Government announced it is extending the JobKeeper Payment until 28 March 2021 and is targeting support to those..._







treasury.gov.au

*JobKeeper extension*

On 21 July, the Government announced it is extending the JobKeeper Payment until 28 March 2021 and is targeting support to those organisations which continue to be significantly impacted by the Coronavirus.

From 28 September 2020, eligibility for the JobKeeper Payment will be based on actual turnover in the relevant periods, the payment will be stepped down and paid at two rates.
Information about the operation of the existing JobKeeper Payment until 27 September 2020 is available on the ATO website.

*Business eligibility*

From 28 September 2020, organisations seeking to claim JobKeeper payments will be required to reassess their eligibility for the JobKeeper extension with reference to their actual turnover in the June and September quarters 2020. Organisations will need to demonstrate that they have met the relevant continuing decline in turnover test in both of those quarters to be eligible for JobKeeper from 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021.

Organisations will need to further reassess their eligibility in January 2021 for the period from 4 January to 28 March 2021.

Organisations will need to demonstrate that they have met the relevant continuing decline in turnover test in each of the previous three quarters to remain eligible for the March 2021 quarter.

*JobKeeper payment rates*

The JobKeeper payment rate is to be reduced and paid at two rates:

From 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021, the payment rate will be $1,200 per fortnight for all eligible employees who, in the four weeks before 1 March 2020, were working in the business for 20 hours or more a week on average and for business participants who were actively engaged in the business for more than 20 hours per week, and $750 per fortnight for employees who were working in the business for less than 20 hours a week on average and business participants who were actively engaged in the business less than 20 hours per week in the same period.
From 4 January 2021 to 28 March 2021, the payment rate will be $1,000 per fortnight for all eligible employees who in the four weeks before 1 March 2020, were working for 20 hours or more a week on average and for business participants who were actively engaged in the business for more than 20 hours per week, and $650 per fortnight for employees who were working for less than 20 hours a week on average and business participants who were actively engaged in the business for less than 20 hours per week in the same period.
Further Information is available in the JobKeeper Payment extension fact sheet.

*Fact sheet*










Extension of the JobKeeper Payment
Last updated: 21 July 2020


----------



## duracell

Jack Malarkey said:


> Treasury information on jobkeeper 2.0:
> 
> *Business eligibility*
> 
> From 28 September 2020, organisations seeking to claim JobKeeper payments will be required to reassess their eligibility for the JobKeeper extension with reference to their actual turnover in the June and September quarters 2020. Organisations will need to demonstrate that they have met the relevant continuing decline in turnover test in both of those quarters to be eligible for JobKeeper from 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021.
> 
> Organisations will need to further reassess their eligibility in January 2021 for the period from 4 January to 28 March 2021.
> 
> Organisations will need to demonstrate that they have met the relevant continuing decline in turnover test in each of the previous three quarters to remain eligible for the March 2021 quarter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Extension of the JobKeeper Payment
> Last updated: 21 July 2020


Hi Jack.

I was wondering if you could offer your opinion on this:

For the Sep Qtr 2019, I claimed a GST credit for a car that I purchased which led to a refund from the ATO.
Even though my rideshare income will have fallen in the upcoming SepQtr20 by >30% over the Sep Qtr19, my GST income will have actually have increased ie shown from a GST credit to me in Sep19, to a GST debit to the ATO in Sep20.

Does this mean I will be ineligible to make a claim from 1 Oct onward?

Thanks


----------



## Jack Malarkey

duracell said:


> Hi Jack.
> 
> I was wondering if you could offer your opinion on this:
> 
> For the Sep Qtr 2019, I claimed a GST credit for a car that I purchased which led to a refund from the ATO.
> Even though my rideshare income will have fallen in the upcoming SepQtr20 by >30% over the Sep Qtr19, my GST income will have actually have increased ie shown from a GST credit to me in Sep19, to a GST debit to the ATO in Sep20.
> 
> Does this mean I will be ineligible to make a claim from 1 Oct onward?
> 
> Thanks


The concept of GST turnover remains the same.

GST turnover is essentially your gross sales minus the GST on those sales (ie, subtracting one-eleventh of those sales). Don't subtract expenses or GST credits on those expenses.

So you should be okay.


----------



## duracell

Jack Malarkey said:


> The concept of GST turnover remains the same.
> 
> GST turnover is essentially your gross sales minus the GST on those sales (ie, one-eleventh of those sales). Don't subtract expenses or GST credits on those expenses.
> 
> So you should be okay.


Many thanks Jack for this and also for all of your help in general on this forum.&#128077;

It will be interesting to see how they determine which drivers have worked more or less than 20 hours a fortnight?
I can see lots of casual drivers saying that they were sitting for hours and hours without a ping


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Treasury's review (interesting for those who like to delve into the policy background to the changes):

*The JobKeeper Payment: Three-month review | Treasury.gov.au*

_Treasury completed a three-month review of the JobKeeper Payment in June 2020, informed by the status of the Coronavirus outbreak and the economy. The review found that the JobKeeper Payment met its initial objectives: to support business and job survival, preserve employment relationships, and..._







treasury.gov.au


----------



## Sleepo

duracell said:


> Many thanks Jack for this and also for all of your help in general on this forum.&#128077;
> 
> It will be interesting to see how they determine which drivers have worked more or less than 20 hours a fortnight?
> I can see lots of casual drivers saying that they were sitting for hours and hours without a ping


The 20 hour rule refers to how much time you were working in the business in Feb 2020, not what you are working now



Jack Malarkey said:


> Treasury information on jobkeeper 2.0:
> 
> *JobKeeper payment | Treasury.gov.au*
> 
> _The Government's JobKeeper Payment will help keep more Australians in jobs and support businesses affected by the significant economic impact of the coronavirus. On 21 July 2020, the Government announced it is extending the JobKeeper Payment until 28 March 2021 and is targeting support to those..._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> treasury.gov.au
> 
> *JobKeeper extension*
> 
> On 21 July, the Government announced it is extending the JobKeeper Payment until 28 March 2021 and is targeting support to those organisations which continue to be significantly impacted by the Coronavirus.
> 
> From 28 September 2020, eligibility for the JobKeeper Payment will be based on actual turnover in the relevant periods, the payment will be stepped down and paid at two rates.
> Information about the operation of the existing JobKeeper Payment until 27 September 2020 is available on the ATO website.
> 
> *Business eligibility*
> 
> From 28 September 2020, organisations seeking to claim JobKeeper payments will be required to reassess their eligibility for the JobKeeper extension with reference to their actual turnover in the June and September quarters 2020. Organisations will need to demonstrate that they have met the relevant continuing decline in turnover test in both of those quarters to be eligible for JobKeeper from 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021.
> 
> Organisations will need to further reassess their eligibility in January 2021 for the period from 4 January to 28 March 2021.
> 
> Organisations will need to demonstrate that they have met the relevant continuing decline in turnover test in each of the previous three quarters to remain eligible for the March 2021 quarter.
> 
> *JobKeeper payment rates*
> 
> The JobKeeper payment rate is to be reduced and paid at two rates:
> 
> From 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021, the payment rate will be $1,200 per fortnight for all eligible employees who, in the four weeks before 1 March 2020, were working in the business for 20 hours or more a week on average and for business participants who were actively engaged in the business for more than 20 hours per week, and $750 per fortnight for employees who were working in the business for less than 20 hours a week on average and business participants who were actively engaged in the business less than 20 hours per week in the same period.
> From 4 January 2021 to 28 March 2021, the payment rate will be $1,000 per fortnight for all eligible employees who in the four weeks before 1 March 2020, were working for 20 hours or more a week on average and for business participants who were actively engaged in the business for more than 20 hours per week, and $650 per fortnight for employees who were working for less than 20 hours a week on average and business participants who were actively engaged in the business for less than 20 hours per week in the same period.
> Further Information is available in the JobKeeper Payment extension fact sheet.
> 
> *Fact sheet*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Extension of the JobKeeper Payment
> Last updated: 21 July 2020


Sounds like when we make our claim for fortnights 12 and 13, we will have to prove we are eligible to continue to next phase


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*Joint media release by the Prime Minister, the Treasurer, and the Minister for Families and Social Services on Tuesday 21 July 2020:*

https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/m...jobkeeper-payment-and-income-support-extended
21 July 2020

*JobKeeper Payment and income support extended*

Joint media release with
The Hon Scott Morrison MP
Prime Minister and
Senator the Hon. Anne Ruston
Minister for Families and Social Services

The Morrison Government will deliver more support for households and businesses to help Australians through the COVID-19 pandemic and bolster our economic recovery.

The JobKeeper Payment will be extended by six months to 28 March 2021 and the temporary Coronavirus Supplement for those on income support will be extended until 31 December 2020.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison said the extra assistance would continue supporting hundreds of thousands of Australians who are without work, and offer businesses and their workers a lifeline to not only get through this crisis, but recover on the other side.

"We will have Australian's backs as we face the ongoing impacts of COVID-19," the Prime Minister said.

"There is no silver bullet and this is about delivering the support Australians need and the policies our economy requires to reopen, recover and create jobs.

"These supports are a lifeline but our JobMaker plan is also setting Australia up for our country's recovery. We're delivering the initiatives and reforms that will help grow our economy and create the jobs we need for the years ahead."

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg said the extension of support recognised Australia's economic recovery was still in its early stages and a number of businesses and individuals remained significantly affected by the global COVID-19 pandemic.

"The Government's focus remains on reopening the economy where it is safe to do so, but the extension of these measures recognises that some parts of the economy will continue to be affected and need continued support," the Treasurer said.

"Sadly, as a result of this global health pandemic, businesses will close and people will lose their jobs, but that is why we have extended the Coronavirus Supplement and announced a new skills package to help people transition from welfare to work.

"It is also why we are extending the JobKeeper Payment beyond September to help keep businesses in business and Australians in jobs as our economy reopens."

Minister for Families and Social Services Anne Ruston said the extension of the Coronavirus supplement would support many Australians who may have found themselves out of work, through no fault of their own.

"The Government has acted decisively to support hundreds of thousands of Australians, many who are receiving income support for the first time," Minister Ruston said.

"We are extending the Coronavirus Supplement and enhanced eligibility criteria for a further three months to cushion against the economic impact of the pandemic.

"We are also increasing the income free area for JobSeeker Payment and Youth Allowance (other) to $300 a fortnight to encourage and support recipients to take up job opportunities as businesses reopen."

*JobKeeper Payment*

The JobKeeper Payment has been instrumental in supporting job retention, maintaining employment links and business cash flow, as well as providing income support to eligible employees.

This extension will provide further support to significantly impacted businesses so more Australians can retain their jobs and continue to earn an income.

The JobKeeper Payment is currently due to finish on 27 September 2020, but will now remain available for eligible employers until 28 March 2021.

As the economy reopens the payment will be tapered in the December and March quarters to encourage businesses to adjust to the new environment, supporting a gradual transition to economic recovery, while ensuring those businesses who most need support continue to receive it.

A two-tiered payment will also be introduced from 28 September, to better align the payment with the incomes of employees before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Employees who were employed for less than 20 hours a week on average in the four weekly pay periods ending before 1 March 2020 will receive the lower payment rate.

JobKeeper Payment rates from 28 September 2020 to 28 March 2021:


DateFull rate per fortnightLess than 20hrs worked per fortnight rate28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021$1,200$7504 January 2021 to 28 March 2021$1,000$650

From 28 September 2020, businesses, and not-for-profits will be required to reassess their eligibility by reference to their actual June and September quarter turnovers to demonstrate that they have suffered an ongoing significant decline in turnover.

Organisations will need to demonstrate that they have experienced the relevant decline in turnover in both of those quarters to be eligible for the JobKeeper Payment in the December quarter.

Employers will need to again reassess their eligibility for the JobKeeper Payment for the March quarter. Employers will need to demonstrate that they have met the relevant decline in actual turnover in each of the previous three quarters ending on 31 December 2020 to remain eligible for the JobKeeper Payment in the March quarter 2021.

If they do not meet the turnover test in the extension period this does not affect their eligibility prior to 28 September 2020. The continuation of JobKeeper for these businesses will help support the economic recovery and provide them with sufficient time to adjust.

The JobKeeper Payment will continue to remain open to new participants that meet the eligibility requirements.

Also, as the Review recommended, an independent evaluation will be conducted at the conclusion of the program.

The new arrangements for the JobKeeper Payment are expected to cost an additional $16.6 billion.

*COVID-19 supplement*

The Government will extend the payment period of the temporary Coronavirus Supplement for those on income support from 25 September 2020 to 31 December 2020 to continue to provide elevated assistance while the economy is still in its early stages of recovery.

As the economy reopens, the Coronavirus Supplement will be extended at the rate of $250 per fortnight. The extended Coronavirus Supplement reflects the gradually improving economic and labour market conditions and is designed to ensure there are appropriate incentives for all payment recipients to seek out employment or study opportunities.

Both existing and new income support recipients will continue to be paid the Coronavirus Supplement.

The Government will also ensure income support is appropriately targeted as the economy recovers by reintroducing a range of means testing arrangements.

From 25 September 2020, the assets test and the Liquid Assets Waiting Period will be reintroduced and the JobSeeker Payment partner income test will increase from 25 cents for every dollar of partner income earned over $996 per fortnight to 27 cents for every dollar of partner income earned over $1,165 per fortnight.

The Government will also improve incentives to work by increasing the income free area for JobSeeker Payment and Youth Allowance (Other) from $106 per fortnight to $300 per fortnight and will simplify the taper rate from a dual taper of 50 cents and 60 cents to a single taper of 60 cents.

This will mean recipients are more easily able to calculate the value of every dollar they earn.

These changes will mean individuals will be able to earn up to $300 per fortnight without foregoing any JobSeeker payment or affecting their eligibility for the Coronavirus Supplement.

The expanded criteria for JobSeeker Payment and Youth Allowance (Other) will continue to provide payment access for permanent employees who are stood down or lose their employment, sole traders, and the self-employed until 31 December 2020.

Reduced waiting times, including the Ordinary Waiting Period, Newly Arrived Resident's Waiting Period (NARWP) and the Seasonal Work Preclusion Period, will continue to be waived until 31 December 2020.

The new arrangements for the Coronavirus Supplement are expected to cost an additional $3.8 billion.

Further details are available on the Treasury website.


----------



## Jules66

Hey Jack, Thanks for all your updates. I know you like to stick to facts but I have to ask whats your opinion on all of this and how it relates to ride share drivers. We wont hold you to your opinion but Im sure everyone wants to know and those politicians really do waffle on.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jules66 said:


> Hey Jack, Thanks for all your updates. I know you like to stick to facts but I have to ask whats your opinion on all of this and how it relates to ride share drivers. We wont hold you to your opinion but Im sure everyone wants to know and those politicians really do waffle on.


Thanks, @Jules66. My opinion of the original scheme and its proposed extension is positive: they're a good fit for rideshare drivers.

The amounts payable are relatively generous given that there are virtually no expenses in deriving them (a big contrast to rideshare fares) and they are not subject to GST (unlike rideshare fares).

Yet the fact that rideshare drivers are subject to GST from the first dollar made it easier for them to qualify compared with other businesses with annual turnover under $75,000 as the drivers typically had business activity statements lodged, making it easier to meet the integrity requirements linked to the 12 March 2020 date.

The dual payment system and the retesting of eligibility strike me as a reasonable evolution of the arrangements.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Re jobkeeper 2.0:

When calculating GST turnover for the quarter ended 30 June 2019 (1 April to 30 June 2019), ensure you DON'T include the one-off Uber 'driver appreciation award' many drivers received in April 2019 as these awards were not subject to GST.

See:









Uber 'driver appreciation reward' payments


If you've received a 'driver appreciation reward' payment, find out about your tax obligations.




www.ato.gov.au


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The following article by Airtax is an excellent and easy-to-understand overview of the extended and revamped jobkeeper program:

https://help.airtax.com.au/hc/en-us/articles/360001631335
*JobKeeper Phase 2 - extension and changes*









Mark ONeill

16 minutes ago


Updated
*Program extension and payment reduction *

On 21 July 2020, the Federal Government announced that the JobKeeper program will be extended from 28 September 2020 to 28 March 2021.

Payments from the program will reduce from 28 September 2020 from $1,500 to $1,200 per fortnight. From 3 January 2021, payments will reduce further to $1,000 per fortnight.

For workers who worked less than 20 hours per week in February 2020, their payment will reduce further to $750 per fortnight between 28 September 2020 and 2 January 2021. This will reduce again to $650 per fortnight from 3 January 2021.

*30 per cent decline in GST turnover eligibility test remains *

To be eligible for the JobKeeper program from 28 September 2020, businesses must demonstrate a 30 per cent decline in GST turnover relative to the same period the year before.

For the December 2020 quarter (i.e. October to December 2020) businesses must demonstrate a 30 per cent decline in GST turnover compared to the December 2019 quarter.

Similarly, for the March 2021 quarter (i.e. January 2021 to March 2021) businesses must demonstrate a 30 per cent decline in GST turnover March 2020 quarter.

*Extra eligibility test introduced*

In addition, from 28 September 2020 businesses will also need to demonstrate continuity in decline in turnover.

What this means is that to receive JobKeeper payments from 28 September 2020 businesses must demonstrate a 30 per cent decline in their GST turnover across the following comparison periods:

1. Apr - Jun 2020 & Apr - Jun 2019

2. Jul - Sep 2020 & Jul - Sep 2019

Similarly, from 3 January 2021 will need to demonstrate a 30 per cent decline in GST turnover across the following comparison periods:

1. Apr - Jun 2020 & Apr - Jun 2019

2. Jul - Sep 2020 & Jul - Sep 2019

3. Oct - Dec 2020 & Oct - Dec 2019


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Latest updates of Australian Taxation Office guidance on jobkeeper:

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*
A timeline of new and updated JobKeeper Payment information on ato.gov.au.







www.ato.gov.au

JobKeeper - timeline of content updates

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:


July
June
May
April
July


21 JulyUpdate: Key dates now includes information on the extension of the JobKeeper Payment program announced 21 July 2020.
Update: Added a key point to JobKeeper Payment advising of 21 July 2020 announcement including the extension through to 28 March 2021.
Key dates

21 July 2020 - extension of the JobKeeper Payment program

The government has announced proposed changes to the JobKeeper Payment program including:


an extension of the program to 28 March 2021
turnover tests to determine eligibility
tiered payments for eligible staff
from 28 September to 3 January 2021 and
from 4 January to 28 March 2021.


These proposed changes will not impact JobKeeper Payments until after 28 September 2020.

For more information, visit the Treasury website and read JobKeeper extensionExternal Link.

*JobKeeper key dates*
Key dates for the JobKeeper Payment.







www.ato.gov.au

Key points:


On 21 July the government announced proposed changes to JobKeeper including an extension through to 28 March 2021. These changes do not impact JobKeeper payments until after 28 September 2020.
(https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

From the employment blog of Thomson Geer (lawyers):

*Quick reference guide to the Federal Government's extension of JobKeeper*
_
The Federal Government has made a much anticipated announcement that its economic lifeline JobKeeper scheme will be extended for a further 6 months._
www.tglaw.com.au

*Quick reference guide to the Federal Government's extension of JobKeeper*

Lauren Townsend and Sophie Donaghey

24 July 2020

JobKeeper

The Federal Government has made a much anticipated announcement that its economic lifeline JobKeeper scheme will be extended for a further 6 months beyond its initial drop-dead date, until 28 March 2021.

However, it will come with some critical changes, including two stages of payment reductions and changed eligibility criteria.

The changes to JobKeeper will commence on 28 September 2020.

The current scheme will remain in place until that time.

At the time of publishing this blog, the Federal Government has released a detailed fact sheet on the forthcoming changes to the JobKeeper scheme. However, we are still awaiting the release of amendments to the JobKeeper _Payments & Benefits Rules,_ which set out the detailed 'ins and outs' of the JobKeeper scheme.

...

Presumably though, there will be an extension to some degree.

What do we know about the extended version of JobKeeper?

1. The JobKeeper payment will be reduced in two phases


Workers (including eligible casuals) working 20 hours or more per week (average) in the 4 weeks of pay periods before 1 March 2020Workers (including eligible casuals) working fewer than 20 hour per week (average) in the 4 weeks of pay periods before 1 March 2020'Phase 1': JobKeeper payment per fortnight up to and including 27 September 2020$1,500$1,500'Phase 2':JobKeeper payment per fortnight 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021$1,200$750'Phase 3': JobKeeper payment per fortnight 4 January 2021 to 28 March 2021$1,000$650

The Commissioner of Taxation will have discretion to allow the work hours test to be met where it might have otherwise failed in certain circumstances (e.g. where an employee was on leave, not employed during all or part of February 2020 or volunteering during the bushfires).

In an administrative change, entities claiming payments will be required to nominate which payment rate they are claiming for each of their eligible employees.

...

2. Businesses and not-for-profits will need to prove they have actually suffered a relevant decline in turnover

While the test will shift from projected to actual decline in turnover, in general, employers will remain eligible to receive the JobKeeper Payment if their organisation meets the following decline in turnover test (unless the ATO establishes alternative tests):


Annual turnover (on a consolidated GST group basis)Actualdecline in turnover$1 billion or more50% or moreLess than $1 billion30% or moreACNC-registered charities other than schools and universities15% or more

Whereas JobKeeper eligibility is currently based on a projected GST turnover, from 28 September 2020 eligibility will be based on actual GST turnover.

Claimants will need to reassess and prove that they met the decline in turnover test based on actual GST turnover:

at the commencement of Phase 2 (and in advance of the BAS deadline in October 2020), for continued receipt of payments during Phase 2; and
at the commencement of Phase 3 (and in advance of the BAS deadline in January 2021), for continued receipt of payments during Phase 3.
The test will be satisfied by reference to actual GST turnover in the relevant preceding quarters by comparing current and corresponding periods (generally comparable quarters in 2019). For Phase 2, this will be both the June and September 2020 quarters, while for Phase 3, the preceding periods will be the June, September and December 2020 quarters.

The JobKeeper scheme will remain available to new participants provided they meet the relevant decline in turnover tests.

3. The eligibility rules for employees will not change

The eligibility rules for employees and business participants will remain unchanged.

Employees will continue to only be able to claim JobKeeper from one employer.

Next steps

Organisations and not-for-profits do not need to take immediate action to secure their continued participation in the JobKeeper scheme - the scheme as it currently stands will run until 28 September 2020.

Further details of the changes and information on practical steps will be made available by the Government and the ATO closer to the time the changes are to be rolled out.

...


----------



## Jack Malarkey

News.com.au

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp...r/news-story/7136e34599375aeb32d66b1a04f546ab
*Scott Morrison's secret plan to boot thousands of sole traders off JobKeeper*

JULY 25, 2020 12:22 AM

Samantha Maiden news.com.au

EXCLUSIVE

Prime Minister Scott Morrison considered a secret plan to boot hundreds of thousands of sole traders off JobKeeper but the proposal to introduce even tougher rules was abandoned in the wake of the second Melbourne lockdown.

Senior ministers have confirmed that a plan to restrict access to the revamped JobKeeper 2.0 for sole traders was considered in recent months.

The new JobKeeper 2.0 is expected to kick two million workers off the coronavirus wage subsidy because the companies they work for cannot prove their turnover is 30 per cent down.

But sole traders represent such a compliance concern for the Australian Taxation Office that news.com.au understands the Morrison Government canvassed plans for even tougher rules that would have made it much harder for sole traders to qualify.

These plans were scuttled in recent weeks after a new spike in COVID-19 cases in Melbourne and fears that excluding sole traders could have a devastating impact on Victorian workers who were forced into a second lockdown.

One of the biggest concerns was that it is easier for sole traders to "cook the books" and delay invoices to qualify for the turnover test that requires proof of a 30 per cent downturn.

According to the Treasury review of the JobKeeper scheme, there are around 350,000 sole traders currently securing JobKeeper.

"Sole traders make up 40 per cent of organisations which have received the JobKeeper payment &#8230; but just 12 per cent of individual recipients,'' the report states.

"This is reflected in an industry like construction, which had the largest number of JobKeeper applications processed for April, but ranked third in the number of individual recipients."

On Tuesday, the Prime Minister highlighted sole traders when he announced the revamped JobKeeper which will extend the scheme but at a lower rate of $1200 a fortnight.

"The inclusion of sole traders too, I think is a very important point, for them to keep their businesses open,'' the Prime Minister said.

"The fact we're maintaining the easing of eligibility for sole traders both on Jobseeker and their continuing access to JobKeeper out to the end of this year I think is important."

But on the same day that the Prime Minister held that press conference, the Treasury released material suggesting that sole traders would be kicked off the scheme.

The bungled fact sheet on the Treasury website informed sole traders they would be unable to access the scheme from September 28.

"Non-employing businesses will no longer be eligible for the JobKeeper payment from this date," the website said.

A spokesman for Mr Frydenberg dismissed the error as a mistake, telling the Herald Sun that "Treasury uploaded incorrect information to its website."

"Sole traders are and continue to be part of the JobKeeper program which will run until March next year," the spokesman said.

But the error in fact reflects an earlier plan that would have struck off thousands of sole traders.

Labor's treasury spokesman Jim Chalmers said it was now clear the Prime Minister needed to come clean on the secret plan to exclude sole traders.

"Sole traders need this urgently clarified,'' he told news.com.au.

"Did the Treasurer consider excluding them or not? Too many people are left out of JobKeeper and left behind as it is."


----------



## Who is John Galt?

Jack Malarkey said:


> Scott Morrison's secret plan to boot thousands of sole traders off JobKeeper


Thanks, Jack. Very interesting. I can see further tweaking in entitlements between September and March.

.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*Question*

In the extended phases of jobkeeper, will there be any month's payment that will incorporate an additional jobkeeper fortnight (similar to the payment in September for the three jobkeeper fortnights ending in August)?

*Jack's answer*

Yes, there will be.

Jobkeeper payments are made early in a calendar month for the jobkeeper fortnights that have ended in the previous month.

The payment in February 2021 will cover three jobkeeper fortnights ending in January as follows:

(1) Monday 21 December 2020 to Sunday 3 January 2021;

(2) Monday 4 January 2021 to Sunday 17 January 2021; and

(3) Monday 18 January 2021 to Sunday 31 January 2021.

The other monthly payments will each cover two jobkeeper fortnights.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The Conversation

*How to get both JobKeeper and JobSeeker*

_Under the new rules, it is possible to get both, but you'll have to apply and pass the tests._

Brendan Coates, Jonathan Nolan, Grattan Institute

July 22, 2020 2.43pm AEST

At A$1,500 a fortnight, JobKeeper has been nothing but a help to the people on it.

The rules required those who had previously been paid more than JobKeeper to stay on their old wage, with the rest topped up by their employer. Those who had previously been paid less (one quarter of them) got a pay rise.

It'll be less rewarding from the end of September. That's when it'll fall to $1,200 per fortnight for people who had previously been working 20 hours or more hours per week, and $750 per fortnight for people who had previously been working less than that.

At the same time, the temporary coronavirus supplement paid to Australians on JobSeeker and other benefits will fall from $550 a fortnight to just $250.

Those receiving only the full-time JobKeeper rate can expect their incomes to fall by 20%. Those on the part-time rate can expect their income to halve.

But the good news is that at least some will be able to top up their incomes by applying for JobSeeker.

*JobKeeper and JobSeeker*

Many will be able to apply to receive both.

They will need to satisfy the assets test for JobSeeker, which is being re-imposed from September 25. It will deny JobSeeker to single homeowners with assets of more than $268,000 in addition to their home, and to single non-home owners with assets of more than $482,500.

They would also need to wait for a reimposed liquid assets waiting period of between one and 13 weeks, depending how much money they have in their bank accounts.

Their partners would need to earn less than $3,068 a fortnight, or roughly $80,000 a year.

And they will be required to make at least one phone or online appointment per week with an employment services provider.

*Up to $554 on top of JobKeeper*

Our calculations suggest that under the new rules from late September, such a person on the part-time JobKeeper rate of $750 a fortnight should be able to claim up to an extra $554 in JobSeeker - taking their total income to $1,304 per fortnight - only $196 per fortnight less than they got when JobKeeper was $1,500 per fortnight.










It gets better. Even people getting the new lower full-time JobKeeper rate of $1,200 per fortnight will be able to get some JobSeeker if they fit through the hoops.

Our calculations suggest they will be eligible for up to $284 per fortnight JobSeeker top-up, taking their total income to $1,484 for fortnight, only $16 per fortnight less than they are receiving now.

It gets better still. If they pass through the hoops, they will also become eligible for other benefits such as a Commonwealth Health Care Card, Family Tax Benefit part A if they have kids, and rent assistance if renting.

The treasury believes 245,000 Australians will be on both JobKeeper and JobSeeker by the end of the year.

*You'll have to apply*

One of the virtues of the original JobKeeper was that, from the point of view of the recipient, it was automatic. Once their employer decided to apply for it, there was nothing else they needed to do.

As JobKeeper is phased down and JobSeeker returns to its traditional role of supporting Australians on low incomes, there will be a lot more they need to do.

Some won't bother, and some won't succeed, but at least until the end of the year it'll be possible for some Australians on JobKeeper to get more or less what they were getting before.

It's less good for those pushed out of work

It's worth sparing a thought for those that will lose their jobs as JobKeeper winds down.

In October, employers wanting to stay on JobKeeper will have to be retested and approved, and in January retested and approved again.

Many will miss out. Retesting is expected to reduce the number of workers on JobKeeper by 60% over the last three months of this year and by a further ten percentage points over the first three months of next year.

If those whose lose JobKeeper also lose their jobs - and many will - they'll have to make do with the much lower JobSeeker payment of about $825 a fortnight, not much more than half of the $1,500 a fortnight they had.










Treasury expects 1.5 million people to be on JobSeeker by the end of the year.

It expects some 245,000 to receive both JobSeeker and JobKeeper. That will leave around 1.25 million to get by on the lower JobSeeker alone.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*What counts as working hours for a rideshare or taxi driver? (This will be relevant for the purposes of the 20-working hours test for the higher rates of extended jobkeeper.)*

The following decision of the Federal Circuit Court arose in the context of limits for international students on working hours during university terms and semesters but its reasoning is of more general application and is authority for working hours including (but not being limited to) times when the driver seeks fares or is waiting between fares:

Verma v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2017] FCCA 69 (18 January 2017)

Relevant extract from the decision:

'22. ..In my view, once he or she begins their driving shift, the time a taxi driver spends waiting for a fare or waiting between fares is a necessary and inextricable aspect of driving a taxi for remuneration. It may be that the driver is able to read a book or even study during this time but the periods are necessarily irregular and of unpredictable duration. The driver, although waiting, is still primarily engaged in the activity of taxi driving for remuneration.

'23....I am satisfied that the periods that the applicant spent waiting for or between fares as a taxi driver was "work" within the definition.'


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> The following article by Airtax is an excellent and easy-to-understand overview of the extended and revamped jobkeeper program:
> 
> https://help.airtax.com.au/hc/en-us/articles/360001631335
> *JobKeeper Phase 2 - extension and changes*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mark ONeill
> 
> 16 minutes ago
> 
> 
> Updated
> *Program extension and payment reduction *
> 
> On 21 July 2020, the Federal Government announced that the JobKeeper program will be extended from 28 September 2020 to 28 March 2021.
> 
> Payments from the program will reduce from 28 September 2020 from $1,500 to $1,200 per fortnight. From 3 January 2021, payments will reduce further to $1,000 per fortnight.
> 
> For workers who worked less than 20 hours per week in February 2020, their payment will reduce further to $750 per fortnight between 28 September 2020 and 2 January 2021. This will reduce again to $650 per fortnight from 3 January 2021.
> 
> *30 per cent decline in GST turnover eligibility test remains *
> 
> To be eligible for the JobKeeper program from 28 September 2020, businesses must demonstrate a 30 per cent decline in GST turnover relative to the same period the year before.
> 
> For the December 2020 quarter (i.e. October to December 2020) businesses must demonstrate a 30 per cent decline in GST turnover compared to the December 2019 quarter.
> 
> Similarly, for the March 2021 quarter (i.e. January 2021 to March 2021) businesses must demonstrate a 30 per cent decline in GST turnover March 2020 quarter.
> 
> *Extra eligibility test introduced*
> 
> In addition, from 28 September 2020 businesses will also need to demonstrate continuity in decline in turnover.
> 
> What this means is that to receive JobKeeper payments from 28 September 2020 businesses must demonstrate a 30 per cent decline in their GST turnover across the following comparison periods:
> 
> 1. Apr - Jun 2020 & Apr - Jun 2019
> 
> 2. Jul - Sep 2020 & Jul - Sep 2019
> 
> Similarly, from 3 January 2021 will need to demonstrate a 30 per cent decline in GST turnover across the following comparison periods:
> 
> 1. Apr - Jun 2020 & Apr - Jun 2019
> 
> 2. Jul - Sep 2020 & Jul - Sep 2019
> 
> 3. Oct - Dec 2020 & Oct - Dec 2019


The following paragraph in the Airtax article is incorrect if it suggests that there's a fourth comparison period based on the quarter 1 January 2021 to 31 March 2021:

'_Similarly, for the March 2021 quarter (i.e. January 2021 to March 2021) businesses must demonstrate a 30 per cent decline in GST turnover March 2020 quarter.'

https://help.airtax.com.au/hc/en-us/articles/360001631335_
To the extent it suggests there's a fourth comparison period, I have concluded that this paragraph is NOT correct. In particular, I can't find anything in the Treasury fact sheet that supports a fourth comparison period.

It would also be impossible to base payments accruing from January 2021 to March 2021 on a concurrent quarter (rather than on an already completed quarter) given the Government's policy underpinning the extended jobkeeper program of always basing eligibility on actual turnover rather than projected turnover.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> The following paragraph in the Airtax article is incorrect if it suggests that there's a fourth comparison period based on the quarter 1 January 2021 to 31 March 2021:
> 
> '_Similarly, for the March 2021 quarter (i.e. January 2021 to March 2021) businesses must demonstrate a 30 per cent decline in GST turnover March 2020 quarter.'
> 
> https://help.airtax.com.au/hc/en-us/articles/360001631335_
> To the extent it suggests there's a fourth comparison period, I have concluded that this paragraph is NOT correct. In particular, I can't find anything in the Treasury fact sheet that supports a fourth comparison period.
> 
> It would also be impossible to base payments accruing from January 2021 to March 2021 on a concurrent quarter (rather than on an already completed quarter) given the Government's policy underpinning the extended jobkeeper program of always basing eligibility on actual turnover rather than projected turnover.


Airtax has now corrected the article.

https://help.airtax.com.au/hc/en-us/articles/360001631335


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www...-weigh-in-heavily-on-jobkeeper-2-0-design/amp
Thursday 30 July 2020

*Jotham Lian*

*Accounting bodies to weigh in heavily on JobKeeper 2.0 design*

The professional accounting and tax bodies will soon present the Treasury with a laundry list of issues to be considered in the design and execution of JobKeeper 2.0, as the profession aims to avoid implementation issues that encumbered the first version.

A joint submission from members of the National Tax Liaison Group is expected to be presented to the Treasury shortly, with the professional bodies optimistic that their views will be taken into consideration, given that there is time before JobKeeper 2.0 changes kick in from 28 September.

The extension of JobKeeper for a further six months to 28 March 2021 was announced last week, revealing a new two-tiered payment rate and a tighter eligibility requirement.

The changes include a new decline in turnover test, with entities now needing to demonstrate that their actual GST turnover has declined by the requisite percentage in both the June and September quarters.

A decline in the December quarter will also be required for entities looking to receive JobKeeper payments in 2021.

It is expected that the joint submission to the Treasury will now seek greater flexibility on this requirement, with businesses whose situations have improved in the June quarter, but have subsequently deteriorated in the September quarter, unable to gain access to JobKeeper.

The Treasury is also expected to be urged to address an anomaly where businesses that qualify based on business participation are required to have notified the ATO of taxable supplies made before 12 March, leaving new businesses and start-ups out of the loop due to their elected reporting cycle.

With Parliament scheduled to sit in late August, the profession is hopeful that legislation and subsequent ATO guidance will be ready ahead of the changes set to be rolled out in just under two months.

The first version of JobKeeper passed both houses of parliament in an emergency one-day sitting back in early April, leaving little time to provide constructive input.

Subsequent changes to the JobKeeper rules by Treasurer Josh Frydenberg by way of legislative instruments were also introduced on the run, with the profession left waiting on appropriate guidance from the ATO.

"We have the luxury of time this time round for some consultation to occur before legislation surfaces, so all is not lost just yet," the Institute of Public Accountants general manager of technical policy Tony Greco said.

"There are a number of issues that the accounting and tax associations have identified based on [the JobKeeper 2.0] announcement that hopefully can shape the direction of JobKeeper 2.0 before legislation is finalised.

"We will be working collaboratively with the Treasury and the ATO to work through the next stage of JobKeeper."

[end of article]

*Jack Malarkey comments:*

The tax professionals here are working on the understanding that Parliament will be making the required amendments for the extended jobkeeper program.

I remain of the view that all the necessary amendments to give effect to the extended jobkeeper program can legally be made by a combination of legislative amendments by the Treasurer of the jobkeeper rules and by the Taxation Office of its jobkeeper legislative instrument.

This would be via the very broad legislative delegations already made by Parliament.

I believe that Parliament doesn't need specifically to approve the changes.

Let's see what happens.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> _Accountants Daily_
> 
> https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www...-weigh-in-heavily-on-jobkeeper-2-0-design/amp
> Thursday 30 July 2020
> 
> *Jotham Lian*
> 
> *Accounting bodies to weigh in heavily on JobKeeper 2.0 design*
> 
> The professional accounting and tax bodies will soon present the Treasury with a laundry list of issues to be considered in the design and execution of JobKeeper 2.0, as the profession aims to avoid implementation issues that encumbered the first version.
> 
> A joint submission from members of the National Tax Liaison Group is expected to be presented to the Treasury shortly, with the professional bodies optimistic that their views will be taken into consideration, given that there is time before JobKeeper 2.0 changes kick in from 28 September.
> 
> The extension of JobKeeper for a further six months to 28 March 2021 was announced last week, revealing a new two-tiered payment rate and a tighter eligibility requirement.
> 
> The changes include a new decline in turnover test, with entities now needing to demonstrate that their actual GST turnover has declined by the requisite percentage in both the June and September quarters.
> 
> A decline in the December quarter will also be required for entities looking to receive JobKeeper payments in 2021.
> 
> It is expected that the joint submission to the Treasury will now seek greater flexibility on this requirement, with businesses whose situations have improved in the June quarter, but have subsequently deteriorated in the September quarter, unable to gain access to JobKeeper.
> 
> The Treasury is also expected to be urged to address an anomaly where businesses that qualify based on business participation are required to have notified the ATO of taxable supplies made before 12 March, leaving new businesses and start-ups out of the loop due to their elected reporting cycle.
> 
> With Parliament scheduled to sit in late August, the profession is hopeful that legislation and subsequent ATO guidance will be ready ahead of the changes set to be rolled out in just under two months.
> 
> The first version of JobKeeper passed both houses of parliament in an emergency one-day sitting back in early April, leaving little time to provide constructive input.
> 
> Subsequent changes to the JobKeeper rules by Treasurer Josh Frydenberg by way of legislative instruments were also introduced on the run, with the profession left waiting on appropriate guidance from the ATO.
> 
> "We have the luxury of time this time round for some consultation to occur before legislation surfaces, so all is not lost just yet," the Institute of Public Accountants general manager of technical policy Tony Greco said.
> 
> "There are a number of issues that the accounting and tax associations have identified based on [the JobKeeper 2.0] announcement that hopefully can shape the direction of JobKeeper 2.0 before legislation is finalised.
> 
> "We will be working collaboratively with the Treasury and the ATO to work through the next stage of JobKeeper."
> 
> [end of article]
> 
> *Jack Malarkey comments:*
> 
> The tax professionals here are working on the understanding that Parliament will be making the required amendments for the extended jobkeeper program.
> 
> I remain of the view that all the necessary amendments to give effect to the extended jobkeeper program can legally be made by a combination of legislative amendments by the Treasurer of the jobkeeper rules and by the Taxation Office of its jobkeeper legislative instrument.
> 
> This would be via the very broad legislative delegations already made by Parliament.
> 
> I believe that Parliament doesn't need specifically to approve the changes.
> 
> Let's see what happens.


I hope that this consultation with the accounting and tax associations doesn't delay the legislative amendments.

It would be good to have the legislated details of the alternative turnover tests and of the 20 working hours test for the higher rates of payment where February 2020 is a-typical as soon as practicable.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Latest update of Australian Taxation Office guidance:

https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/
JobKeeper - timeline of content updates

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:

31 July

New: What to do if you have received a JobKeeper overpayment that you (or your employees) were not eligible for.

Update: Key dates updated to advise that enrolments close for August fortnights on 31 August 2020.

*JobKeeper overpayments*









JobKeeper overpayments


What to do if you have received a JobKeeper overpayment that you (or your employees) were not eligible for.




www.ato.gov.au





You have received an overpayment if you have incorrectly self-assessed that you (or your employees) were eligible for the JobKeeper payment.

We understand that some overpayments will arise as a result of people making an honest mistake. We provide further guidance below about how we will manage JobKeeper overpayments, including when a JobKeeper overpayment does not need to be repaid.

If an overpayment is identified, one of the following will occur:

we decide the overpayment does not have to be repaid (typically if you made an honest mistake)

we decide the overpayment needs to be repaid by you.

we decide that another entity that directly or indirectly benefited from the overpayment is also liable to repay the overpayment - when another entity is also liable, we may pursue
the entire repayment from you

the entire repayment from the other entity, or
payments from you and the other entity until the overpayment is repaid in full

*When overpayments don't need to be repaid*

Due to the extraordinary circumstances in the early stages of the JobKeeper program, overpayments may have been made in error as businesses moved quickly to access JobKeeper payments.

If a JobKeeper overpayment is identified, we may decide the overpayment does not have to be repaid, particularly if there was an honest mistake. This decision is made on the facts and circumstances of each case.

Factors we may consider include whether:

you relied in good faith on a statement made by an employee in their nomination notice
you fully passed on the benefit of the JobKeeper payment to the relevant employee
the mistake was made earlier in JobKeeper when there was less public guidance.

*Honest mistakes*

We consider a mistake to be honest if it is reasonable to have made the mistake in your circumstance.

A mistake will not be considered honest if:

fraud was perpetrated by either the JobKeeper recipient or another entity

there has been intentional disregard of the law, recklessness in its application
the entity nominated employees, business participants, or religious practitioners that it should have known would not satisfy eligibility requirements

the employer has deliberately not met the wage condition

the entity has been contacted by us about its claim potentially being ineligible and has not taken reasonable steps to check the eligibility before making claims in the future.

Note: this is not an exhaustive list and there may be other circumstances where a mistake is not considered honest.

*Example 1 - New to business sole trader that does not meet integrity rules*

Jack started a new business selling toys at the start of December 2019. He completed the necessary registrations for his new business as a sole trader, including getting an ABN and registering for quarterly GST reporting. Jack also paid other costs in establishing his business. Due to delays in setting up the business, he didn't make any sales until late January 2020.

As Jack's business didn't make any taxable supplies in the December quarter reporting period, the business is not eligible for JobKeeper. This is because it did not make a taxable supply in the tax period that ended before 12 March 2020.

Jack made relevant inquiries, including discussing his potential application with his tax agent, to determine eligibility before he applied for JobKeeper as a business participant. He received a JobKeeper payment in respect of fortnights 1 and 2. Before payments for fortnights 3 and 4, he received notice from us that he was ineligible under the integrity rules.

While this is considered an overpayment, Jack will not have to repay the JobKeeper payments made to him for fortnights 1 and 2. Even though Jack didn't satisfy the integrity rules, for fortnights 1 and 2, he satisfied all other eligibility requirements. It's reasonable for Jack not to know that he didn't satisfy the integrity rules when he claimed for fortnights 1 and 2 and it is considered that Jack made an honest mistake.

End of example

*Example 2 - Employer makes honest mistake regarding employee's eligibility*

Jo is an Australian tax resident, has one job and is on a partner visa which makes her ineligible for JobKeeper payments. Jo is still working and earning $2,800 per fortnight from MedCo, a company with many employees. After registering for JobKeeper, MedCo gives each of its employees, including Jo an employee nomination notice.

Jo returns it to them on 1 May 2020. Jo continues to receive her salary of $2,800 gross from MedCo, who are then reimbursed $1,500 for JobKeeper fortnights 1 to 4 for wages paid to Jo. We identify the mistake and bring it to MedCo's attention after the payment for fortnights 3 and 4.

As MedCo relied on Jo's nomination notice, it will have made an honest mistake in claiming JobKeeper for Jo. We will not require repayment of the overpayment in respect of fortnights 1 to 4.

MedCo will not receive any future JobKeeper payments for Jo.

Even if the error was identified after fortnight 4, unless there were other factors weighing against the exercise of the discretion, we would not pursue recovery from MedCo This is because MedCo reasonably relied on Jo's employee nomination notice and made an honest mistake about whether her visa made her ineligible to receive JobKeeper.

End of example

*When overpayments need to be repaid*

If we identify you have received an overpayment of JobKeeper that you need to repay, we will write to you to let you know:

why we think there has been an overpayment
how much you need to repay, and

how you can make the repayment to us.

If you can't pay on time, we can help you. If you're trying to do the right thing, we're committed to understanding your situation and helping you if possible.

If you do not agree with our decision to require repayment, you can object and ask us to reconsider our decision.

*Administrative penalties*

Generally, we will not impose administrative penalties for JobKeeper overpayments that were the result of a mistake.

However, administrative penalties will apply if there is evidence of deliberate actions to get JobKeeper payments that an entity would not have otherwise been entitled to.

*Example 3 - Employer fails to apply correct fall in turnover tests*

Big Business Co (BB Co) has an aggregated turnover well in excess of $1 billion. It had a projected decline in turnover of 35% at the test time, and incorrectly applied the 50% decline in turnover test instead of the 30% test as required in the turnover rules.

BB Co has applied for JobKeeper on behalf of 1,000 employees and has received payments for JobKeeper fortnights 1 and 2. BB Co met the wage condition for all 1,000 employees of paying a minimum of $1,500 per fortnight (before tax).

As BB Co did not satisfy the 50% decline it turnover test, it was ineligible for JobKeeper and is liable for the overpayments.

We will not waive the requirement to repay these JobKeeper overpayments as BB Co did not make an honest mistake; its mistake was not reasonable in all the circumstances.

BB Co was reckless in not thoroughly considering the decline in turnover test provisions and the substantial support material published by the ATO outlining eligibility requirements.

End of example

*Example 4 - Information within the knowledge or control of the employer*

Tony began employment with XYZ Pty Ltd after 1 March 2020, making him ineligible for JobKeeper payments. Tony is still working and earning $2,800 per fortnight. XYZ Pty Ltd gives Tony a nomination notice as they have given them to all staff despite him not meeting employee eligibility requirements.

Tony returns the nomination notice to XYZ Pty Ltd on 1 May 2020. Tony receives a $2,800 gross from XYZ Pty Ltd and the employer receives $1,500 for Tony.

We will not waive the requirement to repay as information pertaining to Tony's ineligibility was within the knowledge or control of XYZ Pty Ltd.

It was not reasonable for XYZ Pty Ltd to not know that Tony was not an eligible employee as they held information about his employment status as at 1 March 2020.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Friday 31 July 2020

Jotham Lian

*ATO will not claw back 'honest' JobKeeper mistakes*

_The ATO will not seek to recover JobKeeper payments from employers who made an honest mistake, a parliamentary inquiry has heard._
The ATO will not seek to recover JobKeeper payments from employers who made an honest mistake, a parliamentary inquiry has heard.

Fronting a COVID-19 parliamentary committee, ATO second commissioner Jeremy Hirschhorn said that while the Tax Office had written to 8,000 businesses to inform them that JobKeeper payments would cease because of eligibility issues, it had not sought to reclaim all of the payments so far.

Mr Hirschhorn noted that payments to these businesses were made in the first month or two of operation of the wage subsidy program, with the value of payments under $100 million.

"Where it is an honest mistake, we are just turning off Jobkeeper for future months, we are not seeking to claw back the JobKeeper that they have received," Mr Hirschhorn said.

"We had asked money back from some, but I think the concern in the community was more the fear that we would claw it back, whereas the actuality of most of these eligibility cases is that they were viewed as honest mistakes and we have not sought to claw back.

"There are different reasons - there is the eligibility and honest mistake element and there are bits where we identify multiple claims for the one employee, and that's where money will come back, potentially."

Mr Hirschhorn also acknowledged that these letters were sent to new businesses or start-ups that did not satisfy the eligibility criteria - an issue that has been raised extensively by the professional accounting and tax bodies because of the inequitable outcome based on an entity's reporting cycle.

Of the 8,000 businesses that received the ATO letter, 3,800 did not respond, Mr Hirschhorn added.

"Our general stance is&#8230; there are certain mistakes you can make like classic eligibility mistakes where we would categorise as honest mistakes because the law is complex particularly for newly formed businesses - that's where a lot of the angst is around newly formed businesses," Mr Hirschhorn said.

*Redesigning the application process for JobKeeper 2.0

Mr Hirschhorn also told the committee that the ATO would now look to include more eligibility checks into the application process to ensure that entities applying for JobKeeper 2.0 would not face such letters from the ATO down the track.

"People will have to reapply, so we will have to design a new application process asking for the relevant information, and with a bit more time this time around, we will be able to build more features into the application form," he said.

"Can we design this into the application process so we don't get a situation where somebody applies, gets money, and then we say 'you don't look eligible to us' - we're going to design as much as possible into the application process."*

[Emphasis added]


----------



## Westside Rider

@Jack Malarkey when's the next $3000 payment?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Westside Rider said:


> @Jack Malarkey when's the next $3000 payment?


For those who made the required declarations on Saturday 1 August 2020, I'd expect the payments to come through on Tuesday or Wednesday.

The Australian Taxation Office has previously advised that they take an an average of five business days but I have found that in practice they have been somewhat quicker than that. ('Business Days' don't include weekends or public holidays.)

The payment after that will be in early September 2020 and it will be for $4,500 as there are three jobkeeper fortnights that end in August 2020.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Sky News

*Govt working on an amended JobKeeper 2.0 | Sky News Australia*

_Rules around JobKeeper 2.0 are about to get "thrown out the window" as Treasurer Josh Frydenberg works on measures designed to help ailing Victorian businesses. Sky News Political Editor Andrew Clennell said Mr Frydenberg is working on a package where businesses would only have to show a 30 per..._

03/08/2020

Rules around JobKeeper 2.0 are about to get "thrown out the window" as Treasurer Josh Frydenberg works on measures designed to help ailing Victorian businesses.

Sky News Political Editor Andrew Clennell said Mr Frydenberg is working on a package where businesses would only have to show a 30 per cent decline in turnover over one quarter, rather than two quarters, which is the case under the current JobKeeper arrangements.

"The government is apparently planning to change the JobKeeper rules for the entire nation, not have some sort of Victorian provision," Mr Clennell said. "This seems a bit strange to the extent this change could benefit businesses in WA and SA, for example, where there is no virus, as well as businesses in Victoria who have been shut down."

Melbourne moved to six-week-long stage four restrictions - and a state of disaster - from 6pm Sunday night, which included dramatic limitations on people's freedoms. From 8pm to 5am each night a curfew will take effect with people only allowed to leave for work, medical care and caregiving.

Melburnians can only exercise for a maximum of one hour a day, within a 5-kilometre radius of their home, and shopping visits have been restricted to once per day within the same boundaries.

The changes have already had a dramatic effect with Flinders Street Station experiencing a 31 per cent drop in foot traffic at 5am compared to its four-week average, according to data from the City of Melbourne.

Mr Clennell said faced with a slump in economic activity due to the newly announced stage four restrictions, it is likely the federal government will provide extra support for Victorians.

"You didn't have to be Nostradamus to figure out what was going to happen here - in terms of more JobKeeper support," Mr Clennell said.

"There is a pattern from this government.

"They play hardball on relenting, the PM waits 'til the last minute, repeatedly says it is not the job of the Commonwealth to intervene and provide support and business and the banks and the states have to help.

"Then he puts in the supports anyway."


----------



## Westside Rider

Jack Malarkey said:


> For those who made the required declarations on Saturday 1 August 2020, I'd expect the payments to come through on Tuesday or Wednesday.
> 
> The Australian Taxation Office has previously advised that they take an an average of five business days but I have found that in practice they have been somewhat quicker than that. ('Business Days' don't include weekends or public holidays.)
> 
> The payment after that will be in early September 2020 and it will be for $4,500 as there are three jobkeeper fortnights that end in August 2020.


Tuesday $0.00

Hopefully tomorrow is $3000


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Westside Rider said:


> Tuesday $0.00
> 
> Hopefully tomorrow is $3000


Mine has just arrived: 12.45 am AEST on Wednesday (Commonwealth Bank).


----------



## Westside Rider

Jack Malarkey said:


> Mine has just arrived: 12.45 am AEST on Wednesday (Commonwealth Bank).


Mine came in around 12:30am  for once Westpac weren't slow at processing payments.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The 2019-20 online tax return on myGov has a new question asking about the current status of your business. Options include ‘ceased’ and ‘continuing’.

It would be prudent for those receiving jobkeeper as a business participant to answer ‘continuing’.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*Question: What's the tax treatment of jobkeeper payments received as a business participant?*

Answer:

(1) Jobkeeper payments are NOT subject to GST.

(2) As a business recipient, you include jobkeeper payments as part of your business income for income tax purposes.

See:

GST:

*Quick tips for activity statements*
_Help with GST, fuel tax credits, pay as you go instalments and withholding._

Income tax:

*Is it income?*
_Check what to report and include in your tax return._


----------



## Jack Malarkey




----------



## Jack Malarkey

ABC Australia:

*More businesses and workers will qualify for the extended JobKeeper*

_Treasurer Josh Frydenberg will announce on Friday that more businesses and workers will be eligible for the JobKeeper program.
Government will ease JobKeeper criteria, adding $15 billion to the coronavirus recovery scheme_

By Michael Doyle 6 August 2020 10.30 pm AEST

_The eligibility criteria for JobKeeper will be eased for businesses and employees, with an extra $15 billion being added to the scheme._

*Key points:*

The new guidelines for the JobKeeper extension will begin on September 28
More businesses and workers will now qualify for the government payments
Treasurer Josh Frydenberg has said the Victorian lockdowns have forced the additional $15 billion spend

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg will announce on Friday that businesses will only need to show that their GST turnover had fallen over one quarter instead of multiple to qualify for the scheme's extension.

The initial JobKeeper will finish on September 28, with businesses and employees needing to apply for the extension.

The Government initially outlined the JobKeeper extension guidelines on July 21, but says it needs to extend its criteria after the Victoria Government implemented stricter lockdowns across the state this week.

Now, businesses will only have to show their GST turnover has fallen in the June quarter, compared to the corresponding quarter in 2019, to be eligible after September 28.

Under the previous guidelines, a business needed to record a loss in the June and September quarters.

Mr Frydenberg has blamed the stage 4 restrictions in Melbourne, and the wider restrictions across Victoria, for the Federal Government changing the scheme's extension.

"The combined effect of the economic deterioration in Victoria, which will see more firms needing to rely on JobKeeper, and the changes we are making to the program, will see the cost of JobKeeper increase by around $15.6 billion," he said.

"The introduction of stage 4 restrictions by the Victorian Government will have a severe economic impact on the Victorian and Australian economy."

The changes will also affect businesses who will apply for the second extension of JobKeeper.

The second extension will begin on January 4 next year.

Under the previous guidelines, a business would have needed to record an actual GST turnover loss for the June, September and December quarters of this year.

Mr Frydenberg will announce on Friday that businesses will need to show a loss for only the December quarter to qualify for the scheme in January.

These guidelines also affect non-profit organisations.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison described the revised guidelines as "doing whatever it takes".

"Our response is to get the right support to all those Australian families, workers and businesses that need us, as these circumstances change," Mr Morrison said.

"This means more support for more workers and more businesses for longer, as we battle this latest Victorian wave."

Employee eligibility will also be extended, with a worker qualifying for payments if they have been with their workplace since at least July 1, instead of the March 1 deadline initially slated.

New employees will be eligible for JobKeeper payments dating back to August 3.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Updated Treasury fact sheet:

https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-08/Fact_sheet-JobKeeper_Payment_extension.pdf

No media release yet.

Updated Treasury fact sheet confirms September quarter for 28 September to 3 January and December quarter for 4 January to 28 March.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Media release by the Prime Minister and Treasurer:

*More support for businesses and workers | Treasury Ministers*

*Extract*

7 August 2020

Joint media release with
The Hon. Scott Morrison MP
Prime Minister

Following the introduction of stage four restrictions in metropolitan Melbourne and stage three restrictions across regional Victoria, the Morrison Government will help more businesses qualify for JobKeeper.
Key adjustments include:

A change to the employee reference date - from 3 August 2020 the relevant date of employment for an eligible employee will move from 1 March to 1 July 2020, expanding employee eligibility.
A change to the turnover reference period - to be eligible for JobKeeper post 28 September 2020, organisations will only have to demonstrate that their actual turnovers have significantly declined in the previous quarter.
As a result, organisations that are able to demonstrate a significant decline in turnover in the September 2020 quarter will be able to access the JobKeeper extension in the December quarter. An organisation able to demonstrate the requisite decline in turnover in the December 2020 quarter would be able to access the JobKeeper extension in the March 2021 quarter.

The combined effect of the economic deterioration in Victoria which will see more firms needing to rely on JobKeeper and the eligibility changes being made to the program will see the cost of JobKeeper increase by around $15.6 billion in 2020-21.

While these changes will apply nation-wide, it is expected that more than 80 per cent of the increased payments will flow to Victorian businesses and employees.

These changes, combined with a deterioration in the economy as a result of the stricter restrictions imposed in Victoria will see the total cost of the JobKeeper program increase to $101.3 billion.

It is now expected that around 4 million Australians will be benefiting from JobKeeper Payments at the end of the September quarter, falling to around 2.24 million in the December quarter and 1.75 million in the March 2021 quarter.

...


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*Jack's overview

Important changes announced re extended jobkeeper*

1. On Friday 7 August 2020, the Prime Minister and Treasurer announced significant changes to the extended jobkeeper program from 28 September 2020 to 28 March 2021 to make it easier for businesses to qualify.

2. For the period from 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021, the decline in turnover test applies only to September quarter (1 July to 30 September) rather than to both the June and September quarters as previously proposed.

3. For the period from* 4 January 2021 to 28 March 2021*, the decline in turnover test applies only to the* December quarter* (1 October to 31 December) rather than to all three of the June, September and December quarters.

4. There have been no changes to the proposed lower rates of payment of $1,200 ($750) and $1,000 ($650) per fortnight.

5. Treasury has updated its extended jobkeeper fact sheet to reflect the changes.

Media release:

More support for businesses and workers | Treasury Ministers









ministers.treasury.gov.au

Updated Treasury fact sheet:

https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-08/Fact_sheet-JobKeeper_Payment_extension.pdf


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*Some observations about jobkeeper and jobseeker*

(1) Jobkeeper doesn't have an assets test and the only form of anything like an income test is the 30% decline in GST turnover test.

However, non-casual employment precludes eligibility for jobkeeper as a business participant.

(2) For jobseeker, the coronavirus supplement will be extended from 25 September 2020 to 31 December 2020 at the lower rate of $250 per fortnight.

(3) From 25 September 2020, the assets test and the liquid assets waiting period will be reintroduced for jobseeker.

(4) From 25 September 2020, the income-free area for jobseeker will increase from $106 per fortnight to $300 per fortnight.

The current dual taper rate of 50 cents and 60 cents will move to a single taper rate of 60 cents.

All of this means that individuals will be able to earn up to $300 per fortnight without losing any jobseeker payment or affecting eligibility for the coronavirus supplement.

For information about the income test for jobseeker, see:

*JobSeeker Payment - Income test - Services Australia*








www.servicesaustralia.gov.au

(5) From 25 September 2020, the partner income test for jobseeker will drop from 25 cents for every dollar of partner income over $996 per fortnight to 27 cents over $1,165 per fortnight.

(6) The application and continuing compliance obligations for jobseeker are more complex and significant than those for jobkeeper.

(7) Jobseeker (unlike jobkeeper) entitles the recipient to a rental subsidy and various discounts for pharmaceuticals, public transport and so on.

(8) A jobseeker recipient has obligations to seek work (a requirement being reintroduced).

(9) A jobkeeper recipient benefits from the small business tax offset on that income (unlike a jobseeker recipient).

(10) For information about the possibility of receiving both jobkeeper and part jobseeker, see:

*How to get both JobKeeper and JobSeeker*
_
Under the new rules, it is possible to get both, but you'll have to apply and pass the tests._


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Canberra Times _editorial

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6869593/jobkeeper-changes-timely-and-nuanced/
SATURDAY AUGUST 8 2020 - 12:00 AM

*JobKeeper changes timely and nuanced*

The 250,00 to 400,000 Victorian workers expected to be thrown out of work as a result of the imposition of the hardest lockdown seen in Australia to date will be breathing a collective sigh of relief as a result of the Federal government's decision to amend the criteria for JobKeeper.

This comes on top of the recent decision to extend the scheme, which has played a pivotal role in helping millions of Australians to keep a roof over their heads and food on the table since March, for a further six months beyond its original legislated termination date.

With up to one-and-a-half million Victorians expected to be relying on the payment by early next month, it would have been a catastrophe for that state - and for two-and-a-half million other people around the country - if the program had been allowed to wind down.

One of the most significant changes was to shift the employee reference date (the relevant date of employment for an eligible employee) from March 1, 2020, to July 1, 2020. This means that many workers who had found employment since the economy started to open back up again since June will now also be eligible for JobKeeper. That tweak is potentially crucial to the economic welfare of tens of thousands of people.

The other big shift was the decision to modify the criteria for a business's eligibility for the scheme by changing the "turnover reference period". Companies now only have to demonstrate that their income has dropped by the mandated percentage (which varies according to the size of the business) over a single quarter.

This means that businesses which may have moved back towards the black during the period the pandemic was effectively under control and restrictions were being eased won't be penalised for that brief period of fiscal spring.

The combined effect of these two changes will be to increase the cost of JobKeeper by around $15.6 billion during 2020-2021.

The final cost may prove to be far higher given, as the Prime Minister has stressed repeatedly, economic forecasting is extremely problematic given the speed at which the situation can change.

The really good news is that because JobKeeper is a national program, the changes announced on Friday will take effect nationwide.

That is important given it is, as yet, unknown what impact the Victorian lockdown is going to have on other states. When you shut down one quarter of the national economy, albeit for the very best of reasons, it is going to have a massive flow-on effect.

Jobs will be lost in every state and territory, including in the ACT, as a result of the interruption to supply lines sourcing goods and services out of Melbourne and the surrounding area.

This is a national crisis. It's not just a case of Victoria catching a bad cold and going back to bed for a bit.

The most important takeout from the changes is the timely reminder that this government, once lambasted over it's ideological commitment to economic rationalism, is willing and able to "flex" when the situation demands it.

That said, in view of the fact that many Australians are going to be on JobKeeper - and JobSeeker - for far longer than was originally expected, consideration should be given to holding off on the reductions in the level of payments due to take effect later this year.

While it is important to wean businesses off taxpayer-funded support payments once the situation eases, the reality is that we are not at that point yet.

The Treasurer's work is far from done.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

It's instructive to see what Treasury's three-month review report to the Government of the jobkeeper program had to say about having two-tiered jobkeeper payments based on weekly working hours.

It's clear that Treasury had reservations about such a system. These reservations centred on the practicalities of implementation.

Yet the Government decided to proceed with the two-tiered payment system.

This was no doubt because of concerns about many part-timers receiving significantly higher jobkeeper payments than they had been receiving as remuneration until then.

New Zealand's equivalent program to jobkeeper has from the start had a two-tiered system based on working at least 20 hours a work that has worked well enough in practice.

If the Government had decided to retain the single flat payment system, the amount of the payment may well have been lower than the proposed higher levels of the payment under the two-tier system.

The Treasury report in this context concerned itself only with employees. Once the Government had decided to go down the two-tiered path for employees, it must have decided it would be anomalous not to have a similar arrangements for business participants.

To my mind, the Government has made the right calls on these matters.

Below is the relevant part of the Treasury report with my emphasis added:

'It may be possible to introduce a two tiered payment system, as in NZ, based on working hours where part time employees receive a lower payment, with part time defined by an hours threshold - in NZ this is below 20 hours per week. This could be tied to usual working hours pre1 March 2020 or to current working hours. Both raise significant policy issues.

'Assigning employees to tiers based on usual working hours would require employers to draw on historical payroll data. Besides being a complex undertaking for some employers, there would also be many individual instances where, say, using February hours would be unfair for employees whose hours were atypical for that period - such as those whose hours were lower due to the effect of bushfires. Employees who have increased hours since 1 March might also be disadvantaged.

'Using current working hours would reduce payments to those who were full time employees but have been stood down on zero hours, which would not be consistent with the original objectives of JobKeeper. To implement such an arrangement would require employers to report these to the ATO each fortnight, a significant compliance cost. _*Existing ATO systems do not capture hours worked, meaning that verifying such reporting and any compliance activity would require intensive audit work. *_

'In the design of future responses to economic and labour market shocks, consideration could be given to improving STP reporting, including hours worked, to provide more flexibility in program design and delivery. This would require the establishment of significantly augmented audit and compliance arrangements compared with those currently in place.

'If a lower payment rate was introduced, it would narrow or remove any differential between the JobKeeper and JobSeeker payments, potentially amplifying disincentives to work. In addition, some employees would become eligible for JobSeeker, including the Coronavirus Supplement. These individuals would be accessing two payment support systems and potentially receiving much the same level of income. Any move to a lower payment for some employees should therefore be aligned with any changes to JobSeeker support.

'On balance, careful consideration would need to be given to making any changes to payment amounts, and sufficient time would need to be provided to employers and the ATO to implement such changes. _*It is not clear that the net benefit of these changes would be positive for such a time limited program.'*

https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-07/jobkeeper-review-2020_2.docx_

PDF version:

https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-07/jobkeeper-review-2020_0.pdf


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*Obtaining back-dated jobkeeper payments?*

What if someone didn't apply for jobkeeper until recently because it didn't occur to them they might be eligible? The practice of the Australian Taxation Office is to pay only prospectively and not to back date the payments.

When applicants ask about this over the
phone, the response is essentially 'so sad, too bad'.

Is there anything these applicants can do to challenge this approach? Here are my thoughts:

1. There is no loophole that will magically benefit these applicants.

2. I doubt the Tax Office will be prepared to send anyone written advice in response to a phone call on this matter.

3. More likely, you'll need to send a written request for back-dating of the payments and then lodge an objection against any decision not to allow it.

4. I suggest that you make early phone contact with the office of the Inspector-General of Taxation and Taxation Ombudsman (IGTO for short) and seek help. Continue to involve them. See:

*Home | IGT*








www.igt.gov.au

5. The timing requirements for enrolling for jobkeeper in the 'approved form' by a business participant are in subsection 11(2) of the Treasurer's _Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Rules 2020._

6. You have missed the boat for past payments and can now catch it only if the Tax Office exercises an available discretion in your favour: this is what you are trying to achieve.

7. Under section 388-55 in Schedule 1 to the _Taxation Administration Act 1953_, the Commissioner of Taxation has a discretion to defer the time for giving an approved form.

8. This discretion is not circumscribed by words such as 'in special circumstances' so is potentially broad in scope.

9. Administrative law principles state that a discretion must be exercised on the merits of the particular case and the decision-maker can't fetter themselves in its exercise by reference to an all-encompassing policy against exercising it.

10. Section 13 (review of Commissioner's decision) of the _Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Act 2020 _authorises the lodgment of an objection against (among other things) 'a decision that the entity is not entitled to a Coronavirus economic response payment for a period'.

11. The objection needs to include full grounds, which would include challenges to the non-exercise of the discretion.

12. If the objection is disallowed, you have rights of appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

Treasurer's rules:

Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Rules 2020

Act:

Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Act 2020


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_New Daily_

*Cormann: Adjusting JobKeeper remains an option*

_Finance Minister Mathias Cormann hasn't ruled out making a further tweak to the JobKeeper wage subsidy program given the evolving COVID-19 crisis_

10:34am, Aug 9, 2020 Updated: 10:38am, Aug 9

Colin Brinsden

*Mathias Cormann: Adjusting JobKeeper payments remains an option*

Finance Minister Mathias Cormann hasn't ruled out further changes to JobKeeper if necessary in the face of an evolving coronavirus crisis.

Last week the government announced a further $15 billion injection into the wage subsidy program with changes allowing easier access for businesses, that are aimed at outbreak-hit Victoria.

However, the scheme will step down from a fortnightly payment of $1500 a week to $1200 at the end of September, and then down to $1000 from December to March.

Asked on the ABC's _Insiders_ program on Sunday whether the reduction in September is too soon in the light of bproblems in Victoria, Senator Cormann said:

"We've been flexible in the past when it comes to what has been a rapidly evolving and fluid situation."

"We've responded to things as they've emerged. But &#8230; moving forward our intention is to transition the economy and to transition the fiscal policy settings back to the new normal by the end of March."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

In the Treasury fact sheet as updated on Friday 7 August 2020, there was a change to the 20-hour test for access to the higher rates of payment.

February 2020 is no longer the only reference month for the test: June 2020 is now an ALTERNATIVE reference month and for BOTH payment periods.

The Tax Office will have discretion to set out alternative tests where the working hours were not usual during the February or June (or both) reference months.

Details of the alternative tests are not yet available.

Below is the relevant part of the updated Treasury fact sheet (with my emphasis added):

*'The JobKeeper Payment rate*

'From 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021, the JobKeeper Payment rates will be:

• $1,200 per fortnight for all eligible employees who were working in the business or not- for-profit _for 20 hours or more a week on average in the four weeks of pay periods before either 1 March 2020 or 1 July 2020_, and for eligible business participants who were actively engaged in the business for 20 hours or more per week on average; and
• $750 per fortnight for other eligible employees and business participants.

'From 4 January 2021 to 28 March 2021, the JobKeeper Payment rates will be:

• $1,000 per fortnight for all eligible employees who were working in the business or not- for-profit for 20 hours or more a week on average in the four weeks of pay periods _before either 1 March 2020 or 1 July 2020_, and for business participants who were actively engaged in the business for 20 hours or more per week on average; and
• $650 per fortnight for other eligible employees and business participants.

'Businesses and not-for-profits will be required to nominate which payment rate they are claiming for each of their eligible employees (or business participants).

'The Commissioner of Taxation will have discretion to set out alternative tests where an employee or business participant's hours were not usual during the _February and/or June 2020_ reference period (the period with the higher number of hours worked is to be used for employees with 1 March 2020 eligibility). For example, this will include where the employee was on leave, volunteering during the bushfires, or not employed for all or part of February or June 2020.'

https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-08/Fact_sheet-JobKeeper_Payment_extension.pdf


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Hidden away in a newspaper article, I discovered that Treasury will have a six-month review of jobkeeper. This comes on top of the recent three-month review.

Here's the relevant paragraph:

'Kennedy [Dr Steven Kennedy, Secretary to the Treasury], who was appearing before a senate committee on Covid-19, said the issue would be looked into as part of a six-month review of the program'.

*Companies using millions in jobkeeper payments to pay increased dividends to shareholders*

_Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson says companies involved should lose jobkeeper eligibility, branding it 'corporate welfare'_


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Today (Friday 14 August 2020) is the last day you can make the GST turnover declarations required to receive the August jobkeeper payment of $3,000 for the two jobkeeper fortnights that ended in July 2020:

https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/JobKeeper-key-dates/#Keydates
These figures are for statistical purposes only and don't retest eligibility.

Don't delay; get onto it this very day.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

I had previously thought that all the legislation required to give effect the extended jobkeeper program as announced on 21 July 2020 and 7 August 2020 could be effected by the Treasurer and the Australian Taxation Office legislating under the delegations made to them by Parliament.

That is essentially true but I have established that there are some amendments that Parliament itself will need to make.

The current jobkeeper primary legislation prevents payments being made by the Government beyond 31 December 2020 so Parliament itself will need to extend this date. There are also some fair work amendments needed that only Parliament can make.

Parliament next meets on Monday 24 August 2020.

Both the House of Representatives and the Senate will sit from Monday 24 August 2020 to Thursday 27 August 2020 and from Monday 31 August 2020 to Thursday 3 September 2020.

After that, Parliament will next sit from Tuesday 6 October 2020 (Budget day).


----------



## Jack Malarkey

ABC Australia

Monday 17 August 2020

*Identity theft soars during COVID-19 as scammers target gov payments. Here's how to protect yourself*

_As the nation raced to move work, socialising and personal admin tasks online, scammers were waiting. Now, 24,000 Australians have reported their personal details stolen._

By national consumer affairs reporter Amy Bainbridge and the Specialist Reporting Team's Emily Clark

_A staggering 24,000 people have reported their personal details stolen so far this year, as experts warn scammers have been targeting Australians' COVID-19 financial relief payments and superannuation._

*Key points:*

Australia's consumer watchdog says identify theft scams have increased during COVID-19
Scammers are seeking personal information so they can access benefit payments and superannuation
The ACCC also warned about romance scams - in one case, a victim was scammed out of $181,000 via a dating website
New figures from the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) show identity theft is up 55 per cent on the same period last year.

As the nation raced to move our work, socialising and personal admin tasks online, scammers saw an opportunity, according to the ACCC.

Deputy chair of the consumer watchdog Delia Rickard said scammers would always "follow the money".

"With the various government relief benefits that are around and ways to early access your super, scammers want to cash in on that," she said.

And getting your personal information - which allows them to steal your identity - is
how they do it.
*
How has COVID-19 helped scammers steal personal information?*

Ms Rickard said there were "multiple tactics", but basically the scammers had been pretending to be the Government.

"They might be pretending to be MyGov, Home Affairs, ATO, Health Department," she said.

"They'll contact you either by phone, text, or email, convincing you that in order to access a particular benefit or for them to help you get early access to your super, you need to share a range of personal information with them.

"Everything from super details, bank account details, drivers licence, Medicare number - all of the information that scammers can use to impersonate you."

Ms Rickard said scammers often tried to get enough documents from people to tally up 100 points of identity, which is everything they need.

They can then apply for payments from the Government in your name or have your cold, hard superannuation cash deposited into their bank account.

Ms Rickard said with that much information, scammers could even open bank accounts and take out credit cards.

When it comes to superannuation, the ABC has reported on several Australians who have seen funds disappear.

"I think it's just contemptible, super is there for retirement so if someone needs to access it early, it's because they're doing it tough," Ms Rickard said.

*Who are scammers targeting exactly?*

COVID-19 has made all of us more vulnerable.

Jan Marshall fell victim to a romance scam several years ago and now works to warn others and support those who have also been taken advantage of.

With so many people out of work and many of us using online systems for the first time, she says now is a perfect moment for scammers.

"In a time like this, fear is already an underlying emotion and the scammers are using that and utilising that to drive behaviour," Ms Marshall said.

And in this instance, they're using fear that is already there and the climate of fear about basic survival to drive people to do things that they might, in a more rational moment, not do."

Sometimes scammers target people randomly, but they are also known to compile lists of people known to have fallen victim before.

So far this year, Australians aged between 25 and 34 have been the most likely to report their personal details stolen to the ACCC.

*How much have the scammers taken so far?*

Well, quite a lot.

The ACCC said $91 million had been lost to scams so far this year and $22 million of that had been lost to identity theft.

In one example, a victim lost $62,000 after someone created a new account using their personal details.

The scammer then tried to transfer funds from a home loan account and made multiple other transactions.

Among the most egregious examples this year, another Australian was fleeced $181,000 via a dating website.

Over a period of about 73 days in 2012, Ms Marshall loaned more than $260,000 to someone she too met on a dating site.

"When I realised it was a scam, I found out I would never get that money back," she said.

Ms Marshall said initially there was a lot of shame and devastation that came from being scammed and losing the relationship, but then the financial reality set in.

"The future you were planning with the money that you had has to be totally redesigned," she said.

*How to protect yourself*

Firstly, if someone calls you out of the blue and purports to be from a government agency, be very careful.

"Whenever anybody contacts you, whether it's by phone, text, email, always go slowly and really think about who it is that's contacting you and why," Ms Marshall said.

"We need to be a lot more sceptical about the people who are trying to contact us, particularly if it's not solicited in any way."

The ACCC's advice around protecting your personal information is:


Don't be pressured into giving away any personal information by someone who has contacted you, no matter who they say they are
Don't click on links in unexpected emails or messages, even if it appears to have come from a legitimate source.
Use strong passwords for your accounts and internet network, and never share them with others
Install anti-virus software on your devices and keep it up to date
Limit what personal information you share about yourself online, including on social media
Now, the COVID-19 lockdowns might be tough and many of us would like to be socialising more than we are, but if you're online, keep your guard up.

"There is more inclination to look for that social connection, whether it be online dating or just someone who comes onto your Facebook page and says 'hi, would you like to chat'," Ms Marshall said.

"This is what happens with romance scams - it starts off very gentle and unassuming, but it grows very quickly."

Ms Marshall said the thing to remember about romance scams was the victims should feel no shame.

"The victims have done nothing wrong. They have been totally manipulated and abused by people lying and cheating them," she said.

"And those people are criminals."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office fact sheet about extended jobkeeper:









https://www.ato.gov.au/uploadedFiles/Content/CR/downloads/QC63444_Jobkeeper_extension_infograph.pdf


----------



## Jack Malarkey

A Bill to extend the jobkeeper program by six months from September 2020 to March 2021 was introduced into the House of Representatives earlier today (Wednesday 26 August 2020).

The main amendments to give effect to the extended jobkeeper program will come after this Bill becomes law and will be made by the Treasurer (via the jobkeeper rules) and the Australian Taxation Office under legislative delegations made to them by Parliament.

Here is some information about today's Bill:

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar...slation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6583
*Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020*

Type: Government

Portfolio: Treasury

Originating house: House of Representatives

Status: Before Reps

*Progress*

Bill progress

�

House of RepresentativesIntroduced and read a first time26 Aug 2020Second reading moved26 Aug 2020Second reading debate26 Aug 2020

*Documents and transcripts*

*Text of bill*



First reading
  

*Explanatory memoranda*



Explanatory memorandum
  

*Transcript of speeches*

All second reading speeches
Minister's second reading speech
*
Extract from the Treasurer's second reading speech:*

'Schedule 1 to the bill extends the prescribed period of operation for the coronavirus payment framework, enabling the extension of the JobKeeper payment until March 2021.

'Consequently, the ability to make amended rules to give effect to the JobKeeper payment will be extended and the rules can be further amended up until 28 March 2021.

'The bill also amends the relevant information sharing provisions to enable the ATO to share certain JobKeeper payment information with Commonwealth, state and territory government agencies to assist them in their efforts to address the impacts of the coronavirus.'

https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInf...dr/e30437e2-4793-4a18-91ef-dc9e7c8273f1/0009"


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> A Bill to extend the jobkeeper program by six months from September 2020 to March 2021 was introduced into the House of Representatives earlier today (Wednesday 26 August 2020).
> 
> The main amendments to give effect to the extended jobkeeper program will come after this Bill becomes law and will be made by the Treasurer (via the jobkeeper rules) and the Australian Taxation Office under legislative delegations made to them by Parliament.
> 
> Here is some information about today's Bill:
> 
> https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar...slation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6583
> *Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020*
> 
> Type: Government
> 
> Portfolio: Treasury
> 
> Originating house: House of Representatives
> 
> Status: Before Reps
> 
> *Progress*
> 
> Bill progress
> 
> �
> 
> House of RepresentativesIntroduced and read a first time26 Aug 2020Second reading moved26 Aug 2020Second reading debate26 Aug 2020
> 
> *Documents and transcripts*
> 
> *Text of bill*
> 
> 
> 
> First reading
> 
> 
> *Explanatory memoranda*
> 
> 
> 
> Explanatory memorandum
> 
> 
> *Transcript of speeches*
> 
> All second reading speeches
> Minister's second reading speech
> *
> Extract from the Treasurer's second reading speech:*
> 
> 'Schedule 1 to the bill extends the prescribed period of operation for the coronavirus payment framework, enabling the extension of the JobKeeper payment until March 2021.
> 
> 'Consequently, the ability to make amended rules to give effect to the JobKeeper payment will be extended and the rules can be further amended up until 28 March 2021.
> 
> 'The bill also amends the relevant information sharing provisions to enable the ATO to share certain JobKeeper payment information with Commonwealth, state and territory government agencies to assist them in their efforts to address the impacts of the coronavirus.'
> 
> https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInf...dr/e30437e2-4793-4a18-91ef-dc9e7c8273f1/0009"


The jobkeeper extension Bill was passed by the House of Representatives on Wednesday 26 August 2020 and awaits consideration by the Senate.

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar...slation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6583


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The following from business.gov.au will be of interest to those who from 28 September 2020 are no longer eligible for jobkeeper (or jobkeeper at the higher rate) but who are eligible for jobseeker:

*Transition from JobKeeper to JobSeeker *

Changes to the JobKeeper Payment may make recipients of that payment eligible for the JobSeeker Payment or other income support payments. The Government is making further changes to income support arrangements for JobKeeper Payment recipients who transition onto income support.

Income support recipients earning above their income test cut-off point and on a nil rate of income support will be able to continue to keep their concession card and return seamlessly to income support if their earnings reduce below their cut-off point.

Services Australia will allow recipients of the JobKeeper Payment to apply for income support ahead of the cessation of their JobKeeper Payment to ensure individuals can quickly access income support after their access to the JobKeeper Payment ends.

Learn more about the JobSeeker Payment at Services Australia.

SERVICES AUSTRALIA

*JobKeeper Payment for sole traders and other entities | business.gov.au*
_
If you're a sole trader or self-employed, you may be eligible to receive $1500 per fortnight if your turnover has reduced._








www.business.gov.au


----------



## Westside Rider

Jack Malarkey said:


> The following from business.gov.au will be of interest to those who from 28 September 2020 are no longer eligible for jobkeeper (or jobkeeper at the higher rate) but who are eligible for jobseeker:
> 
> *Transition from JobKeeper to JobSeeker *
> 
> Changes to the JobKeeper Payment may make recipients of that payment eligible for the JobSeeker Payment or other income support payments. The Government is making further changes to income support arrangements for JobKeeper Payment recipients who transition onto income support.
> 
> Income support recipients earning above their income test cut-off point and on a nil rate of income support will be able to continue to keep their concession card and return seamlessly to income support if their earnings reduce below their cut-off point.
> 
> Services Australia will allow recipients of the JobKeeper Payment to apply for income support ahead of the cessation of their JobKeeper Payment to ensure individuals can quickly access income support after their access to the JobKeeper Payment ends.
> 
> Learn more about the JobSeeker Payment at Services Australia.
> 
> SERVICES AUSTRALIA
> 
> *JobKeeper Payment for sole traders and other entities | business.gov.au*
> 
> _If you're a sole trader or self-employed, you may be eligible to receive $1500 per fortnight if your turnover has reduced._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.business.gov.au


Why can't we claim both JobKeeper and JobSeeker at the same time.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Westside Rider said:


> Why can't we claim both JobKeeper and JobSeeker at the same time. :wink:


At the present rate of jobkeeper at $1,500 per fortnight, any jobseeker entitlement would be reduced to nil under jobseeker's income test.

That will change for some once the lower rates of extended jobkeeper take effect from 28 September 2020.

For more information, see:

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/the...ow-to-get-both-jobkeeper-and-jobseeker-143109


----------



## Sleepo

Jack Malarkey said:


> At the present rate of jobkeeper at $1,500 per fortnight, any jobseeker entitlement would be reduced to nil under jobseeker's income test.
> 
> That will change for some once the lower rates of extended jobkeeper take effect from 28 September 2020.
> 
> For more information, see:
> 
> https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/the...ow-to-get-both-jobkeeper-and-jobseeker-143109


Just remember that for sole traders jobseeker income test is based on your profit and loss, so if you have expenses you can offset against the job keeper payment, you may be entitled to more jobseeker.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Sleepo said:


> Just remember that for sole traders jobseeker income test is based on your profit and loss, so if you have expenses you can offset against the job keeper payment, you may be entitled to more jobseeker.


True. Thank you, @Sleepo.

Services Australia:

*If you're a sole trader or self employed*

If you're a sole trader or self employed, you must report JobKeeper Payment as business income. You'll have to submit an updated Profit and Loss statement if there's a change to your overall business profit.

If you don't do this, you may owe us money that you'll need to pay back.

https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/individuals/news/reporting-income-from-jobkeeper-payment


----------



## Westside Rider

JobKeeper = $1500 per fortnight and unaffected by any hours worked.

JobSeeker = $1100 per fortnight and affected by any hours worked.

Glad I chose option A over option B back when this covid shit hit the fan.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Westside Rider said:


> JobKeeper = $1500 per fortnight and unaffected by any hours worked.
> 
> JobSeeker = $1100 per fortnight and affected by any hours worked.
> 
> Glad I chose option A over option B back when this covid shit hit the fan.


This is true about jobkeeper until 27 September 2020 (the October 2020 payment). There is, however, retesting of eligibility for the extension of jobkeeper from 28 September 2020 (the November 2020 payment) to 28 March 2021 (the April 2021 payment).

For the period from 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021, you need to have had a decline in turnover of at least 30% for the September quarter in 2020 (1 July 2020 to 30 September 2020) typically compared with the corresponding quarter in 2019. We are now a few days from the final month of the September quarter.

For the period from 4 January 2021 to 28 March 2021, you need to have had a decline in turnover of at least 30% for the December quarter in 2020 (1 October 2020 to 31 December 2020) typically compared with the corresponding quarter in 2019.

Australian Taxation Office fact sheet about the extended jobkeeper program:

https://www.ato.gov.au/uploadedFiles/Content/CR/downloads/QC63444_Jobkeeper_extension_infograph.pdf


----------



## Westside Rider

Not sure whether I'll qualify for the extension given work here has gradually picked up.

Also I was still doing Uber at the same time last year, at that stage I had not switched to taxi yet.


----------



## Still Standing

Sorry if this has been discussed and answered before .. but do we report GST turnover as that gross amount including Uber fees ?
Or is the gross amount including the Uber fee before it is deducted ?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Still Standing said:


> Sorry if this has been discussed and answered before .. but do we report GST turnover as that gross amount including Uber fees ?
> Or is the gross amount including the Uber fee before it is deducted ?


The gross amount (including the Uber service fee) minus the GST on the gross amount (ie, minus one-eleventh of the gross amount).

So if the gross amount including the service fee is $110, your GST turnover is $100 ($110 minus one-eleventh of $110).

Australian Taxation Office:

https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobK...=Basictest#Step3workouttherelevantGSTturnover
_'Projected GST turnover and current GST turnover exclude the following:_


_GST you included in sales to your customers (if any)_
_...'_


----------



## Westside Rider

Still Standing said:


> Sorry if this has been discussed and answered before .. but do we report GST turnover as that gross amount including Uber fees ?
> Or is the gross amount including the Uber fee before it is deducted ?


Uber - your revenue is the gross amount (inc commission, booking fee, tolls etc) since you're technically the one charging the customer to use the service, not Uber.

Ola - your revenue is the net amount (the money Ola deposits into your bank) since it's Ola directly charging the customer to use the service, not the driver.

Edit @Jack Malarkey beat me to it.


----------



## Sleepo

Westside Rider said:


> Uber - your revenue is the gross amount (inc commission, booking fee, tolls etc) since you're technically the one charging the customer to use the service, not Uber.
> 
> Ola - your revenue is the net amount (the money Ola deposits into your bank) since it's Ola directly charging the customer to use the service, not the driver.
> 
> Edit @Jack Malarkey beat me to it.


You forgot to deduct the GST from what Ola paid you.


----------



## Westside Rider

Sleepo said:


> You forgot to deduct the GST from what Ola paid you.


Having never driven for DiDi is their system like Uber's or Ola's when it comes to what your revenue is?


----------



## Sleepo

Westside Rider said:


> Having never driven for DiDi is their system like Uber's or Ola's when it comes to what your revenue is?


as per Uber


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The Bill to extend jobkeeper to 28 March 2021 has now been passed by both Houses of Parliament and awaits Royal Assent.

After that, the detail of the extension will be fleshed out in amendments to the Treasurer's rules. The Australian Taxation Office will also need to legislate various alternative tests.










https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar...slation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6583


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily _

Tuesday 1 September 2020

Jotham Lian

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www...ce/14779-jobkeeper-2-0-legislation-passed/amp
*JobKeeper 2.0 legislation passed*

JobKeeper 2.0 legislation has now passed both houses, with minor amendments that will ensure accountants are entrusted with issuing the 10 per cent decline in turnover certificate.

The Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020 was passed by the Senate on Tuesday after minor technical changes were approved.

The bill extends the historic JobKeeper scheme by a further six months to 28 March 2021, replacing the $1,500 a fortnight payment with a new two-tier payment rate from 28 September 2020.

A legislative instrument setting out the detailed rules for the new rate and the new eligibility criteria based on the decline in turnover for the previous quarter is expected to be issued shortly by Treasurer Josh Frydenberg.

The new bill will also allow legacy employers - those that previously qualified for JobKeeper but are unable to qualify for JobKeeper 2.0 - to continue to access temporary _Fair Work Act _provisions for a further six months if they are experiencing a 10 per cent decline in turnover.

These temporary _Fair Work Act _provisions include giving JobKeeper enabling directions or requests for employees to change their days or times of work.

The minor amendments agreed to now ensure that an eligible financial service provider who is able to issue a 10 per cent decline in turnover certificate is defined as a registered tax agent or BAS agent, or a qualified accountant.

This removes registered company auditors and tax (financial) advisers that were previously included in the definition.

The 10 per cent decline in turnover certificate must confirm, based on the information provided, that the specified employer satisfied the 10 per cent decline in turnover test for the designated quarter applicable to a specified time.

Accountants providing these certificates must be independent and external to the employer, and cannot be a director, employee or associated entity.

There will be a carve-out for small businesses with fewer than 15 employees to allow such employers to provide a statutory declaration to attest to the 10 per cent decline.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

On Wednesday 2 September 2020, the Australian Taxation Office updated its jobkeeper guidance as follows:

https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/JobKeeper-extension-announcement/
*JobKeeper extension announcement*

This information is a summary of the announced extension to the JobKeeper Payment to run from 28 September until 28 March 2021.

The JobKeeper extension will become law when amendments to the JobKeeper Rules are registered.

We will regularly update information once it is available. Information is current at 2 September 2020.

*Extension from 28 September 2020*

The existing JobKeeper scheme runs until 27 September 2020. The Government has announced that the JobKeeper scheme will be extended from 28 September 2020 until 28 March 2021.

There are two separate extension periods. For each extension period, an additional actual fall in turnover test applies and the rate of the JobKeeper payment is different.

Alternative tests for determining turnover and payment rates may be available in some circumstances. We will publish more information as it becomes available.

The extension periods are:


Extension 1: from 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021
Extension 2: from 4 January 2021 to 28 March 2021
*The rates of payment will change*

The rate of the JobKeeper Payment will depend on the number of hours an eligible employee works or an eligible business participant is actively engaged in the business. It will be split into two rates.


Tier 1 rate:Tier 2 rate:This rate is expected to apply to:

eligible employees who worked for 80 hours or more in the four weeks of pay periods before either 1 March 2020 or 1 July 2020, and
eligible business participants who were actively engaged in the business for 80 hours or more in February and provide a declaration to that effect.
This rate is expected to apply to:

any other eligible employees and eligible business participants.


Employers and businesses will need to nominate the rate they are claiming for each eligible employee and/or eligible business participant.

The rate of the JobKeeper Payment is also different for each extension period.

*JobKeeper Extension 1*

This extension period will run from 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021.

You will need to demonstrate that your actual GST turnover has fallen in the September 2020 quarter (July, August, September) relative to a comparable period (generally the corresponding quarter in 2019).

If you were receiving JobKeeper for fortnights before 28 September, you have already satisfied the original fall in turnover test.

The rates of the JobKeeper Payment in this extension period are:


Tier 1: $1,200 per fortnight (before tax)
Tier 2: $750 per fortnight (before tax).
*JobKeeper Extension 2*

This extension period will run from 4 January 2021 to 28 March 2021.

You will need to demonstrate that your actual GST turnover has fallen in the December 2020 quarter (October, November, December) relative to a comparable period (generally the corresponding quarter in 2019).

If you were receiving JobKeeper for fortnights before 28 September, you have already satisfied the original fall in turnover test.

You can be eligible for JobKeeper Extension 2 even if you were not eligible for JobKeeper Extension 1.

The rates of the JobKeeper Payment in this extension period are:


Tier 1: $1,000 per fortnight (before tax)
Tier 2: $650 per fortnight (before tax).
*Businesses or not-for-profits*

*What you need to do*

From 28 September 2020, you must do all of the following:


work out if the Tier 1 or Tier 2 rate applies to each of your eligible employees and/or eligible business participants and/or eligible religious practitioners
notify the Commissioner and your eligible employees and/or eligible business participants and/or eligible religious practitioners what payment rate applies to them; and
during JobKeeper Extension 1, ensure your eligible employees are paid at least
$1,200 per fortnight for Tier 1 employees
$750 per fortnight for Tier 2 employees

during JobKeeper Extension 2, ensure your eligible employees are paid at least
$1,000 per fortnight for Tier 1 employees
$650 per fortnight for Tier 2 employees.

For your eligible religious practitioners, you must provide certain benefits to them in the fortnight.

If you are registered for GST and have outstanding BAS statements, you should lodge your BAS for the September 2019 and December 2019 quarters as soon as possible (or for equivalent months, if you report monthly)..

*Fall in turnover*

To claim for fortnights in the JobKeeper Extension 1, you need to determine if you satisfy the actual fall in turnover test for the September 2020 quarter, you must calculate your GST turnover for the quarter of September 2019 and September 2020.

We will provide more information soon as to how to undertake this calculation.

For many businesses registered for GST, this calculation will match the 'total sales' reported at G1 on your BAS minus GST payable (1A), where applicable.

You can provide additional turnover information to demonstrate that you satisfy the actual fall in turnover test for the September quarter from the start of October onwards. You must provide it before you complete your November monthly declaration.

*What doesn't change*

To claim for fortnights in the JobKeeper Extension 1 or 2:


You don't need to re-enrol for the JobKeeper extension if you are already enrolled for JobKeeper for fortnights before 28 September.
You don't need to reassess employee eligibility or ask employees to agree to be nominated by you as their eligible employer if you are already claiming for them before 28 September.
You don't need to meet any further requirements if you are claiming for an eligible business participant, other than those that applied from the start of JobKeeper relating to:
holding an ABN, and
declaring assessable income and supplies.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> On Wednesday 2 September 2020, the Australian Taxation Office updated its jobkeeper guidance as follows:
> 
> https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/JobKeeper-extension-announcement/
> *JobKeeper extension announcement*
> 
> This information is a summary of the announced extension to the JobKeeper Payment to run from 28 September until 28 March 2021.
> 
> The JobKeeper extension will become law when amendments to the JobKeeper Rules are registered.
> 
> We will regularly update information once it is available. Information is current at 2 September 2020.
> 
> *Extension from 28 September 2020*
> 
> The existing JobKeeper scheme runs until 27 September 2020. The Government has announced that the JobKeeper scheme will be extended from 28 September 2020 until 28 March 2021.
> 
> There are two separate extension periods. For each extension period, an additional actual fall in turnover test applies and the rate of the JobKeeper payment is different.
> 
> Alternative tests for determining turnover and payment rates may be available in some circumstances. We will publish more information as it becomes available.
> 
> The extension periods are:
> 
> 
> Extension 1: from 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021
> Extension 2: from 4 January 2021 to 28 March 2021
> *The rates of payment will change*
> 
> The rate of the JobKeeper Payment will depend on the number of hours an eligible employee works or an eligible business participant is actively engaged in the business. It will be split into two rates.
> 
> 
> Tier 1 rate:Tier 2 rate:This rate is expected to apply to:
> 
> eligible employees who worked for 80 hours or more in the four weeks of pay periods before either 1 March 2020 or 1 July 2020, and
> eligible business participants who were actively engaged in the business for 80 hours or more in February and provide a declaration to that effect.
> This rate is expected to apply to:
> 
> any other eligible employees and eligible business participants.
> 
> 
> Employers and businesses will need to nominate the rate they are claiming for each eligible employee and/or eligible business participant.
> 
> The rate of the JobKeeper Payment is also different for each extension period.
> 
> *JobKeeper Extension 1*
> 
> This extension period will run from 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021.
> 
> You will need to demonstrate that your actual GST turnover has fallen in the September 2020 quarter (July, August, September) relative to a comparable period (generally the corresponding quarter in 2019).
> 
> If you were receiving JobKeeper for fortnights before 28 September, you have already satisfied the original fall in turnover test.
> 
> The rates of the JobKeeper Payment in this extension period are:
> 
> 
> Tier 1: $1,200 per fortnight (before tax)
> Tier 2: $750 per fortnight (before tax).
> *JobKeeper Extension 2*
> 
> This extension period will run from 4 January 2021 to 28 March 2021.
> 
> You will need to demonstrate that your actual GST turnover has fallen in the December 2020 quarter (October, November, December) relative to a comparable period (generally the corresponding quarter in 2019).
> 
> If you were receiving JobKeeper for fortnights before 28 September, you have already satisfied the original fall in turnover test.
> 
> You can be eligible for JobKeeper Extension 2 even if you were not eligible for JobKeeper Extension 1.
> 
> The rates of the JobKeeper Payment in this extension period are:
> 
> 
> Tier 1: $1,000 per fortnight (before tax)
> Tier 2: $650 per fortnight (before tax).
> *Businesses or not-for-profits*
> 
> *What you need to do*
> 
> From 28 September 2020, you must do all of the following:
> 
> 
> work out if the Tier 1 or Tier 2 rate applies to each of your eligible employees and/or eligible business participants and/or eligible religious practitioners
> notify the Commissioner and your eligible employees and/or eligible business participants and/or eligible religious practitioners what payment rate applies to them; and
> during JobKeeper Extension 1, ensure your eligible employees are paid at least
> $1,200 per fortnight for Tier 1 employees
> $750 per fortnight for Tier 2 employees
> 
> during JobKeeper Extension 2, ensure your eligible employees are paid at least
> $1,000 per fortnight for Tier 1 employees
> $650 per fortnight for Tier 2 employees.
> 
> For your eligible religious practitioners, you must provide certain benefits to them in the fortnight.
> 
> If you are registered for GST and have outstanding BAS statements, you should lodge your BAS for the September 2019 and December 2019 quarters as soon as possible (or for equivalent months, if you report monthly)..
> 
> *Fall in turnover*
> 
> To claim for fortnights in the JobKeeper Extension 1, you need to determine if you satisfy the actual fall in turnover test for the September 2020 quarter, you must calculate your GST turnover for the quarter of September 2019 and September 2020.
> 
> We will provide more information soon as to how to undertake this calculation.
> 
> For many businesses registered for GST, this calculation will match the 'total sales' reported at G1 on your BAS minus GST payable (1A), where applicable.
> 
> You can provide additional turnover information to demonstrate that you satisfy the actual fall in turnover test for the September quarter from the start of October onwards. You must provide it before you complete your November monthly declaration.
> 
> *What doesn't change*
> 
> To claim for fortnights in the JobKeeper Extension 1 or 2:
> 
> 
> You don't need to re-enrol for the JobKeeper extension if you are already enrolled for JobKeeper for fortnights before 28 September.
> You don't need to reassess employee eligibility or ask employees to agree to be nominated by you as their eligible employer if you are already claiming for them before 28 September.
> You don't need to meet any further requirements if you are claiming for an eligible business participant, other than those that applied from the start of JobKeeper relating to:
> holding an ABN, and
> declaring assessable income and supplies.


There's a confusing and misleading paragraph that appears twice in the Tax Office overview: once under the heading 'JobKeeper Extension 1' and once under the heading 'Jobkeeper 2'.

This is the paragraph:

_'If you were receiving JobKeeper for fortnights 28 September, you have already satisfied the original fall in turnover test'._

The paragraph is confusing and misleading in the context of mandatory retesting of eligibility.

In my view, this paragraph should be omitted in both places.

https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/JobKeeper-extension-announcement/


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The Bill to extend jobkeeper by six months to 28 March 2021 is now law, having received royal assent on Thursday 3 September 2020 (Act No. 81 of 2020).

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar...slation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6583


----------



## Jack Malarkey

ABC Australia

Tuesday 8 September 2020

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.abc.net.au/article/12638334
*JobKeeper loophole will tempt thousands of Australians to rort the system, accountants warn*

By business reporter David Taylor

There appears to be a large loophole in the assessment of who is eligible for the extended JobKeeper payment, and tax experts worry it is going to be exploited by hundreds of thousands of Australians.

*Key points:*

_The activity test for sole traders means they need to be "actively engaged in the business" for 20 hours a week to receive the fulJobKeeper rate

Accountants say it is unclear what "actively engaged" means; would thinking about the business while washing the dishes count?

Some small business operators are profiting from JobKeeper and say they have already seen instances of people rorting the system_

In order to receive the full $1,200 per week in wage support, sole traders will need to show the Tax Office they are working more than 20 hours per week from Monday September 28.

"What you're pointing out is a tempting opportunity," Chartered Accountants tax lead Michael Croker said.

Chartered Accountants represents 120,000 number crunchers around the country.

But the profession is already expressing concerns about exactly how small businesses, particularly sole traders, will tally up their hours of work each week.

The Treasurer announced that for sole traders that they needed to be 'actively engaged in the business' for 20 hours or more per week to get the higher rate," Mr Croker explained, noting that they would otherwise only be eligible for the part-time rate of $750.

"Now, you could be washing the dishes at night and thinking about your business at the same time - that's a very loose test."

It might be a very loose test, but Newcastle-based hairdressing salon owner Sandy Chong said it also reflected reality.

If you own a business, you work 24/7," she told PM.

"They go home and they actually work on their business all of the time.

"And so I can understand that you would be washing up and you would be thinking about what it is that you need to do, how can I be resourceful at this time, and what is it that I need to do to make my business survive.

"So thinking about your business when you wash up? Yep, that's definitely working."

'Always some who will manipulate the system'

The CEO of the Council of Small Business, Peter Strong, has also come to the defence of his members.

"Lots of small business people go on holidays and still work more than 20 hours per week, just by the nature of what they're in," he added.

But there is evidence some businesses are already gaming the JobKeeper wage subsidy scheme.

As a member of the Australian hairdressing council, Sandy Chong talks to businesses right across the country.

"For the majority of businesses that are getting JobKeeper, they've been really appreciative, and it's really helped their cashflow," she observed.

"Unfortunately there's always some who will manipulate the system, and it does appear to be happening in some small businesses and sole traders around the country."

She told PM some retailers were intentionally closing their doors for a couple of days to push down their turnover and meet the JobKeeper cut-off of a 30 per cent or greater fall in revenue.

What that does of course is to reduce their income, and they're trying to be eligible for JobKeeper until March," she explained.

"And it's pretty unfair when you've got a lot of the country trying to do the right thing."

'The temptation exists for everybody'

Mr Strong concedes most of the pandemic economic policies, including JobKeeper 2.0, require a degree of honesty for those applying for assistance and are open to rorting.

"What we expect to see is common sense prevail around this," he argued.

"We're about the economy and jobs, not about compliance and regulation."

PM asked Mr Strong if he accepted that the design of JobKeeper 2.0 would tempt millions of Australians to rort the tax system.

"The temptation exists for everybody, whether you're a normal taxpayer or a business owner to do these things, but in the business community, most people are quite scared of the Tax Office," he responded.

That fear may be justified.

The ATO has established the JobKeeper Integrity Unit with the sole purpose of making sure JobKeeper goes to those who genuinely need it.

It has also, PM understands, worked with the designers of the single-touch payroll system to see if an effective way of accurately monitoring hours worked can be developed.

As to what the Tax Office can do right now to prevent rorting, PM asked the ATO for a response but did not hear back before deadline.

However, as Chartered Accountants' Michael Croker pointed out, even if businesses do receive cash they are not entitled to, given the extraordinary pressure on all business right now, the policy is still bound to do its job anyway.

"That is the purpose of JobKeeper - to get the money out into the community and to support desirable consumer spending behaviour," he argued.

That is, of course, assuming businesses do actually use the money.

Ms Chong fears many businesses will game the system only to stash the cash.

"Even with my own business, we've done quite well with JobKeeper," she noted.

"Because, you know, the hard thing with the pandemic is that we're just not sure what tomorrow will bring.

"And so there are some businesses that have done really well, but they're holding onto that cashflow just in case."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_SmartCompany_

*Explained: How sole traders and SMEs can access JobKeeper 2.0*

_Businesses won't need to re-enrol to access JobKeeper 2.0, but they will need to tell the ATO who was working in their business in February._







www.smartcompany.com.au

MATTHEW ELMAS

SEPTEMBER 8, 2020

It's t-minus 20 days until JobKeeper 2.0 replaces the existing wage subsidy program, kicking thousands of businesses across the country off the scheme under tighter eligibility rules.

But for those hoping to retain access to the government payments, there are some things you need to know about how JobKeeper 2.0 is going to work.

The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) has issued new guidance to businesses about the JobKeeper extension, and although some of the finer points are still being settled, it has been clarified that businesses will not need to re-enroll into the program or re-assess employee eligibility.

Here's what we know:

*Small businesses: How to prepare for JobKeeper 2.0*

The second phase of JobKeeper kicks off on September 28 and will run to January 3, 2021.

The same fortnightly payment schedule as the first phase of the program will apply, including existing wage payment deadlines.

Under JobKeeper 2.0 there will be two tiers of payments, depending on how many hours staff have worked for in the past. This bit is important because the language appears to have changed since the federal government first announced the extension in July.

While it was initially announced workers would receive the higher tier of payments if they worked 20 hours or more for their employer each week in February, the ATO has since moved to a monthly measurement.

Under new guidance, eligible employees who worked 80 hours or more in the four weekly pay periods before either March 1 or July 1 will receive the tier one rate, worth $1,200 per fortnight before tax.

All other eligible staff that do not meet this threshold will be paid under the second tier, worth $750 a fortnight.

Businesses are required to nominate the rate they are claiming for each eligible worker, but do not need to re-assess eligibility or gain additional permission for staff that are already being paid under the program.

As was the case under JobKeeper phase one, businesses are required to meet the minimum wage condition (i.e. paying their workers first) before being reimbursed through the subsidy scheme.

*Sole traders: How to prepare for JobKeeper 2.0*

Sole traders looking to claim JobKeeper payments for themselves under the second phase will need to provide declarations about their involvement in their businesses during February.

Essentially, eligible business participants must have been actively engaged in their business for 80 hours or more in February to claim the higher tier of payments, worth $1,200 per fortnight.

Sole traders who don't make this declaration will be entitled to the lower tier, worth $750 a fortnight.

*Eligibility: What business owners need to know*

To be eligible for JobKeeper 2.0 payments, businesses must show an actual fall in turnover of at least 30% for the September 2020 quarter, including calculations of GST turnover for the September 2019 comparison quarter.

While the ATO has yet to provide specific details on how this calculation should be undertaken, Business Activity Statements (BAS) will be integral.

"For many businesses registered for GST, this calculation will match the 'total sales' reported at G1 on your BAS minus GST payable (1A), where applicable," the ATO said.

"You can provide additional turnover information to demonstrate that you satisfy the actual fall in turnover test for the September quarter from the start of October onwards. You must provide it before you complete your November monthly declaration."

*What about alternative tests?*

The ATO says it will make some alternative tests available for special circumstances soon.

*What about JobKeeper 3.0?*

From January 4, 2021 to March 28, 2021, JobKeeper will move from phase two to a third stage.

JobKeeper 3.0 will be ostensibly the same as the second phase, albeit with lower payments:


The first (higher) tier will be worth $1,000 per fortnight; and
The second (lower) tier will be worth $650 per fortnight.
This second extension will require businesses to demonstrate an actual fall in GST turnover of at least 30% in the December 2020 quarter against a comparable period in 2019.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Yahoo Finance_

*The $500 loophole that lets you 'double dip' on JobKeeper 2.0*

_Some Australians will be able to claim both JobKeeper and JobSeeker even after cuts to the wage subsidy._

Jessica Yun

9 September 2020, 8.33 am

Australians receiving JobKeeper are able to 'top up' their wage subsidy ahead of the scheduled cuts by claiming JobSeeker, which will see some gain more than $500 a fortnight.

After the end of September, JobKeeper and JobSeeker are both set to fall by roughly $300 respectively.

While the JobKeeper scheme has now officially been extended for another six months, the current $1,500 a fortnight rate will fall to $1,200 for those who work 20 hours or more, while those who work less than 20 hours will receive $750 per fortnight. These rates will slide again on 4 January.

The current boost to JobSeeker, the $550 a fortnight Coronavirus Supplement, will be revised down to $250 a fortnight and extended until at least December.

But now, Aussies are able to claim both 'JobKeeper 2.0' and a limited rate of JobSeeker, reported _news.com.au_.

According to Social Services Minister Anne Rushton, someone receiving JobKeeper at $1,200 a fortnight might also be eligible to claim $276 of JobSeeker, which brings their total government support payments to $1,476.

Meanwhile, someone on the part-time JobKeeper rate of $750 a fortnight will be able to claim up to $546, which brings their total payments to $1,295.

"I would encourage any Victorian, or Australian for that matter, who is concerned about changes to their employment or has had their income reduced to test their eligibility for JobSeeker or related payments,''
Senator Rushton said.

"Our social security safety net is not just for people who have lost their jobs, it is able to provide a cushion for people who have had or fear their hours or income will be reduced.

"Anyone earning an income simply needs to report the amount earned to Services Australia each fortnight, which can be done online, over the phone or on the app."

_Yahoo Finance_ has contacted Treasury, Services Australia and Social Services Minister Anne Rushton for comment.

The fastest and easiest way to claim JobSeeker is online or through the phone, Government Services Minister Stuart Robert said in early August, with Victorian callers prioritised due to the Stage Four restrictions.

If your employment has changed, you can check your eligibility for government support at servicesaustralia.gov.au/covid19 and start applying, he added.

"People can start applying now and activate if they leave or have reduced employment and do not need to come into a service centre to confirm their identity and get a Customer Reference Number."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Email received from the Australian Taxation Office on Wednesday 9 September 2020 at 5.38 pm AEST:










*Include JobKeeper payments in your assessable income*Contact Name: Jack Malarkey
ABN:HelloWe know 2020 has been a difficult year for most and we want you to know that we have support available for you to meet your tax and super obligations.

Our records show that you or your business received JobKeeper payments in the 2019-20 financial year.
*What you need to know for your 2019-20 tax return*
JobKeeper payments are assessable income and any JobKeeper payments you received in 2019-20 need to be included in your 2019-20 tax return. If you have already lodged your tax return but did not include these payments, you will need to amend your return and add them.

If you have repaid or are in the process of repaying some or all of your JobKeeper payments to the ATO, you do not need to include these amounts in your tax return.

The normal rules for deductibility apply in respect of the amounts your business pays to its employees where those amounts are subsidised by the JobKeeper payment.

If you're a sole trader, you need to include the payments as business income in your individual tax return.

If your business is a partnership or trust, the payments need to be reported as business income on your partnership or trust tax return.

If your business is a company, the payments need to be reported as income on your company tax return.You can find more information on how to include JobKeeper payments in your income tax return at ato.gov.au/sbsupport


----------



## Jack Malarkey

7 News

*This JobKeeper hack could earn you hundreds more each fortnight*
_
The double-dipping could add hundreds of dollars to Australian workers' pay packets._

The JobKeeper and JobSeeker payment hack you need to know

Allie Godfrey

Published: 09/09/2020

Updated: 9 September 2020 8:41 pm

Australians on JobKeeper payments can claim JobSeeker to top up their income - and the federal government is actively encouraging people to do so when the payments are reduced on September 27.

The double-dipping hack could add hundreds of dollars to workers' pay packets each week.

Federal Minister for Family and Social Services Anne Ruston told 7NEWS.com.au claiming JobKeeper does not exclude people from claiming income support from the federal government.

"Our social security safety net is not just for people who have lost their jobs," Ruston said.
"It is able to provide a cushion for people who have had [their hours or income reduced] or fear their hours or income will be reduced.

"As we transition our economy, we are ensuring the supports we have in place are much more targeted to individual circumstances.

From September 27, the rate of JobKeeper will drop from $1500 per fortnight to $1200 per fortnight for full-time employees, and $750 per fortnight for people employed under 20 hours.

The part-time JobKeeper rate will then be less than the new rate of JobSeeker, which is $815 per fortnight.

The federal government hopes that allowing Australians to claim both payments will keep them working during the pandemic.

*Double dipping*

Workers no longer need to prove they are unemployed, or have an employment separation certificate, to access JobSeeker payments.

To claim JobSeeker, Australians must meet the income test, which is a maximum income of $1257 per fortnight, as well as residency requirements, assets test and mutual obligations.

Someone who is receiving JobKeeper at a rate of $1200 per fortnight may be eligible for a part payment of JobSeeker of about $276 per fortnight (including Coronavirus Supplement), bringing their total taxpayer-funded income to $1476.

Someone receiving JobKeeper at the part-time rate of $750 per fortnight could be eligible for a part payment of JobSeeker (including Coronavirus Supplement) of about $545 per fortnight.

Their total taxpayer-funded income would then rise to $1295 per fortnight.

It is also worth keeping in mind that people on JobSeeker who have children are automatically eligible for the full rate of Family Tax Benefit.

They may also be eligible for rent assistance of up to $139 per fortnight for singles.

"I would encourage any Victorian, or Australian for that matter, who is concerned about changes to their employment or has had their income reduced to test their eligibility for JobSeeker or related payments," Ruston said.

"Anyone earning an income simply needs to report the amount earned to Services Australia each fortnight, which can be done online, over the phone or on the app."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

On Monday 14 September 2020, the Australian Taxation Office included on its website some additional text about business participants:

*Eligible business participants for JobKeeper*

_Check if your business can claim the JobKeeper Payment for an eligible business participant._







www.ato.gov.au

*'Eligible business participants for JobKeeper*

'If you've enrolled for the JobKeeper Payment, don't forget to check if you can nominate an eligible business participant.

'An eligible business participant is an individual who's not an employee of your business but is actively engaged in its operation. For example, they might manage the sale of your business' goods, or exercise control over the business' strategy.

'To be eligible for JobKeeper payments, the business participant must be an individual who is:

a sole trader (and is not bankrupt)
a director of, or shareholder in, a company
a partner of a partnership (but not through an interposed entity, for example an individual trustee of a trust that is a partner in a partnership)
an adult beneficiary of a trust (who is not the trustee).
'The individual must also have been actively engaged in the business at 1 March 2020 and in the fortnight that the JobKeeper payment is claimed. For instance, if your eligible business participant is on leave, you cannot claim JobKeeper payments for JobKeeper fortnights that fall in that time period.

'As of 20 July 2020, approved providers of child care services can't claim JobKeeper payments for business participants.

'Unlike employees, the rules registered by the government last month did not change the key date for assessing business participants' eligibility.

'*Key points to remember*

An eligible business participant must be an individual.
An individual can only count as either an eligible employee or an eligible business participant, not both.
Your business can only have one eligible business participant - even if the individual you have nominated as eligible business participant leaves your business, you can't nominate someone else to replace them.
Even if your business has several people who meet the eligibility criteria (such as all partners in a partnership, or a board of directors), you can only nominate one individual as your eligible business participant.
'See also:

Sole traders
Partnerships, trusts and companies
JobKeeper nomination notice for eligible business participants - excluding sole traders
JobKeeper - application form for Commissioner's discretion in respect of an eligible business participant
Last modified: 14 Sep 2020 QC 6345'


----------



## Jack Malarkey

For a business participant, can hours worked in June 2020 be taken into account under the basic test for the higher rate of payment (tier 1)?

I have thought so on the basis that June 2020 is an alternative to February 2020 as the reference period (including for business participants).

This interpretation was based on the Treasury fact sheet for extended jobkeeper. The relevant part of the fact sheet reads:

'The JobKeeper Payment rate

'From 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021, the JobKeeper Payment rates will be:

• $1,200 per fortnight for all eligible employees who were working in the business or not- for-profit for 20 hours or more a week on average in the four weeks of pay periods before either 1 March 2020 or 1 July 2020, and for eligible business participants who were actively engaged in the business for 20 hours or more per week on average; and
• $750 per fortnight for other eligible employees and business participants.

'From 4 January 2021 to 28 March 2021, the JobKeeper Payment rates will be:

• $1,000 per fortnight for all eligible employees who were working in the business or not- for-profit for 20 hours or more a week on average in the four weeks of pay periods before either 1 March 2020 or 1 July 2020, and for business participants who were actively engaged in the business for 20 hours or more per week on average; and
• $650 per fortnight for other eligible employees and business participants. Businesses and not-for-profits will be required to nominate which payment rate they are claiming for each of their eligible employees (or business participants).

'The Commissioner of Taxation will have discretion to set out alternative tests where an employee or business participant's hours were not usual during the February and/or June 2020 reference period (the period with the higher number of hours worked is to be used for employees with 1 March 2020 eligibility). For example, this will include where the employee was on leave, volunteering during the bushfires, or not employed for all or part of February or June 2020.'

https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-08/Fact_sheet-JobKeeper_Payment_extension_1.pdf

Yet the Australian Taxation Office has more recently stated:

'This [higher] rate is expected to apply to:


eligible employees who worked for 80 hours or more in the four weeks of pay periods before either 1 March 2020 or 1 July 2020, and
eligible business participants who were actively engaged in the business for 80 hours or more in February and provide a declaration to that effect.'

JobKeeper extension announcement
_Find out about JobKeeper extension and how changes affect you._








www.ato.gov.au
Note that the Tax Office says nothing about June 2020 in the context of business participants. (The Tax Office also doesn't say anything about an alternative test.)
We'll need to wait for the Treasurer's amended rules to clarify this matter. We should find out soon.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> For a business participant, can hours worked in June 2020 be taken into account under the basic test for the higher rate of payment (tier 1)?
> 
> I have thought so on the basis that June 2020 is an alternative to February 2020 as the reference period (including for business participants).
> 
> This interpretation was based on the Treasury fact sheet for extended jobkeeper. The relevant part of the fact sheet reads:
> 
> 'The JobKeeper Payment rate
> 
> 'From 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021, the JobKeeper Payment rates will be:
> 
> • $1,200 per fortnight for all eligible employees who were working in the business or not- for-profit for 20 hours or more a week on average in the four weeks of pay periods before either 1 March 2020 or 1 July 2020, and for eligible business participants who were actively engaged in the business for 20 hours or more per week on average; and
> • $750 per fortnight for other eligible employees and business participants.
> 
> 'From 4 January 2021 to 28 March 2021, the JobKeeper Payment rates will be:
> 
> • $1,000 per fortnight for all eligible employees who were working in the business or not- for-profit for 20 hours or more a week on average in the four weeks of pay periods before either 1 March 2020 or 1 July 2020, and for business participants who were actively engaged in the business for 20 hours or more per week on average; and
> • $650 per fortnight for other eligible employees and business participants. Businesses and not-for-profits will be required to nominate which payment rate they are claiming for each of their eligible employees (or business participants).
> 
> 'The Commissioner of Taxation will have discretion to set out alternative tests where an employee or business participant's hours were not usual during the February and/or June 2020 reference period (the period with the higher number of hours worked is to be used for employees with 1 March 2020 eligibility). For example, this will include where the employee was on leave, volunteering during the bushfires, or not employed for all or part of February or June 2020.'
> 
> https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-08/Fact_sheet-JobKeeper_Payment_extension_1.pdf
> 
> Yet the Australian Taxation Office has more recently stated:
> 
> 'This [higher] rate is expected to apply to:
> 
> 
> eligible employees who worked for 80 hours or more in the four weeks of pay periods before either 1 March 2020 or 1 July 2020, and
> eligible business participants who were actively engaged in the business for 80 hours or more in February and provide a declaration to that effect.'
> 
> JobKeeper extension announcement
> _Find out about JobKeeper extension and how changes affect you._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ato.gov.au
> Note that the Tax Office says nothing about June 2020 in the context of business participants. (The Tax Office also doesn't say anything about an alternative test.)
> We'll need to wait for the Treasurer's amended rules to clarify this matter. We should find out soon.


DriveTax reached the same conclusion as I did:

*Coronavirus JobKeeper Payments & other Tax Breaks for Uber Drivers*

_Uber & Rideshare drivers, learn how to apply for Coronavirus JobKeeper & JobSeeker payments from Centrelink, plus all the ATO tax breaks & other COVID-19 support you can access._







www.drivetax.com.au

_'The other major change is that the JobKeeper payment amount will decreasefrom the 28th of September (i.e. the early November payment), and the amount you receive will now depend on how many hours you worked on average in either February 2020 or June 2020:_


_If in EITHER February 2020 or June 2020 you worked on average 20+ hours per week your JobKeeper payment will go down as follows:_
_$1,200/fn from 28th of September 2020 to 3rd January 2021_
_$1,000/fn from 3rd of January 2021 to 28th of March 2021_

_If you do not meet this criteria, meaning you did not work on average more than 20 hours per week in either February 2020 or June 2020, then your JobKeeper payment will go down as follows:_
_$750/fn from 28th of September 2020 to 3rd January 2021_
_$650/fn from 3rd of January 2021 to 28th of March 2021_

_'You can find the government's fact sheet here:_


Treasury - JobKeeper Extension Fact Sheet'


----------



## Jack Malarkey

New Treasurer's jobkeeper rules have been made.

See the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Amendment Rules (No. 8) 2020.

Explanatory statement:

Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Amendment Rules (No. 8) 2020

We still await the legislative instrument to be made by the Commissioner of Taxation (Australian Taxation Office) setting out alternative tests for decline in turnover and also the alternative test for the working hours for the higher rate of payment.

The Treasurer's rules (as amended) specify ONLY February 2020 as the reference month for the working hours basic test for a business participant for the higher rate of payment. (June 2020 is listed as an alternative to February 2020 for employees but NOT for business participants.)

To obtain the higher rate a business participant needs to have been 'actively engaged in the business' for at least 80 hours in February 2020.

The rules do NOT specify anything more detailed than this.

The accompanying explanatory statement also does NOT provide any relevant explanation of this.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

On Wednesday 16 September 2020, the Commissioner of Taxation (Australian Taxation Office) made and registered the first of several legislative instruments.

This first instrument concerns the attribution of GST supplies and is unlikely to be relevant to rideshare drivers.

Legislative instrument:

Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) (Timing of Supplies Made and Decline in Turnover Test) Rules 2020 (No.1)

Explanatory statement:

Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) (Timing of Supplies Made and Decline in Turnover Test) Rules 2020 (No.1)

This legislative instrument does NOT have any content providing for alternative decline in turnover tests.

There will be additional legislative instruments made by the Tax Office.

I will make posts about them as they become available.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office:

*(Information about alternative tests for decline in turnover or for monthly working hours for the higher* *rate of payment is NOT yet available.)*

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*
A timeline of new and updated JobKeeper Payment information on ato.gov.au.







www.ato.gov.au

JobKeeper - timeline of content updates

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:
...

16 September


16 SeptemberNew: We have published new information based on the JobKeeper Payment extension law being passed - for an overall summary of changes see, JobKeeper extension.

Payment rates
80-hour threshold for employees
Decline in turnover tests
Actual decline in turnover test
Updates: We have published updates to content based on the JobKeeper Payment extension law being passed.

JobKeeper key dates
Employers
Eligible employers
Your eligible employees
Partnerships, trusts and companies
Not-for-profits and charities
Religious institutions
Sole traders
Exercise of the Commissioner's discretion
Employees
How the JobKeeper payment affects income support payments
Paying your eligible employees
Tax and BAS agents
Keeping JobKeeper payment fair
JobKeeper overpayments
Creating your own employee nomination notice
Original decline in turnover test
Turnover test for universities
Employee test requirements
Better practice governance and JobKeeper payments for large public and multinational groups


*Australian Taxation Office information for sole traders about the 80 hours test for the higher rate of payment:*

*Sole traders*
ATO information about the JobKeeper Payment scheme for sole traders.







www.ato.gov.au

'From 28 September 2020, the JobKeeper payment rate will depend on whether you were actively engaged in your business for at least 80 hours in your reference period (generally February 2020).

'The hours that you spent actively engaged in your business can include, but are not limited to, time spent on the following activities:


providing services, or selling goods
supervising and managing the performance of employees
negotiating contracts with suppliers and customers including providing quotes
drawing up business plans and planning or budgeting reports
managing the record keeping and accounts, including the use of the documents for analysis
making financial, legal and tax decisions, including time spent on obtaining professional advice (for example ensuring the business complies with legal and regulatory obligations)
managing commercial risks of the business
'You would not be actively engaged in the business whilst doing personal (non-business) activities, merely because you think about your business during this time.

Example 2 - Hours actively engaged in a business

Nishanth is a plumber carrying on a business. His business has grown and since hiring 2 plumbers he has spent less time providing the services personally and spends the day providing quotes, dealing with suppliers and managing employees. These activities would still be counted towards the calculation of hours actively engaged in Nishanth's business.'


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The Australian Taxation Office on Thursday 17 September 2020 made and registered the legislative instrument providing for the alternative test for the monthly 80 hour requirement for business participants to receive the higher rate of payment.

See section 7 (concerning business participants) of:

Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Alternative Reference Period Determination 2020

The accompanying explanatory statement is available at:

Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Alternative Reference Period Determination 2020

This legislation is difficult to understand. The Tax Office will provide additional guidance on this matter soon.

(We are still awaiting details of the alternative test for decline in turnover.)

Paragraph 50 of the explanatory statement provides an easy-to-understand explanation of the alternative test:

'_50. For example, if the eligible business participant was absent through sickness in February 2020, causing that month not to be representative of a typical month, the alternative reference period would be the most recent 29-day period (wholly within a calendar month) in which they were not sick. If there were also circumstances in the earlier month that cause it not to be representative of a typical month, the alternative reference period would be the most recent month in which no such circumstances existed.'_


----------



## Jack Malarkey

My understanding of the test is that if February 2020 wasn’t a typical month for you and that caused you to drop below 80 hours, you can keep going backwards (not forwards) in time until you reach a 29-day period within a calendar month that was typical.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Are details of the alternative actual decline in turnover test coming soon?_

Australian Taxation Office:

'Alternative test

'Alternative tests for determining actual decline in turnover will be available in some circumstances. These will apply in a similar way to the alternative tests for the original decline in turnover test. However, they must be applied on the basis that the turnover test period is a quarter. We will publish further guidance on the alternative tests for actual decline in turnover test soon.

'Last modified: 16 Sep 2020'

*Actual decline in turnover test*

(I can confirm that the Australian Taxation Office did not make and register a legislative instrument relevant to this matter on Thursday 17 September 2020.)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Canberra Times

*Tax office monitoring misuse of JobKeeper*_

SEPTEMBER 17 2020 - 3:01 PM

Daniel McCulloch

*
TAX OFFICE MONITORS JOBKEEPER MISUSE:*

* 9000 tip-offs about alleged misuse of JobKeeper

* 2200 employees found to be double-dipping on multiple payments

* 15,000 ineligible companies removed from scheme

* $75 million of overpaid JobKeeper clawed back

* No fines issued so far

*55,000 suspicious applications blocked

* 75,000 compliance checks undertaken

* 1000 company turnovers checked

* 10 companies who made errors in turnover calculations need to repay money and may face penalties

* 300 suspected breaches of workplace conditions referred to the Fair Work Commission

(Source: Australian Taxation Office)

Australian Associated Press


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Yahoo Finance

*ATO reveals it delayed 75,000 JobKeeper payments*

_The ATO has revealed who it's targeting and warned those rorting govt payments are facing criminal charges._

Lucy Dean

Friday 18 September 2020, 11.46 am

The Australian Tax Office has stopped more than 55,000 initial JobKeeper applications and delayed a further $1 billion in payments as hundreds of thousands of Australians attempt to access the coronavirus payments.

ATO Commissioner Chris Jordan told the Senate Select Committee on Covid-19 that the JobKeeper system was designed to prioritise ease of access, while also aiming to exclude Australians looking to defraud the system.

From our preliminary analysis across each of the measures I can confirm that the vast majority of Australians have done the right thing and only claimed the amounts they were entitled to," Jordan said.

"That said, JobKeeper, early release of super, and cash flow boost - which hasn't had as much publicity as it probably should - are all completely new schemes, and we always expected some people might make honest mistakes, despite trying their best, as well as, people dishonestly trying to rip off the system."

He said the ATO's compliance system takes that into account and hopes to ensure people making mistakes "get the push they need", while punishing deliberate wrong-doing.

"For JobKeeper, as a result of ongoing compliance checks, to date we have stopped more than 55,000 applications at the very first stage, because they did not meet the eligibility criteria," he said.

Additionally, the ATO has delayed $1 billion in payments to more than 75,000 applicants in order to run further checks.

"Following these checks, some payments would have been stopped."
*
Criminal charges incoming for JobKeeper rorts*

Jordan added that the ATO's pre-payment and assurance reviews have also resulted in another 48,000 compliance checks, where it has asked for more information from businesses.

And while most cases have been honest mistakes, Jordan said the ATO won't hesitate to bring down the "full force of the law" for those looking to defraud the JobKeeper system.

These behaviours include claiming for individuals who are not employees, manipulation of turnover, and false claims where there is no business activity at all. Here, we work closely with the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and other agencies in the Serious Financial Crime Taskforce."

As it stands, there are 11 cases the AFP's Serious Financial Crime Taskforce is looking at, and another 50 cases referred for potential ATO-led criminal investigations.

That being said, there are some investigations already on the public record, and while I can't comment in too much detail, I can confirm that there are people facing criminal charges as a result of our joint investigations," he said.

"Australians rightly expect that stimulus payments will go to only those who are eligible to receive it. They are also right to expect that there will be serious consequences for those that seek to undermine the system."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> The Australian Taxation Office on Thursday 17 September 2020 made and registered the legislative instrument providing for the alternative test for the monthly 80 hour requirement for business participants to receive the higher rate of payment.
> 
> See section 7 (concerning business participants) of:
> 
> Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Alternative Reference Period Determination 2020
> 
> The accompanying explanatory statement is available at:
> 
> Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Alternative Reference Period Determination 2020
> 
> This legislation is difficult to understand. The Tax Office will provide additional guidance on this matter soon.
> 
> (We are still awaiting details of the alternative test for decline in turnover.)
> 
> Paragraph 50 of the explanatory statement provides an easy-to-understand explanation of the alternative test:
> 
> '_50. For example, if the eligible business participant was absent through sickness in February 2020, causing that month not to be representative of a typical month, the alternative reference period would be the most recent 29-day period (wholly within a calendar month) in which they were not sick. If there were also circumstances in the earlier month that cause it not to be representative of a typical month, the alternative reference period would be the most recent month in which no such circumstances existed.'_


The Tax Office's legislative instrument for alternatives to the February 2020 reference period for the 80-hour test for the higher rate of payment has a note that will be of interest:

_'Paragraph (a) would cover, but is not limited to, scenarios such as the eligible business participant not being actively engaged in the business for all or part of February 2020 due to sickness, injury or leave'._

So it would be enough that a driver was on leave for even part of February 2020 to have the option of access to an alternative month for the 80-hour test.

The legislative instrument also gives optional access to an alternative month where _'the entity conducted business or some of its business in a declared drought zone, or declared natural disaster zone, during February 2020'._

I suspect many drivers would meet this eligibility criterion by conducting at least some of their business in a declared drought zone during February 2020.

See section 7 (business participants) of
Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Alternative Reference Period Determination 2020.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Monday 21 September 2020

Jotham Lian

*Alternative tests 'still apply' for JobKeeper extension*

_Alternative tests for the JobKeeper extension are set to remain largely the same as the first version, with the exception of a quarterly test period and a disclosure requirement._

The ATO is poised to introduce guidance around the JobKeeper extension alternative tests this week after the Treasurer's rules and the subsequent Commissioner's determinations were registered last week.

These alternative tests are expected to mirror the original tests that cover seven circumstances, including businesses that started after the comparison period, those that had a substantial increase in turnover, have an irregular turnover, or were affected by drought or natural disaster.

The original alternative tests also provides for a business restructure that changed the entity's turnover, and sole traders or small partnerships that experienced sickness, injury or leave during the comparable period.

However, it is expected that the alternative tests will now need to be applied on the basis that the turnover test period is a quarter, instead of the flexibility of choice between a month or quarter for the first version.

ATO acting second commissioner Deborah Jenkins confirmed to a senate committee that the alternative tests would proceed under the JobKeeper extension.

"There are no changes to the use of alternative tests. Under the extension to JobKeeper, we still have the option," said Ms Jenkins.

"As you can imagine, it's to take into account things like that people might have had a particularly good year last year, so the relativities look different and it could have been, for example, that they were affected by floods, bushfires et cetera.

"The option to have an alternative test still applies under the JobKeeper extension."

*Additional checkbox*

Businesses that are looking to apply for the JobKeeper extension using one of the alternative tests will now need to indicate to the ATO that they are doing so.

"The first time I think you'll all remember it all happened quite quickly and we had to get things up and running so we didn't record any information about who used an alternative decline in turnover test," said ATO senior director Michelle Allen.

"For the actual decline in turnover test that you need to fill in for JobKeeper [2.0], if you are using an alternative period for your decline, you will need to tell us and indicate that and advise which test it is.

"So, it's just an extra box on the form that you need to use."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

(*Note in particular the comments about the sale of vehicles pushing up actual GST turnover and thereby in some cases precluding eligibility for extended jobkeeper.)*

News.com.au

*Expert warns new eligibility rules are a 'ticking time bomb'*

_The Government's decision to extend the JobKeeper payment has been widely celebrated - but new rules coming next month mean countless Aussies will soon be left in the cold._

SEPTEMBER 22, 2020 1:33AM

Alexis Carey

The $1500-a-fortnight wage subsidy was announced by the Government in response to the coronavirus pandemic back in April, and was designed to keep Aussies in jobs as the pandemic played out.

Initially, six million workers were expected to benefit from the scheme - the largest stimulus package ever handed down in the country's history - and in July, the subsidy was extended for a further six months until March 28, 2021.

When the extension announcement was made, Prime Minister Scott Morrison said the extra assistance would continue supporting hundreds of thousands of Australians who were without work, and offer businesses and their workers a lifeline to not only get through this crisis, but recover on the other side.

"We will have Australians' backs as we face the ongoing impacts of COVID-19," Mr Morrison said at the time.

"There is no silver bullet and this is about delivering the support Australians need and the policies our economy requires to reopen, recover and create jobs.

These supports are a lifeline but our JobMaker plan is also setting Australia up for our country's recovery. We're delivering the initiatives and reforms that will help grow our economy and create the jobs we need for the years ahead."

But the second version of the scheme comes with a raft of new eligibility criteria - and according to Ben Johnston from Sydney accounting firm Johnston Advisory, many people are unaware of the changes - and the fact they might be shafted as a result.

He told news.com.au the numbers alone proved "hardly anyone will be eligible" the second time around, with the Government earmarking $70 billion for the first version of the scheme, compared with just $30 billion for JobKeeper 2.0.

"The numbers speak for themselves - I reckon only about a third of current JobKeeper recipients will be eligible come October," Mr Johnston said.

"So many more businesses will be left to fend for themselves.

There has been an artificial influx (of money) into the economy, and once that is taken away, it will be really telling to see if businesses can survive on their own two feet."

Mr Johnston said there were a number of key rule changes which would exclude many businesses from the coronaviruslifeline, which in turn would have a flow-on effect for countless employees.

Firstly, he explained that many struggling businesses had sold assets such as vehicles and machinery during the COVID-19 crisis to boost cashflow.

However, that one-off income will now be included in a firm's turnover, which could push it above the JobKeeper threshold, even though it is not a true representation of finances.

Mr Johnston said it was a "fundamental change" which could see "many businesses miss out" and was especially ironic given the Government had expanded the instant asset write-off scheme to encourage spending in response to the pandemic.

The scheme was extended to include assets worth up to $150,000 earlier this year, and as a result, Mr Johnston said many business owners had sold off assets or traded in older ones to take advantage of the incentive - which could now turn around and bite them by pushing them out of the running for JobKeeper.

"It was a one-off stimulus measure to entice people (to spend) but it is getting clawed back a bit now by JobKeeper eligibility being affected," he said.

Secondly, business owners were previously able to choose whether to register and report income for JobKeeper eligibility purposes under an "accrual basis" - reporting all sales and expenses in a period based on invoicing, regardless of whether they actually got paid or paid out during that period - or on a "cash basis", which only looked at when cash actually came in or out.

That flexibility allowed them to determine which method best reflected the impact COVID-19 had taken on their business.

But under the new rules, that flexibility has been removed and the reporting method - either accrual or cash - will soon have to match the business's registration preference for business activity statement reporting.

It sounds complicated, but in a nutshell it's a potential problem as some businesses might only be paid long after work has actually been carried out - a trend which was exacerbated during coronavirus lockdown, when many customers delayed their payments.

It could be distorting the picture - the Government is basically saying that after six months of this, everything should have levelled out in terms of invoicing and paying, but industry groups say some really late payers might only be paying up now, which means a business might be excluded from JobKeeper even if the work was done prior to the virus," Mr Johnston said.

Under the new system, sole traders and eligible businesses will also be subject to a tiering method which could mean sole traders who work less than 20 hours a week on average in their business may not receive the full amount.

Mr Johnston said there was a "100 per cent chance" jobs would be lost as a result of the changes, which he likened to a "ticking time bomb".

"I think they are tightening the JobKeeper eligibility too much too soon. It should have remained at least through the Christmas trading period, when having more money flowing through the economy would have boosted retail sales as well," he said.

"This is a wake-up call. It will catch a lot of people off guard."

He said businesses could also only estimate eligibility, but would not know for sure if they qualify until October 1, after the current quarter had ended.

"You can forecast (eligibility), but if a business reporting on a cash basis that is owed money from a big client is paid (at the last minute), it could push eligibility over the line," Mr Johnston said.

"It is really uncertain which means it's also uncertain how many employees a business can keep on post-October.

"It will undoubtedly lead to job losses."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Updates to the Australian Taxation Office's online jobkeeper guidance:

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

_A timeline of new and updated JobKeeper Payment information on ato.gov.au._







www.ato.gov.au

Monday 21 September


21 SeptemberNew: A Commissioner's determination may be available for employees that meet the 80-hour threshold for the higher tier 1 payment rates but have insufficient records.
Updates: We have added new examples to content.

Sole traders
Partnerships, trusts and companies
80-hour threshold for employees


If you don't have employees

As a sole trader, you can only nominate yourself as the eligible business participant. Where you meet the eligibility requirements, you can qualify for the JobKeeper payment.

Example 2 - Sole trader eligibility

Jameela is a sole trader and operates a cupcake business. She is an Australian resident with an ABN and has run her business since 2017. Jameela runs her business as a sole trader with no employees.

Jameela projected a decline in turnover of about 80% in April 2020 compared with April 2019 as a result of COVID-19.

Jameela is an eligible business participant and qualified for JobKeeper payments from 30 March 2020 until 27 September 2020.

On 1 October 2020 Jameela calculates that she has an actual decline in turnover of 60% for the quarter ending 30 September 2020, compared with her quarter ending 30 September 2019.

Jameela continues to be eligible for JobKeeper payments for JobKeeper Extension 1 from 28 September 2020 until 3 January 2021.

From 1 January 2021 Jameela can check if she meets the actual decline in turnover test for the quarter ending 31 December 2020 to continue to receive JobKeeper payments for JobKeeper extension 2 from 4 January until 28 March 2021.

The actual decline in turnover test does not require Jameela to project sales. It is calculated using her actual current GST turnovers in the relevant quarter and comparison period.

https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/Sole-traders/


----------



## Jack Malarkey

From the Australian Taxation Office's small business newsroom:

*Extension of the JobKeeper Payment*

_The JobKeeper Payment has been extended to 28 March 2021._








www.ato.gov.au










21 September 2020

The JobKeeper Payment has been extended and is available for eligible businesses and not-for-profits until 28 March 2021.

The key changes include:

the program's extension
a requirement to demonstrate a decline in actual GST turnover with a comparable period
changes to JobKeeper payment rates for employees based on the total hours worked during their reference period.
If you're already receiving JobKeeper payments for your employees, you don't need to do anything differently until 28 September 2020.

Continue to pay all eligible employees $1,500 per fortnight (before tax) up to and including JobKeeper fortnight 13, which ends on 27 September 2020.

From 28 September 2020, there will be a tier 1 and a tier 2 JobKeeper payment rate.

You'll need to nominate the rate you're claiming for each of your eligible employees and/or business participants.

For the first extension period from 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021, the tier 1 rate will be $1,200 per fortnight, and the tier 2 rate will be $750 per fortnight. Both rates are before tax.

For the second extension period from 4 January 2021 to 28 March 2021, the tier 1 rate will be $1,000 per fortnight, and the tier 2 rate will be $650 per fortnight. Both rates are before tax.

Ensure you pay your eligible employees the right amounts so you are reimbursed correctly when you make your monthly business declarations.

See also:

JobKeeper extension

JobKeeper Payment

Services AustraliaExternal Link can provide information to employees who may be eligible for financial assistance.


----------



## Senti-Ant

Jack Malarkey said:


> _Accountants Daily_
> 
> Monday 21 September 2020
> 
> Jotham Lian
> 
> *Alternative tests 'still apply' for JobKeeper extension*
> 
> _Alternative tests for the JobKeeper extension are set to remain largely the same as the first version, with the exception of a quarterly test period and a disclosure requirement._
> 
> The ATO is poised to introduce guidance around the JobKeeper extension alternative tests this week after the Treasurer's rules and the subsequent Commissioner's determinations were registered last week.
> 
> These alternative tests are expected to mirror the original tests that cover seven circumstances, including businesses that started after the comparison period, those that had a substantial increase in turnover, have an irregular turnover, or were affected by drought or natural disaster.
> 
> The original alternative tests also provides for a business restructure that changed the entity's turnover, and sole traders or small partnerships that experienced sickness, injury or leave during the comparable period.
> 
> However, it is expected that the alternative tests will now need to be applied on the basis that the turnover test period is a quarter, instead of the flexibility of choice between a month or quarter for the first version.
> 
> ATO acting second commissioner Deborah Jenkins confirmed to a senate committee that the alternative tests would proceed under the JobKeeper extension.
> 
> "There are no changes to the use of alternative tests. Under the extension to JobKeeper, we still have the option," said Ms Jenkins.
> 
> "As you can imagine, it's to take into account things like that people might have had a particularly good year last year, so the relativities look different and it could have been, for example, that they were affected by floods, bushfires et cetera.
> 
> "The option to have an alternative test still applies under the JobKeeper extension."
> 
> *Additional checkbox*
> 
> Businesses that are looking to apply for the JobKeeper extension using one of the alternative tests will now need to indicate to the ATO that they are doing so.
> 
> "The first time I think you'll all remember it all happened quite quickly and we had to get things up and running so we didn't record any information about who used an alternative decline in turnover test," said ATO senior director Michelle Allen.
> 
> "For the actual decline in turnover test that you need to fill in for JobKeeper [2.0], if you are using an alternative period for your decline, you will need to tell us and indicate that and advise which test it is.
> 
> "So, it's just an extra box on the form that you need to use."


Regarding: " if you are using an alternative period for your decline, you will need to tell us and indicate that and advise which test it is." and you're in a position where a standard comparison of the September 2019 to September 2020 quarter isn't feasible (off work for half of July before returning to work), then what alternative comparison quarter can I nominate in its place? I seem to recall someone mentioning that it would always go backwards in time meaning in my case that the June 2019 to September 2020 quarter would be used, but I was off work for most of that too, so what then??? Would I go back to the March 2019 quarter for comparison?? Here's an additional importantant question: is there likely to be any flexibility regarding the current comparison period. Will it always need to be September 2020 quarter as the 'current test period against which the older period gets compared??

Regards


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Senti-Ant said:


> Regarding: " if you are using an alternative period for your decline, you will need to tell us and indicate that and advise which test it is." and you're in a position where a standard comparison of the September 2019 to September 2020 quarter isn't feasible (off work for half of July before returning to work), then what alternative comparison quarter can I nominate in its place? I seem to recall someone mentioning that it would always go backwards in time meaning in my case that the June 2019 to September 2020 quarter would be used, but I was off work for most of that too, so what then??? Would I go back to the March 2019 quarter for comparison?? Here's an additional importantant question: is there likely to be any flexibility regarding the current comparison period. Will it always need to be September 2020 quarter as the 'current test period against which the older period gets compared??
> 
> Regards


It's better that I don't speculate about the specifics of the alternative decline in turnover tests lest I lead people astray. The Tax Office will soon be providing the official word on this.

There will definitely NOT be any flexibility about the September 2020 being the current test period against which the older test period is compared. For extended jobkeeper from 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021, ONLY the quarter from 1 July 2020 to 30 September 2020 can be the current test period.

Likewise, for extended jobkeeper from 4 January 2021 to 28 March 2021, ONLY the quarter from 1 October 2020 to 31 December 2020 can be the current test period.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

On Wednesday 23 September 2020, the Australian Taxation Office registered the necessary legislative instrument to provide for the alternative decline in turnover tests for the extended jobkeeper program.

See:

Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Alternative Decline in Turnover Test Rules (No. 2) 2020

Accompanying explanatory statement:

Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Alternative Decline in Turnover Test Rules (No. 2) 2020

In the next day or so, the Tax Office will update its online jobkeeper guidance to provide an explanation that will be much easier to understand than the legislative instrument itself.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

These parts of the explanatory statement for the legislative instrument to provide for alternative decline in turnover tests will be of particular interest to many drivers who have taken leave during all or part of the usual comparison period:

_Sole trader or small partnership with sickness, injury or leave_

48. The legislative instrument applies to give an alternative test to a sole trader or small partnership if the current GST turnover of the sole trader or partnership was affected by the sole trader or a partner not working for all or part of that period due to sickness, injury or leave. Where an entity was affected by such change, those circumstances are outside the ordinary business setting. Therefore, the relevant comparison period in 2019 is not appropriate. The test is intended to address the situation where it is the individual, the sole trader or partner, who works in the business to generate turnover, and hence only applies to those sole traders and small partnerships which do not have employees. Similarly, the test only applies to small partnerships as small partnerships would have more difficulty in compensating for the absence from work of one of the partners, and larger partnerships can expect absences as part of their usual business setting.

49. If the relevant comparison period is a quarter, the entity multiplies the current GST turnover for the month immediately before the month in which the sole trader or partner did not work due to sickness, injury or leave by three and uses that figure instead of the comparison turnover. If the relevant comparison period is one calendar month, the entity uses the current GST turnover for the month immediately before the month in which sole trader or partner did not work due to sickness, injury or leave instead of the current GST turnover for the relevant comparison period.

50. The change to this test from the former instrument, to use an earlier comparison period rather than a later comparison period, is to avoid entities needing to use a period that has been impacted by the economic disruption caused by COVID-19.

...

Example 9 - Sole trader or small partnership with sickness, injury or leave

87. In September 2019, Alex, who is a sole trader and has no employees, had a sickness and could not work for most of the month which greatly affected Alex's current GST turnover for that period.

88. Alex uses the current GST turnover of $150,000 for the turnover test period of the quarter ending on 30 September 2020.

89. In September 2019, Alex was very sick and could not work for most of the month, which greatly affected Alex's current GST turnover for that period.

90. Alex applies the alternative test under section 13 of this instrument, as Alex is a sole trader with no employees, who was sick for part of the relevant comparison period, and the sickness changed his current GST turnover.

91. Alex's current GST turnover in August 2019, being the month immediately before the month in which Alex was sick, was $75,000. Alex multiplies this figure by three to get $225,000 and compares that with the current GST turnover for the quarter ending 30 September 2020 of $150,000. Alex finds that his current GST turnover for the quarter ending 30 September 2020 falls short of the figure worked out using the alternative test by $75,000, which is greater than 30%. The alternative decline in turnover test is satisfied.

Legislative instrument:

Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Alternative Decline in Turnover Test Rules (No. 2) 2020

Accompanying explanatory statement:

Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Alternative Decline in Turnover Test Rules (No. 2) 2020


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office:

https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/
*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:

*23 September 2020*


23 SeptemberNew: We have published a JobKeeper extension step-by-step factsheet for businesses and not-for-profits.

Updates: We have updated 3 forms to provide details of the eligibility requirements for the higher tier of JobKeeper payment reimbursement.

JobKeeper payment - employee nomination notice
JobKeeper nomination notice for eligible business participants - excluding sole traders
JobKeeper payment - religious practitioner nomination notice











https://www.ato.gov.au/uploadedFile...as_a_business_or_not_for_profit_factsheet.pdf


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Wednesday 23 September 2020

Jotham Lian

*Commissioner registers updated JobKeeper alternative tests*

_The Commissioner of Taxation has now released the updated alternative decline in turnover tests for the JobKeeper extension._

The Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Alternative Decline in Turnover Test Rules (No. 2) 2020 legislative instrument has now been registered by the commissioner, setting out the revised alternative tests for JobKeeper fortnights from 28 September onwards.

The new alternative tests remain broadly in line with the original, with the same seven circumstances available to entities where there is not an appropriate relevant comparison period in 2019.

These include businesses that started after the comparison period, businesses that acquired or disposed part of the business, and where a business restructure changed the entity's turnover.

The alternative tests also account for businesses that had a substantial increase in turnover, were affected by drought or natural disaster, have an irregular turnover, and had sole traders or small partnerships that experienced sickness, injury or leave during the comparable period.

A key difference in the updated alternative tests is that current GST turnover is now used in place of projected GST turnover, in line with the basic decline in turnover test for the JobKeeper extension from 28 September.

Knowledge Shop tax director Michael Carruthers told Accountants Daily the new legislative instrument also confirms that the commissioner's rules in determining the timing of supplies for the JobKeeper decline in turnover tests apply to these new alternative tests.

This should mean that if an entity is registered for GST, it needs to calculate current GST turnover using the same accounting method that is used for GST reporting purposes (i.e. cash or accruals). Entities that are not registered for GST can choose which method but must use a consistent approach," Mr Carruthers said.

Changes to the 'substantial increase in turnover test'

Entities that experienced a substantial increase in their current GST turnover will now be able to choose between using the period immediately before the turnover test period or before 1 March 2020.

"Under the original version of the rules, you had to start by checking if there was an increase in turnover of at least 50 per cent, 25 per cent or 12.5 per cent in the 12, six or three months before the test period," Mr Carruthers explained.

"While this is still possible under the updated version of this test, an entity can also access the test if there was an increase in turnover of at least 50 per cent, 25 per cent or 12.5 per in the 12, six or three months before 1 March 2020."

Changes to the 'irregular turnover test'

A similar change has been made for businesses looking to access the irregular turnover test, with a choice of now using the period immediately before the applicable turnover test period or before 1 March 2020.

"Under the original version of the rules, you started by looking at whether the entity's lowest turnover quarter was no more than 50 per cent of the highest turnover quarter for the quarters ending in the 12 months immediately before the applicable turnover test period," Mr Carruthers said.

"However, under the updated version, you look at whether the entity's current GST turnover for any consecutive three-month period before the applicable test period or 1 March 2020 is no more than 50 per cent of the highest of the entity's current GST turnover for any other of those three-month periods."

Changes to multiple disposals, acquisitions and restructures

The new alternative test removes the requirement for entities with multiple acquisitions, disposals and restructures to use the period after the last of the sequential transactions.

Where an entity has had multiple acquisitions, disposals or a sequence of restructure transactions at or after the start of the relevant comparison period but before the applicable turnover test period, the entity may apply these tests to each acquisition, disposal or restructure separately.

Sole trader or small partnership with sickness, injury or leave

The new alternative test for sole traders or partnerships affected by the sole trader or a partner not working for all or part of that period due to sickness, injury or leave has also been updated.

The revised test now uses the current GST turnover for the month immediately before the month in which the sole trader or partner did not work, rather than the turnover for the month immediately after the month in which they returned to work.

ATO web guidance is expected to be published shortly.

View the new alternative tests legislative instrument here.

View the accompanying explanatory statement here.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

On Thursday 24 September 2020, the Australian Taxation Office updated its jobkeeper guidance to explain the alternative decline in turnover tests for extended jobkeeper:

*Actual decline in turnover test*
Information on how you can satisfy the actual decline in turnover test.







www.ato.gov.au

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:

*24 September 2020*


24 SeptemberUpdate: We have published information on how you can satisfy the alternative test under the Actual decline in turnover test.
Update: We have updated our JobKeeper guides to provide information on the JobKeeper extension and the steps you need to take.
Update: JobKeeper Extension: Easier to read information for employees - This content is in an Easy Read format. This is a way to present information for people who are not familiar with English, or who have low literacy or learning disability.

https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/In-detail/JobKeeper---timeline-of-content-updates/


----------



## Jack Malarkey

SmartCompany

*JobKeeper 2.0: Key dates businesses and sole traders need to know*

_JobKeeper 2.0 will commence next Monday, and the ATO has revealed key dates and new information about alternative eligibility tests._







www.smartcompany.com.au

MATTHEW ELMAS

SEPTEMBER 25, 2020

Next Monday, the second phase of the JobKeeper wage subsidy will kick off, payments will be curtailed and thousands of employers will lose access to the program altogether.

For those hoping to retain access to the payments, the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) has published some new information about key dates, alternative tests and applying the actual GST turnover decline test.

Deputy commissioner James O'Halloran said businesses should rest assured that not everything needs to be done by next week, but nevertheless, there are some key dates to keep in mind.

"From Monday, 28 September, employers will need to pay their eligible employees a different rate of JobKeeper, with the rate dependent on the number of hours they work. These rates will change again from Monday, 4 January," O'Halloran said in a statement.

"Although you do not need to re-enrol in JobKeeper, you do need to notify us of your eligible employees and what rate you are paying them as part of your normal payday reporting in October. This can easily be done through Single Touch Payroll."

Employers will have until October 31 to ensure they've met the wage condition for all JobKeeper 2.0 eligible employees for fortnights starting September 28 and October 12, respectively.

Businesses will also have until the end of October to finalise their eligibility for the second phase of the program, including submitting their actual turnover decline to the ATO.

"We are here to support employers and we know how vital the JobKeeper payment is to the community," O'Halloran said.

"I encourage employers seeking advice on JobKeeper to contact their registered tax or BAS agent."

*JobKeeper 2.0 key dates*

September 28: start paying eligible employees under the second phase two-tier system, based on their hours worked in the comparison period.

October 1-14: complete your October JobKeeper monthly business declarations.

October 1-31: prepare and submit your business turnover decline to the ATO.

Before October 31: ensure you've met the wage condition for all JobKeeper eligible employees from the fortnight starting September 28.

From November 1: complete your monthly business declaration and confirm payment tiers you are claiming for each eligible worker.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

The Australian Taxation Office has now included online information about the 80-hour alternative test for receiving the higher rate of payment as a business participant:

*Sole traders*
ATO information about the JobKeeper Payment scheme for sole traders.







www.ato.gov.au

Reference period

Your reference period will usually be the month of February 2020.

There may be circumstances where February 2020 is not a suitable reference period for you. If you do not satisfy the 80-hour threshold in February 2020, you should consider whether you satisfy it using an alternative reference period.

If more than one reference period can apply to you, you only need to satisfy the 80-hour threshold for one of those reference periods for the tier 1 rate to apply to you.

Alternative reference period - less than 80 hours and not representative

Use this alternative reference period if your:


total hours of active engagement in your business was less than 80 hours in February 2020, and
when compared to earlier 29-day periods (each wholly within a calendar month), February is not representative of your typical number of hours of active engagement in your business.
For example, you were sick or injured during February 2020, so that period is not representative of your typical time spent actively engaged in your business.

The alternative reference period is the most recent 29-day period (wholly within a calendar month):


ending before 1 March 2020
in which your total hours of active engagement in your business was representative of a typical 29-day period.
Example 5 - Less than 80 hours and not representative

Coco runs an interior design business as a sole trader.

Throughout 2019, Coco was typically actively engaged in her business for 50 hours a week.
From 6 January 2020 until 3 August 2020, Coco was a full-time carer for an ill relative which significantly reduced the time Coco was actively engaged in her business.

As a result, the total number of hours that Coco was actively engaged in her business in February 2020 (being the reference period) was less than 80 hours. This means Coco has met the first condition for this alternative reference period to apply.

Coco was typically actively engaged in her business 50 hours a week (over 200 hours in a 29-day period) before 6 January 2020. Therefore, February 2020 did not represent a typical 29-day period for the number of hours she was actively engaged in her business. This means Coco has met the second condition for this alternative reference period to apply.

The alternative reference period for Coco will be the period from 3 December 2019 to 31 December 2019. This period is used because it is the most recent 29-day period, wholly within a calendar month, in which Coco's total hours of active engagement in her business were typical.

The tier 1 rate of the JobKeeper payment will apply to Coco because she:

was actively engaged in her business for 80 hours or more in the period from 3 December 2019 to 31 December 2019, and
has notified us in her business monthly declaration.
End of example

Alternative reference period - drought and natural disaster

Use this reference period if you conducted business or some of your business in a declared drought zone or declared natural disaster zone during February 2020.

The alternative reference period is the most recent 29-day period, wholly within a calendar month, ending before 1 March 2020 during which you did not conduct business or some of your business in a declared drought zone, or declared natural disaster zone.

Record keeping

If the tier 1 rate applies to you as an eligible business participant, you must keep records. These records will show how you made your assessment of the hours that you were actively engaged in your business. These records might include:


business diaries
appointment books
log books
hours billed
invoices issued
time sheets or attendance records
records prepared for other business or statutory purposes.
There are penalties for making a false or misleading declaration.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

A helpful chart from DriveTax:









Uber Driver's Guide to COVID Government Payments


Check the tax implications of COVID payments from the government and Centrelink for Uber, rideshare and delivery drivers.




www.drivetax.com.au


----------



## Jack Malarkey

We have until 31 October 2020 to check decline in turnover for extended jobkeeper.

The system was meant to be ready from the beginning of today (Thursday 1 October 2020) but it's not fit for purpose yet.

Amounts have not yet been prefilled even where both required activity statements have been lodged and the required figures can be located via myGov.

If you complete the amounts manually, none of the listed reasons applies.

The system mysteriously contemplates monthly figures whereas the tests are based on whole quarters.

Let's hope all is put right soon.


----------



## Still Standing

Hi 
Do you recommend filling in monthly declaration for September ?
Are you saying don’t fill in jobkeeper extension declaration only today ... or both?
I filled in the Sept monthly declaration it went through ok .
But the quarter declaration showed as you have stated no previous income GST amounts for July to Sept 20 or July to sept 19.
Will not filling this in until they sort their program code out delay the $3000 payment due in a few days?
Thanks


----------



## Cil

I just lodged my September turnover 
I just ticked the two top boxes on each question and added $$$ amounts in $$$$ sections
Better ask Jack


----------



## Still Standing

Cheers .. he is slacking and not answering ...



Jack Malarkey said:


> We have until 31 October 2020 to check decline in turnover for extended jobkeeper.
> 
> The system was meant to be ready from the beginning of today (Thursday 1 October 2020) but it's not fit for purpose yet.
> 
> Amounts have not yet been prefilled even where both required activity statements have been lodged and the required figures can be located via myGov.
> 
> If you complete the amounts manually, none of the listed reasons applies.
> 
> The system mysteriously contemplates monthly figures whereas the tests are based on whole quarters.
> 
> Let's hope all is put right soon.
> 
> Hi
> Do you recommend filling in monthly declaration for September ?
> Are you saying don't fill in jobkeeper extension declaration only today ... or both?
> I filled in the Sept monthly declaration it went through ok .
> But the quarter declaration showed as you have stated no previous income GST amounts for July to Sept 20 or July to sept 19.
> Will not filling this in until they sort their program code out delay the $3000 payment due in a few days?
> Thanks
> View attachment 511586


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Still Standing said:


> Hi
> Do you recommend filling in monthly declaration for September ?
> Are you saying don't fill in jobkeeper extension declaration only today ... or both?
> I filled in the Sept monthly declaration it went through ok .
> But the quarter declaration showed as you have stated no previous income GST amounts for July to Sept 20 or July to sept 19.
> Will not filling this in until they sort their program code out delay the $3000 payment due in a few days?
> Thanks


I suggest you do complete the monthly declarations for September (as you have done) under original jobkeeper but not the form on extended jobkeeper (until everything is sorted). That's what I have done myself.

There is no reason that any of this would delay payment of the $3,000 for September.


----------



## Cil

I’ve done monthly and extended


----------



## Jack Malarkey

On Tuesday 29 September 2020, the Australian Taxation Office included the following statement in its online jobkeeper guidance:

*Sole traders*
ATO information about the JobKeeper Payment scheme for sole traders.







www.ato.gov.au

_'JobKeeper and your tax return

'If you are a sole trader who has received JobKeeper payments, you need to include them as business income in your individual tax return. Include the amounts paid to you at the label 'Assessable government industry payments'._

This is the first and only time I have seen a reference to including the payment at the label 'Assessable government industry payments'.

Previously, the Tax Office simply advised that we include jobkeeper payments in our business income: see, for example:

*Is it income?*
Check what to report and include in your tax return.







www.ato.gov.au

That's what I did.

I lodged my 2019-20 tax return in early August 2020 and chose the option of calculating my net business income manually (as I do every year). I included the relevant jobkeeper payments of $6,000 in the calculation.

My net small business income as returned was about $300 short of $6,000 as I would have made a tax loss of about $300 if it weren't for jobkeeper.

It's feasible that at some point the Tax Office will ask me to confirm that I have included the $6,000 of jobkeeper payments in my tax return.

For those who do include jobkeeper payments at the label for 'assessable government industry payments', don't forget also to include them in your calculation of the net small business income for the purposes of the small business income tax offset. This offset can reduce your tax payable by up to $1,000. See:

*Small business income tax offset*
The small business income tax offset can reduce the tax on your small business income by up to $1,000 each year from 2015-16.







www.ato.gov.au

Otherwise, you'll receive a smaller offset than you're entitled to.



Cil said:


> I've done monthly and extended


For extended jobkeeper, were the amounts prefilled or did you need to include your own amounts? If the latter, which box (or boxes) did you tick for providing your own turnover amount?

Do you lodge business activity statements monthly rather than quarterly?


----------



## Cil

Jack Malarkey said:


> On Tuesday 29 September 2020, the Australian Taxation Office included the following statement in its online jobkeeper guidance:
> 
> *Sole traders*
> ATO information about the JobKeeper Payment scheme for sole traders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ato.gov.au
> 
> _'JobKeeper and your tax return
> 
> 'If you are a sole trader who has received JobKeeper payments, you need to include them as business income in your individual tax return. Include the amounts paid to you at the label 'Assessable government industry payments'._
> 
> This is the first and only time I have seen a reference to including the payment at the label 'Assessable government industry payments'.
> 
> Previously, the Tax Office simply advised that we include jobkeeper payments in our business income: see, for example:
> 
> *Is it income?*
> Check what to report and include in your tax return.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ato.gov.au
> 
> That's what I did.
> 
> I lodged my 2019-20 tax return in early August 2020 and chose the option of calculating my net business income manually (as I do every year). I included the relevant jobkeeper payments of $6,000 in the calculation.
> 
> My net small business income as returned was about $300 short of $6,000 as I would have made a tax loss of about $300 if it weren't for jobkeeper.
> 
> It's feasible that at some point the Tax Office will ask me to confirm that I have included the $6,000 of jobkeeper payments in my tax return.
> 
> For those who do include jobkeeper payments at the label for 'assessable government industry payments', don't forget also to include them in your calculation of the net small business income for the purposes of the small business income tax offset. This offset can reduce your tax payable by up to $1,000. See:
> 
> *Small business income tax offset*
> The small business income tax offset can reduce the tax on your small business income by up to $1,000 each year from 2015-16.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ato.gov.au
> 
> Otherwise, you'll receive a smaller offset than you're entitled to.
> 
> 
> For extended jobkeeper, were the amounts prefilled or did you need to include your own amounts? If the latter, which box (or boxes) did you tick for providing your own turnover amount?
> 
> Do you lodge business activity statements monthly rather than quarterly?


I put my own amounts in $$$ section
And ticked the first box on 2020 & 2019
I Lodge BAS quarterly
Fingers crossed


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Cil said:


> I put my own amounts in $$$ section
> And ticked the first box on 2020 & 2019
> I Lodge BAS quarterly
> Fingers crossed


Thanks. I've just done the same thing.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

*Tax Office advice on how to stop jobkeeper payments even if you remain eligible?!*

For a few days recently, the Tax Office online guidance for jobkeeper included unheralded advice on how to stop receiving jobkeeper payments even if you remain eligible to receive them.

This mystified me as all someone in that unlikely position would ever need to do (or not do) is refrain from making the necessary monthly declarations.

I wonder if there was consideration of a campaign to encourage some voluntarily to surrender their jobkeeper entitlements.

Anyway, those instructions dropped out as surreptitiously as they had arrived.

Some finger prints, however, have been left behind for sleuths to discover:










https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobkeeper-payment/sole-traders/


----------



## Still Standing

Jack Malarkey said:


> I suggest you do complete the monthly declarations for September (as you have done) under original jobkeeper but not the form on extended jobkeeper (until everything is sorted). That's what I have done myself.
> 
> There is no reason that any of this would delay payment of the $3,000 for September.


Ok thanks ... will wait until their code wizards .. sort out the debacle .
I cannot sleep for fretting .
Perhaps



Jack Malarkey said:


> Thanks. I've just done the same thing.


Hi 
Earlier you suggested not filling in the extended section until the pre fill issues are sorted .. now you are going against that advice ?
Why?
Do you think checking the " haven't lodged activity statements option will not cause issues?
Are you concerned if you don't fill it in a delay to Sept could result ?



Jack Malarkey said:


> Thanks. I've just done the same thing.


This does not appear a good idea?
Why the hurry ?
Have you been told not filling it in will delay the Sept payment due in three days?
Nothing on internet about what to do.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Still Standing said:


> Ok thanks ... will wait until their code wizards .. sort out the debacle .
> I cannot sleep for fretting .
> Perhaps
> 
> 
> Hi
> Earlier you suggested not filling in the extended section until the pre fill issues are sorted .. now you are going against that advice ?
> Why?
> Do you think checking the " haven't lodged activity statements option will not cause issues?
> Are you concerned if you don't fill it in a delay to Sept could result ?
> 
> 
> This does not appear a good idea?
> Why the hurry ?
> Have you been told not filling it in will delay the Sept payment due in three days?
> Nothing on internet about what to do.


In the end, I decided to proceed with trying to 'trick' the form into accepting the correct figures. It was just a case of trying to get through the processes quickly.

I wasn't concerned about delays to the September payment.

I doubt there will be any problem with ticking the boxes saying no activity statements lodged as the Tax Office can still confirm that the figures are correct by reference to the activity statements.

I received a 12-digit ID receipt.

If challenged, I'll point out that I had to do it because of problems with their form.

At this stage, I think it would be fine to wait to see what happens (as I was originally intending to do myself). You have until the end of this month (31 October) to complete the form.


----------



## Still Standing

Jack Malarkey said:


> In the end, I decided to proceed with trying to 'trick' the form into accepting the correct figures. It was just a case of trying to get through the processes quickly.
> 
> I wasn't concerned about delays to the September payment.
> 
> I doubt there will be any problem with ticking the boxes saying no activity statements lodged as the Tax Office can still confirm that the figures are correct by reference to the activity statements.
> 
> I received a 12-digit ID receipt.
> 
> If challenged, I'll point out that I had to do it because of problems with their form.
> 
> At this stage, I think it would be fine to wait to see what happens (as I was originally intending to do myself). You have until the end of this month (31 October) to complete the form.


Ok thanks .. strange though how you jumped .. had you had a couple of beers?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Still Standing said:


> Ok thanks .. strange though how you jumped .. had you had a couple of beers?


I should have had a couple of beers! @Cil went before me and provided answers to my questions and reassured me.

If challenged, I'll say that I hadn't lodged any MONTHLY activity statements.

No doubt, someone will phone the Tax Office and ask whether they are aware of problems with their form.

I'll keep my eyes open so I can report in this thread on any developments.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

DriveTax:

_Update: as of the 1st of October I am seeing that for some clients their September 2019 BAS turnover is not prefilling into the form even though it seems like it is supposed to. I'm not sure yet whether this is an ATO bug in the form, or just that their instructions aren't clear.

I recommend holding off on submitting this form for a day or two until any bugs are figured out. Note that you have until the 31st of October for this form, and in any case you must lodge your September BAS first so most of you will need to wait for Uber to issue their monthly tax summary which always takes a week or so to arrive. Hopefully the ATO will have sorted this out by then!

https://www.drivetax.com.au/uber-covid-19/#JobKeeperExtension_


----------



## Jack Malarkey

This is what the page advising you of the 13-digit ID number looks like:


----------



## Jack Malarkey

I understand that the problems with the jobkeeper extension form have now been corrected.

You have until 31 October 2020 to complete and submit the form. You do this only after lodging all business activity statements up to 30 September 2020.


----------



## Cil

Just had a look on my gov site Jack
All good


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office:

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:

2 October 2020


2 OctoberNew: We have published JobKeeper Payment resources including all our key resources to help you get JobKeeper right.


----------



## Cil

Jack Malarkey said:


> Australian Taxation Office:
> 
> *JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*
> 
> A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:
> 
> 2 October 2020
> 
> 
> 2 OctoberNew: We have published JobKeeper Payment resources including all our key resources to help you get JobKeeper right.


I put in the wrong $$$ in
&#128517; All good they can ring me or look at my lodgements


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Taxbanter.com.au

(tax trainers for small to medium accountancy firms)









*The new alternative decline in turnover test - what's changed? - TaxBanter*
On 23 September 2020, the Commissioner registered a Legislative Instrument setting out the alternative decline in turnover tests... Read our newest Banter Blog now.







taxbanter.com.au

Home > The new alternative decline in turnover test - what's changed?

Contents

Background

About the Instrument

Further info

On 23 September 2020, the Commissioner registered the Instrument titled the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Alternative Decline in Turnover Test Rules (No. 2) 2020 (the Instrument), accompanied by an Explanatory Statement, which sets out the Commissioner's alternative decline in turnover tests where there is not an appropriate comparison period in 2019 for the purpose of an entity satisfying both the new 'actual decline in turnover test' and the original decline in turnover test for fortnights starting on or after 28 September 2020.

Under the extended JobKeeper scheme, entities must satisfy the new actual decline in turnover test that uses the current GST turnover, and also still satisfy the original decline in turnover test that uses projected GST turnover.

Entities already enrolled in the JobKeeper scheme before the extension have already satisfied the original decline in turnover test, and only need to satisfy the new actual decline in turnover test.

Background

On 15 September 2020, the Treasurer registered a Legislative Instrument titled the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Amendment Rules (No. 8) 2020(the Amendment Rules No. 8), which amends the Legislative Instrument titled the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Rules 2020.

The latter instrument, as amended, is referred to as 'the JobKeeper Rules' in this article. (Note that, at time of writing, this hyperlinked version of the JobKeeper Rules has not been updated to incorporate the changes made by the Amendment Rules No. 8.)

The Amendment Rules No. 8, in giving effect to a number of changes to the JobKeeper Scheme, relevantly introduced:

two extensions to the JobKeeper scheme - Extension 1 from 28 September 2020 to 3 January 2021, and Extension 2 from 4 January 2021 to 28 March 2021 (collectively referred to as the 'extended scheme'); and
a requirement to re-test a business's eligibility each quarter based on a new 'actual decline in turnover test', in addition to having to satisfy the original decline in turnover test.
More information about the legislated extended scheme is available in our previous Banter Blog articles JobKeeper 2.0 is now law, JobKeeper employee eligibility date changed to 1 July 2020and JobKeeper changes: What's new in JobKeeper 2.1?.

About the Instrument

Under the JobKeeper Rules, the Commissioner has a discretion to determine an alternative decline in turnover test in circumstances where there is no appropriate comparison period in 2019. This discretion applies in relation to both the original decline in turnover eligibility test and the new actual decline in turnover test.

On 23 April 2020, the Commissioner registered a Legislative Instrument titled the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Alternative Decline in Turnover Test Rules 2020 which set out the alternative tests for the original decline in turnover test in respect of seven categories of entities. This instrument will be repealed on 27 September 2020 and replaced by the Instrument.

The ATO has released website guidance on the alternative actual decline in turnover test.








Note
The new actual decline in turnover test has not replaced the original decline in turnover test.

An entity that becomes eligible for JobKeeper for the first time on or after 28 September 2020 must pass the original test as well as the new test (in practice, if the entity satisfies the new test, it should also satisfy the original test). An entity that was enrolled in JobKeeper prior to 28 September 2020 does not need to satisfy the original test again.

The new actual decline in turnover test is applied separately to each of the extension periods.

Categories of entities to which an alternative test applies

The seven categories which may use an alternative test in respect of the extended scheme are:

Business commenced after the first day of the relevant comparison period but before 1 March 2020
Business acquisition or disposal that changed the entity's turnover
Business restructure that changed the entity's turnover
Business that has had a substantial increase in turnover
Business affected by drought or natural disaster
Business that has an irregular turnover
Sole trader or small partnership with sickness, injury or leave.
Key changes from the original alternative test

ATO guidance on the operation of the original alternative test for each of the seven categories is available here.

The Instrument retains the seven categories and modifies the alternative tests for the extended scheme. The main modifications are outlined as follows.

Alternative actual decline in turnover test will apply for a quarter

The alternative test for the actual decline in turnover test will only apply for a test quarter and comparison quarter, and not for a comparison month. This is because the turnover test period (and relevant comparison period) for the basic actual decline in turnover test can only be a quarter and not for a calendar month.

The Instrument contains modifications where the relevant comparison period is a calendar month, which will only be relevant for the original decline in turnover test.

Practically, if an entity satisfies the new actual decline in turnover test (using a quarter as the test period) they will generally also satisfy the original decline in turnover test (the only exception being certain Universities).

References to current GST turnover

The Instrument amends a number of references to 'turnover' to 'current GST turnover'. The actual decline in turnover test only compares the current GST turnover of the turnover test period to the current GST turnover of the comparison test period. The original decline in turnover test allows projected GST turnover of the turnover test period to be compared to the current GST turnover of the comparison period.

Further adjustments for bushfire or drought affected entities

For each category, further adjustments are made where the entity qualified for the ATO's bushfire or drought lodgment concessions.
For Categories 6 and 7, these additional adjustments have been amended so that, under the new alternative test, the months covered by the ATO's bushfire or drought concessions are excluded from the test unless they are the only months available. The exception (italicised) was already available in the alternative tests for most other categories.

Changes specific to Category 1 - new businesses

The former alternative test applied to entities that commenced business after the relevant comparison period and before 1 March 2020. The new alternative test applies to entities that commenced business after the first day of the relevant comparison period and before 1 March 2020.

Changes specific to Category 2 and 3 - business acquisitions, disposals and restructures

The former alternative test applied where the relevant restructure happened after the relevant comparison period and before the turnover test period. The new alternative test applies where there was a relevant restructure at, or after, the start of the relevant comparison period and before the turnover test period.

The former alternative test required that entities with multiple acquisitions, disposals and restructures use the period after the last of the sequential transactions. This requirement has been removed.

Changes specific to Category 4 - substantial increase in current GST turnover

The former alternative test applied where the entity's turnover increased by the relevant percentage in the 12, six or three months immediately before the applicable turnover test period. The new alternative test retains this rule but introduces a new alternative option to test the increase in current GST turnover in the 12, six or three months immediately before 1 March 2020.

Changes specific to Category 6 - irregular turnover

The former alternative test applied for the quarters ending in the 12 months immediately before the applicable turnover test period. The new alternative test applies to the consecutive three-month periods - instead of the quarters - ending in the 12 months immediately before the applicable turnover test period, or 1 March 2020.

Changes specific to Category 7 - sole traders and small partnerships

Under the former alternative test, where the comparison period was a quarter, the entity was to multiple by three the current GST turnover from the month immediately afterthe month in which the sole trader or partner returned to work.

Under the new alternative test, the entity is to multiple by three the current GST turnover from the month immediately before the month in which the sole trader or partner did not work.

Practical examples

Refer to the Explanatory Statement to the Instrument for nine practical examples of how the new alternative decline in turnover tests apply.

Further info

Looking for further information on the JobKeeper extensions? Check out our recent webinar,JobKeeper Extended, where we walk through the implications and provide guidance on the recent changes. You can also check out our monthly Tax Updates, where we cover the legislation changes that will affect you and your clients the most.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

My October payment arrived at 12.53 am AEDT on Tuesday 6 October (CBA).


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office: update to online jobkeeper guidance:

JobKeeper - timeline of content updates

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:

7 October 2020


7 OctoberUpdates: We have updated our information on nominating as an eligible business participant:

Sole traders
Partnerships, trusts and companies
Update: We have included content on nominating with a different employer under JobKeeper: information for employees.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Adam Bandt
@AdamBandt

After a trickle-down Budget that leaves too many people behind, Greens will move in Senate today to overturn JobKeeper cuts. It's too early to withdraw this support, especially with Vic still in hard lockdown. If Labor & xbench vote with us, JobKeeper goes back to $1,500.

11:29 AM · Oct 7, 2020·Twitter Web App

*Jack Malarkey comments:*

My interpretation is that disallowance by the Senate of the Treasurer's recent legislative instrument would result in no extended jobkeeper at all rather than a return of jobkeeper to $1,500 a fortnight:

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2020L01165
The Senate can't amend the legislative instrument: it can only disallow it so it's all or nothing.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1313637450267279362


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Tuesday 6 October 2020

*JobKeeper and cash flow boost audits - should accountants in Australia be worried?*

_Now that the JobKeeper 2.0 extension has been introduced many are wondering just how this might affect their business or even how it might affect them personally.

..._

Some of the questions, amongst others, that might come to mind with all of the changes to JobKeeper could include; what audits the ATO are doing around this already, if accountants should have any extras concerns about JobKeeper 2.0 audits and will the new JobKeeper 2.0 eligibility criteria and the imminent cessation of cash flow boost lead to more ATO audit activity?

Where are audits and reviews appearing?

Audits and reviews commenced after the original iteration of JobKeeper back in March 2020. As we originally predicted in our tax audit claim stats article, we have seen ATO audit activity concentrated on:


Evidence of the existence of employees - yes, there are documented cases of businesses that nominated employees for JobKeeper that never existed
Evidence of the employee JobKeeper nomination notifications
Proof of the wage payments to employees
Whether the employer used the basic test or the alternative test to satisfy the fall in turnover eligibility criteria
With Single Touch Payroll (STP), the ability for the ATO to flag over or under payments of JobKeeper payments is very high. We have already seen and expect ongoing mismatches with JobKeeper payment, employee enrolments, and STP to be a big driver of ATO audit activity. This will also include mismatches that have occurred because of flaws in the algorithm of the data analysis. Since the inception of JobKeeper and cash flow boost we have seen:


A number of March 2020 and June 2020 quarter activity statement audits and reviews all in respect of cash flow boost ...
A large number of cash flow boost eligibility checks and eligibility information requests, which are not official reviews, or audits of an activity statement
A large number of cash flow boost audits and reviews where PAYG registration occurred in the March 2020 quarter or there was a large increase in W1 & W2 on the March 2020 and/or June 2020 quarterly activity statement compared to previous lodgements which attracted the attention of the ATO.
JobKeeper 2.0 vs JobKeeper - will changes to the JobKeeper 2.0 eligibility criteria lead to more ATO audit/compliance activity?

In an article recently published in Accountants Daily, ATO Assistant Commissioner Sylvia Gallagher said:


_" JobKeeper behaviours that will attract the ATO's attention include payments to people who don't meet eligibility requirements, falsifying records or revisiting activity statements to meet the fall in turnover test, applying for JobKeeper where there is no evidence of carrying on a business or there is no assessable income, employers failing to pass on the full payment to eligible employees, multiple eligible business participant claims and employees being incorrectly excluded under the 'one in, all in' rule."_

In the original iteration of JobKeeper it was much easier to pass the eligibility test, not so with JobKeeper 2.0. The ATO is getting much more sophisticated with the program now and is imposing tougher regulations.

For example, to be eligible for JobKeeper 2.0, employers must now show that their actual turnover has declined by the required percentage each quarter whereas with JobKeeper they only needed to consider this in their projected turnover.

The JobKeeper 2.0 payment rate will also now be determined by the number of hours an employee worked in the 28 days prior to 1 March 2020 or 1 July 2020.

These new rules will mean that the ATO will be watching those employers who they think are 'rorting' the system, very closely. The ATO have some very good data analytics tools they use to be able to assist them in determining when an employer may have made an honest mistake verses those that are deliberately trying to defraud the government.

The answer to the question of whether this will lead to increased audit activity is nothing short of a certainty - yes it will! Looking back on how strongly the ATO has reviewed other government benefit schemes in the past, and based on the sheer number of Australian employers that have enrolled in the JobKeeper payment scheme (and now JobKeeper 2.0) the ATO will be looking to ensure that all the employers who have received JobKeeper payments did so legitimately.

This is not a criticism that the government is looking to recoup the money they have paid out, but more of a check that the JobKeeper payment and other government benefit entitlements are reaching those employers and their employees that need it most.

If you missed our previously published article, in April 2020, ...you can read the article here. ...

...


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office online jobkeeper guidance:

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

_A timeline of new and updated JobKeeper Payment information on ato.gov.au._







www.ato.gov.au

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:

8 October 2020


8 OctoberUpdates: We have provided further information on how to stop receiving JobKeeper payments:

Eligible employers
Decline in turnover tests


*How to stop receiving JobKeeper payments*

https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobk...ployers/#HowtostopreceivingJobKeeperpayments1
You can choose to stop receiving JobKeeper payments at any time.

If you want to stop receiving the JobKeeper payment, you do not need to unenroll. See step 3 of the relevant JobKeeper guide for more information.

You do not need to notify us if you do not satisfy the actual decline in turnover test for a JobKeeper extension period.

*Step 3: Make a business monthly declaration*

*JobKeeper guide - sole traders*

_ATO JobKeeper guide for sole traders._







www.ato.gov.au

Key points:

The JobKeeper wage subsidy is paid monthly in arrears. For example, the September payment should be received in early October. You need to have paid your eligible employees at least the relevant JobKeeper amount for each fortnight being claimed.
Each month you must complete a business monthly declaration to keep claiming JobKeeper payments. You must do this in the first 14 days after the month you are claiming for ends. Your tax or BAS agent can also make the business monthly declaration for you.
We will ask you to reconfirm the business participant details and your eligible employees (if you have any). You will also need to provide us with information about your GST turnover for the reported month and projected GST turnover for the following month.
The information you provide us on your turnover is not a re-test of your eligibility. We ask for this information to see how your business is progressing under the JobKeeper Payment scheme.
If any of your eligible employees change or leave your employment, you will need to update this employee information through your monthly declaration.
If you want to stop receiving JobKeeper payments, you will
need to change the status for all employees and the business participant to 'not claiming yet'
do this by following the same process set out below for updating details for employees and the business participant
notify all employees and the business participant that you are no longer receiving JobKeeper payments.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office online jobkeeper guidance update:

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*
A timeline of new and updated JobKeeper Payment information on ato.gov.au.







www.ato.gov.au

JobKeeper - timeline of content updates

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment

9 October 2020


9 OctoberUpdate: We have published information about the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Alternative Decline in Turnover Test Amendment Rules 2020. See Actual decline in turnover test.


----------



## Boofhead

@jackmalarkey just a general question mate while we're all going through our shoeboxes - how long do you need to keep your tax records going back? I think 5 years?

Thanks.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Boofhead said:


> @jackmalarkey just a general question mate while we're all going through our shoeboxes - how long do you need to keep your tax records going back? I think 5 years?
> 
> Thanks.


Yes, for income tax it's generally five years from when you lodge your tax return.

For GST, it's generally five years from when you prepared or acquired the record.

Australian Taxation Office:

https://www.ato.gov.au/Individuals/...ng-your-tax-records/#Howlongtokeepyourrecords
*How long to keep your records*

Generally, you must keep your written evidence for five years from the date you lodge your tax return.

There are some more specific situations. If you:


have claimed a deduction for decline in value (formerly known as depreciation) - keep records for the five years from the date of your last claim for decline in value
acquire or dispose of an asset - keep records for the five years after it is certain that no capital gains tax (CGT) event can happen
are in dispute with us - keep records for the later of either
five years from the date you lodge your tax return
five years from the date the dispute is resolved.


*How long you need to keep GST records*

You need to keep your GST records for five years, starting from when you prepared or obtained the records, or completed the transactions or acts those records relate to, whichever is later.

You should keep records long enough to cover the period of review (also known as the amendment period) for an assessment that uses information from the record.

https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/Rec...s/GST-records/#HowlongyouneedtokeepGSTrecords


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Monday 12 October 2020

*ATO warns of JobKeeper email scam*

_A JobKeeper scam is now making its rounds around the community, with the ATO warning taxpayers not to readily disclose personal information._

Jotham Lian

The Tax Office has begun receiving reports of an email scam regarding the JobKeeper program and the backing business investment scheme.

The emails, which impersonate the ATO, claims that the taxpayer's payment is being reviewed and requests for copies of their driver's license and Medicare card to complete the verification process.

The ATO has advised taxpayers not to provide the information requested and instead to call the Tax Office to determine the legitimacy of the request.

"If you receive a message from the ATO asking for your personal information, phone us on 1800 008 540 to make sure it's legitimate," said the ATO in an online update.

This is not the first scam involving COVID-19 stimulus measures, with fraudsters previously ringing members of the public to ask them to flourish their bank account details to receive the JobKeeper payment.

"Scammers are constantly developing new ways to steal from the community, and will often try to take advantage of people when they are most vulnerable," said the ATO back in May when the scam was discovered.

"You can help us stop scammers in their tracks by warning your friends and family to stay alert."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Monday 12 October 2020

Jotham Lian

*Commissioner registers new JobKeeper alternative test*

_The ATO has now registered an additional alternative decline in turnover test for the JobKeeper extension._

The Commissioner of Taxation has now registered additional alternative decline in turnover tests where there is not an appropriate relevant comparison period in 2019 because the entity temporarily ceased trading and were not trading for some or all of the relevant comparison period.

The Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Alternative Decline in Turnover Test Amendment Rules 2020 sets out two alternative tests where trading ceased due to events or circumstances outside of the ordinary course of business.

The first alternative test compares the entity's current GST turnover for the applicable turnover test period with the current GST turnover for the same period in the year immediately before the business temporarily ceased trading.

The second alternative test compares the entity's current GST turnover for the applicable turnover test period with the current GST turnover of the 3 whole months immediately before the month that the business temporarily ceased trading.

The new tests accounts for entities that ceased trading to move premises or where events and circumstances are outside their control, such as a blackout.

However, it only applies for entities that temporarily ceased trading for a period of not less than a week.

"For example, where a business that is run from a purpose-built premises ceased trading for an extended period of time to move into a new premises," said the explanatory statement.

"Ceasing trade at the end of a business day, on weekends and public holidays or ceasing trade during the off-season of a seasonal business would not satisfy the requirement that ceasing trading is because of an event or circumstance outside the ordinary course of the entity's business.

"This alternative test will not generally apply where a business ceases trade because its sole trader or partner (in a small partnership) goes on planned leave for all or part of the relevant comparison period."

CPA Australia tax policy adviser Elinor Kasapidis said the original alternative test instrument was not suitable for a business that was not trading during the comparison period.

"The additional alternative test is a practical response to a situation where a business has ceased trading for a period and needs access to a modified comparison period," Ms Kasapidis told Accountants Daily.

"The alternative test is likely to have only limited application, as it requires trading to cease due to events or circumstances outside of the ordinary course of business.

"We are pleased to see the ATO moving quickly to respond to issues identified during implementation by amending these tests."

View the new alternative tests legislative instrument here.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office:

*Scam alerts*

_Check for the latest tax-related scam alerts. Be wary of emails, phone calls and text messages claiming to be from the ATO. Verify a scam online or phone us on 1800 008 540._







www.ato.gov.au

*October 2020 email scam - JobKeeper and backing business investment claims*

We're receiving reports of email scams about JobKeeper and backing business investment claims. The fake emails say we're investigating your claims. They ask you to provide valuable personal information, including copies of your driver's licence and Medicare card.

The image below is one example of an email scam currently circulating.

Don't provide the information requested, and delete the email straight away.










If you receive a message from the ATO asking for your personal information, phone us on 1800 008 540 to make sure it's legitimate. If you think it's fraudulent, report it by sending an email to [email protected].

You should never give out your personal information unless you're sure of who you are dealing with.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office jobkeeper online guidance:

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

_A timeline of new and updated JobKeeper Payment information on ato.gov.au._







www.ato.gov.au

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:

*15 October 2020*


15 OctoberUpdate: We've recently updated the actual decline in turnover page with more information about what is included in current GST turnover and to improve clarity for the alternative test for a business that has had a substantial increase in turnover.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office:

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*
_A timeline of new and updated JobKeeper Payment information on ato.gov.au._







www.ato.gov.au

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:

16 October 2020


16 OctoberUpdate: We have published information on the critical response account available in ATO online services where JobKeeper transactions are recorded. See JobKeeper overpayments.

*Managing overpayments*

*JobKeeper overpayments*
_What to do if you have received a JobKeeper overpayment that you (or your employees) were not eligible for._







www.ato.gov.au

If you have enrolled in the JobKeeper Payment scheme, a critical response account will appear on ATO online services. JobKeeper transactions are recorded here, including:


business monthly declarations claiming JobKeeper payments made in the previous month (these will appear as credits)
reimbursements paid for JobKeeper payments made in the previous month (these will appear as debits).
From 28 September 2020, general interest charge will automatically apply to outstanding amounts in your critical response account. General interest charge applied before this date will be remitted. These amounts will appear as debit and credit transactions on the account.

See also


General interest charge


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> Australian Taxation Office:
> 
> *JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*
> _A timeline of new and updated JobKeeper Payment information on ato.gov.au._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ato.gov.au
> 
> *JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*
> 
> A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:
> 
> 16 October 2020
> 
> 
> 16 OctoberUpdate: We have published information on the critical response account available in ATO online services where JobKeeper transactions are recorded. See JobKeeper overpayments.
> 
> *Managing overpayments*
> 
> *JobKeeper overpayments*
> _What to do if you have received a JobKeeper overpayment that you (or your employees) were not eligible for._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ato.gov.au
> 
> If you have enrolled in the JobKeeper Payment scheme, a critical response account will appear on ATO online services. JobKeeper transactions are recorded here, including:
> 
> 
> business monthly declarations claiming JobKeeper payments made in the previous month (these will appear as credits)
> reimbursements paid for JobKeeper payments made in the previous month (these will appear as debits).
> From 28 September 2020, general interest charge will automatically apply to outstanding amounts in your critical response account. General interest charge applied before this date will be remitted. These amounts will appear as debit and credit transactions on the account.
> 
> See also
> 
> 
> General interest charge


What this is saying is that repayments of jobkeeper from 28 September 2020 will automatically incur general interest charge.

General interest charge is reset each quarter and is at a high compounding rate but is tax deductible. The current rate is:

GIC rates for 2020-21 income year


QuarterGIC annual rateGIC daily rateOctober - December 20207.10%0.01939891%

*General interest charge (GIC) rates*
_Updated to include general interest charge (GIC) rates announced for the second quarter of the 2020-21 income year._







www.ato.gov.au


----------



## Gary81

Hi Jack,
With regards to the alternative test for "*Alternative reference period - less than 80 hours and not representative" *
Is this something we need to apply for to the Commissioner, i.e. a form, which then needs to be approved.
Or do we gather evidence of it any make a judgement ourselves, then retain the evidence in case of audit?
Sorry if this has been written already but I couldn't find anything about it. I'm partly hoping it needs to be approved rather than making a judgement and being wrong...
Cheers


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Gary81 said:


> Hi Jack,
> With regards to the alternative test for "*Alternative reference period - less than 80 hours and not representative" *
> Is this something we need to apply for to the Commissioner, i.e. a form, which then needs to be approved.
> Or do we gather evidence of it any make a judgement ourselves, then retain the evidence in case of audit?
> Sorry if this has been written already but I couldn't find anything about it. I'm partly hoping it needs to be approved rather than making a judgement and being wrong...
> Cheers


Hi @Gary81. You make a relevant declaration as part of the claim process in early November 2020 and keep records to support your claim that you can produce if the Tax Office decides to check or audit the claim.


----------



## Gary81

Thanks Jack
So just need to make a judgement based on the information here? https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/Sole-traders/#Fortnightsfrom28September2020
Would rather someone said yes or no but what can you do!


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Gary81 said:


> Thanks Jack
> So just need to make a judgement based on the information here? https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/Sole-traders/#Fortnightsfrom28September2020
> Would rather someone said yes or no but what can you do!


Yes, that's correct.

For a rideshare driver, I believe working hours would include time spent with the app on seeking ride requests and travelling to and on them; time travelling home at the end of a shift even if the app is off; time spent meeting taxation and regulatory requirements; time spent on cleaning and preparing the car and otherwise working on it; and time spent familiarising yourself with all aspects of your role in providing personal transport.


----------



## Gary81

Jack Malarkey said:


> Yes, that's correct.
> 
> For a rideshare driver, I believe working hours would include time spent with the app on seeking ride requests and travelling to and on them; time travelling home at the end of a shift even if the app is off; time spent meeting taxation and regulatory requirements; time spent on cleaning and preparing the car and otherwise working on it; and time spent familiarising yourself with all aspects of your role in providing personal transport.


That's really helpful, thanks


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office online guidance for jobkeeper:

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

_A timeline of new and updated JobKeeper Payment information on ato.gov.au._







www.ato.gov.au

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:

19 October 2020


19 OctoberUpdate: We have updated the key dates page to provide more information around due dates for completing and submitting the 'Check decline in turnover' forms. See Key dates.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

SmartCompany

*The ATO is coming for overpaid JobKeeper cash, guidelines confirm - SmartCompany*

_The ATO has released guidelines on JobKeeper overpayments, confirming businesses that were wrongly credited will face repayments_.







www.smartcompany.com.au

STEPHANIE PALMER-DERRIEN

OCTOBER 21, 2020

The Australian Tax Office has released guidelines on JobKeeper overpayments, confirming that businesses that were wrongly credited under the subsidy scheme may have to make repayments.

If the ATO identifies that a business has received an overpayment of JobKeeper, repayment will typically be required.

There will be no administrative penalties for overpayments that are a result of a mistake.

But, the ATO says penalties will apply "if there is evidence of deliberate actions to get JobKeeper payments that an entity would not have otherwise been entitled to".

General interest on the payments will apply to outstanding amounts, as of September 28, 2020.

If the ATO identifies a business has been overpaid the wage subsidy, it will first write to the employer to explain why it thinks there has been an overpayment, how much there is to repay, and how that repayment can be made.

Business owners can ask the ATO to reconsider its decision, but it's not clear at this time what this pathway looks like.

The ATO has also suggested it will be able to offer some support to businesses that have good intentions but cannot necessarily make the repayments straight away.

"If you can't pay on time, we can help you," it says.

"If you're trying to do the right thing, we're committed to understanding your situation and helping you if possible."

In some cases, businesses will not face repayments. This will only be the case if the ATO deems the overpayment a result of 'an honest mistake'.

"We consider a mistake to be honest if it is reasonable to have made the mistake in your circumstance," the ATO guidelines say.

This will not, however, apply if either the business has been contacted by the ATO previously regarding eligibility concerns, and has not taken reasonable steps to check before making additional claims.

It will also not apply if the employer has deliberately not met the wage conditions under the subsidy scheme, or knowingly nominated employees that do not satisfy eligibility criteria.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Friday 23 October 2020

Jotham Lian

*Employers cautioned over 'hard and fast' decline in turnover*

Accountants assisting clients with the JobKeeper extension have been urged to pay close attention to the actual decline in turnover test, with the ATO unable to offer leeway for those who come just shy of the requirements.

With JobKeeper now requiring entities to satisfy the new actual decline in turnover test, rather than the projected decline in turnover test used earlier in the program, the ATO will be required to follow the strict letter of the law in ensuring the requisite percentage declines are satisfied.

"[In JobKeeper 1], the legislation didn't require the actual turnover to decline, so we saw a lot of organisations make a projection in a very difficult environment... and a lot of those projections didn't pan out and that's fine," said ATO assistant commissioner Sandra Farhat on a recent ChangeGPS webinar.

But moving into the extension, that is the test; the test is an actual decline.

"There is really no discretion in relation to decline in turnover, so there is no ability for the ATO to say, 'Well, you were close, just not close enough, but we'll let you through' - the 30 per cent is a hard and fast legislative requirement.

"It is a significant change from a projected decline in turnover to an actual decline in turnover."
...


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_My Business_

Monday 26 October 2020

*JobKeeper extension: ATO answers your questions*

_Business owners viewing our most recent JobKeeper webcast had plenty of questions concerning the stimulus extension, particularly in regards to eligibility. Below we bring you the ATO's answers to some of the most frequently asked questions by recipients of the government's wage subsidy._

Maja Garaca Djurdjevic

...

*If you don't think you qualify for September quarter but will qualify for December quarter based on projections, how do you apply?*

If you are eligible, you can apply for JobKeeper at any time until the program closes. You will need to check and submit your business's actual decline in turnover information for each JobKeeper extension period to demonstrate eligibility.

Check your business satisfied the actual decline in turnover test for:


September quarter 2020 decline in turnover - to be eligible for JobKeeper extension 1. This check will be available online from 1 October 2020.
December quarter 2020 decline in turnover - to be eligible for JobKeeper extension 2. This check will be available online from 1 January 2021.
We have JobKeeper guides with step-by-step instructions available at ato.gov.au/jobkeeperguides.

*I may miss out on the JobKeeper turnover, we may be down by 28-29 per cent, as we run a business with small margins. Is there any scale down on JobKeeper to assist?*

There is no scale down for this circumstance. There are a range of alternative tests that may assist. You may also like to seek the assistance of your tax professional to ensure you have calculated your decline in turnover correctly.

*Can businesses that did not qualify in March apply for JobKeeper from 28th of September onwards as they qualify now due to Victorian lock-up?*

Yes, you can enrol at any time until the program closes. For information about the eligibility criteria, refer to eligible employers.

*Will there be an extended due date for the declaration due in January, to recognise the December/Christmas period? Many firms close over this period.*

You will need to make your business monthly declaration between the 1st and 14th of each month to claim JobKeeper payments for the previous month.

You have until 14 January to make your declarations for JobKeeper fortnights 19 (7 December-20 December) and 20 (21 December-3 January 2021).

There are currently no plans to make changes to these dates.

*When calculating the GST turnover, do we have to include the cash boost and JobKeeper subsidy?*

As outlined on our page on the basic test, current GST turnover is the amount of your sales, except for the following:


the GST you included in sales to your customers (if any)
sales that are input taxed sales (for example, bank interest, sale of shares, residential rental income)
sales not connected with an enterprise that you carry on (for example, sale of private car)
sales that are not made for payment (unless a taxable supply to an associate)
payments for no supply (for example, JobKeeper payments)
gifts and donations (except for deductible gift recipients and ACNC-registered charities as discussed above)
sales not connected with Australia
sales of services made through a business you carry on outside Australia
sales of goods purchased and sold from a place outside Australia
sale of real property situated outside Australia
Cash boost is treated in the same way as JobKeeper so is not included.
...

*Do the weekly hourly eligibility requirements [for the higher rate of payment] apply to active business participants?*

Yes, they do apply to active business participants. We have tailored information to help you on our website. Visit https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/Sole-traders/.
...

*If someone is on an accrual basis and their G1 figure is presented back to them, do they have the option to report eligibility on a cash basis instead?*

No. Where the entity is provided with prefill data for the G1 figure based on an accrual basis, this suggests that they ordinarily report their BAS on an accrual basis. When applying the actual decline in turnover test for the JobKeeper extension periods, the entity is limited to the accounting method that they ordinarily use when reporting their BAS.

For more information, refer to the actual decline in turnover test content on the ATO website.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office update to online guidance on jobkeeper:

*JobKeeper - timeline of content updates*

_A timeline of new and updated JobKeeper Payment information on ato.gov.au._







www.ato.gov.au

27 October 2020


27 OctoberNew: We have provided additional guidance concerning the areas of focus for our compliance activities relating to the JobKeeper extension periods.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Some detective work reveals that the Australian Taxation Office has modified its decline in turnover check form to omit from the possible options for not using the pre-filled data 'Haven't lodged activity statement'.

Original form:










Modified form:


----------



## Senti-Ant

Hey Jack and anyone else informed:

How does obtaining new employment (in this case full time) affect JobKeeper 2 Extension (Sep-Jan and then Jan-March 2021) eligibility and/or payment as an elgible business participant (most of us). @Jack Malarkey you touched upon this two months ago here saying that so long as the employment is *casual* then it doesn't affect eligibility. I too was of this understanding, till I got a job offer that I seriously need to consider which led me to an online search and this gem from the ATO community forums here and most recently here. I'm just a little hesitant to take this as gospel given that its a forum page rather than a formal ATO Jobkeeper legislation/page. I also note that the most up to date forum thread (the ATO community staffer responding just after the late Sept legislative update in the second link above) doesn't really end with a clear response. So, is it accurate to say that any job obtained *after* a successful JK 2 extension enrolment (eligibility already met) won't in any way affect the payment so long as I remain an 'active' participant?



Senti-Ant said:


> Hey Jack and anyone else informed:
> 
> How does obtaining new employment (in this case full time) affect JobKeeper 2 Extension (Sep-Jan and then Jan-March 2021) eligibility and/or payment as an elgible business participant (most of us). @Jack Malarkey you touched upon this two months ago here saying that so long as the employment is *casual* then it doesn't affect eligibility. I too was of this understanding, till I got a job offer that I seriously need to consider which led me to an online search and this gem from the ATO community forums here and most recently here. I'm just a little hesitant to take this as gospel given that its a forum page rather than a formal ATO Jobkeeper legislation/page. I also note that the most up to date forum thread (the ATO community staffer responding just after the late Sept legislative update in the second link above) doesn't really end with a clear response. So, is it accurate to say that any job obtained *after* a successful JK 2 extension enrolment (eligibility already met) won't in any way affect the payment so long as I remain an 'active' participant?


PS - I just found this posted and responded to by an ATO staffer/representative which seems to suggest that like we originally understood, its only casual employment that has no affect on JK fortnightly payments... It would be great to understand what the ATO moderator means by his final paragraph though (underlined below):
" 
Hi @Tanya1919,

If a sole trader has full-time employment during the JobKeeper fortnight, they will not be an eligible business participant anymore.

This is because one of the conditions to be an eligible business participant is that _you are not an employee (other than a casual employee) of another entity._

Eligible business participants do *not* have the same conditions as long-term casual eligible employees. *Long-term casuals *nominating with their employer must not be employed permanently elsewhere _at the time they provide their nomination notice_. 

Is this final paragraph just trying to say that being a casually employed employee (in addition to your ongoing eligible business participant work) just puts you into a slightly different 'casual' employee status? If so does this undo his previous assertion that getting casual employment as an EBP won't affect JK payments??


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Senti-Ant said:


> Hey Jack and anyone else informed:
> 
> How does obtaining new employment (in this case full time) affect JobKeeper 2 Extension (Sep-Jan and then Jan-March 2021) eligibility and/or payment as an elgible business participant (most of us). @Jack Malarkey you touched upon this two months ago here saying that so long as the employment is *casual* then it doesn't affect eligibility. I too was of this understanding, till I got a job offer that I seriously need to consider which led me to an online search and this gem from the ATO community forums here and most recently here. I'm just a little hesitant to take this as gospel given that its a forum page rather than a formal ATO Jobkeeper legislation/page. I also note that the most up to date forum thread (the ATO community staffer responding just after the late Sept legislative update in the second link above) doesn't really end with a clear response. So, is it accurate to say that any job obtained *after* a successful JK 2 extension enrolment (eligibility already met) won't in any way affect the payment so long as I remain an 'active' participant?
> 
> 
> PS - I just found this posted and responded to by an ATO staffer/representative which seems to suggest that like we originally understood, its only casual employment that has no affect on JK fortnightly payments... It would be great to understand what the ATO moderator means by his final paragraph though (underlined below):
> "
> Hi @Tanya1919,
> 
> If a sole trader has full-time employment during the JobKeeper fortnight, they will not be an eligible business participant anymore.
> 
> This is because one of the conditions to be an eligible business participant is that _you are not an employee (other than a casual employee) of another entity._
> 
> Eligible business participants do *not* have the same conditions as long-term casual eligible employees. *Long-term casuals *nominating with their employer must not be employed permanently elsewhere _at the time they provide their nomination notice_.
> 
> Is this final paragraph just trying to say that being a casually employed employee (in addition to your ongoing eligible business participant work) just puts you into a slightly different 'casual' employee status? If so does this undo his previous assertion that getting casual employment as an EBP won't affect JK payments??


You are ineligible to receive jobkeeper as a business participant if during the relevant jobkeeper fortnight you are also an employee (other than a casual employee) of any entity.










https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobkeeper-payment/sole-traders/
Australian Taxation Office (with emphasis added):

https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobkeeper-payment/sole-traders/#Eligiblebusinessparticipant
*Work out if you are an eligible business participant*

If you are a sole trader - that is, you own your business and are not an employee of your business - only you can be the eligible business participant.

You will qualify as an eligible business participant provided you satisfy all the following conditions:


You are actively engaged in your business (at 1 March 2020 and for the fortnight you are claiming).
You were a sole trader at 1 March 2020 and for the fortnight you are claiming.
At 1 March 2020, you are both
at least 18 years old. If you are 16 or 17 you can also qualify if you are independent or not studying full time.
an Australian resident (under section 7 of the _Social Security Act 1991_), or a resident for income tax purposes and the holder of a Special Category (Subclass 444) visa.



You are not receiving government parental leave or Dad and Partner Pay.
You are not totally incapacitated for work and receiving payments under an Australian workers' compensation law in respect of your total incapacity to work.
*You are not an employee (other than a casual employee) of another entity.*

Additional comment by Jack Malarkey:

The Tax Office moderator is simply and correctly saying that the relevant rules for business participants differ from those for long-term casual employees who receive jobkeeper as eligible employees via their employer.

The statement by the moderator doesn't undo anything they said earlier.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Senti-Ant said:


> Hey Jack and anyone else informed:
> 
> How does obtaining new employment (in this case full time) affect JobKeeper 2 Extension (Sep-Jan and then Jan-March 2021) eligibility and/or payment as an elgible business participant (most of us). @Jack Malarkey you touched upon this two months ago here saying that so long as the employment is *casual* then it doesn't affect eligibility. I too was of this understanding, till I got a job offer that I seriously need to consider which led me to an online search and this gem from the ATO community forums here and most recently here. I'm just a little hesitant to take this as gospel given that its a forum page rather than a formal ATO Jobkeeper legislation/page. I also note that the most up to date forum thread (the ATO community staffer responding just after the late Sept legislative update in the second link above) doesn't really end with a clear response. So, is it accurate to say that any job obtained *after* a successful JK 2 extension enrolment (eligibility already met) won't in any way affect the payment so long as I remain an 'active' participant?
> 
> 
> PS - I just found this posted and responded to by an ATO staffer/representative which seems to suggest that like we originally understood, its only casual employment that has no affect on JK fortnightly payments... It would be great to understand what the ATO moderator means by his final paragraph though (underlined below):
> "
> Hi @Tanya1919,
> 
> If a sole trader has full-time employment during the JobKeeper fortnight, they will not be an eligible business participant anymore.
> 
> This is because one of the conditions to be an eligible business participant is that _you are not an employee (other than a casual employee) of another entity._
> 
> Eligible business participants do *not* have the same conditions as long-term casual eligible employees. *Long-term casuals *nominating with their employer must not be employed permanently elsewhere _at the time they provide their nomination notice_.
> 
> Is this final paragraph just trying to say that being a casually employed employee (in addition to your ongoing eligible business participant work) just puts you into a slightly different 'casual' employee status? If so does this undo his previous assertion that getting casual employment as an EBP won't affect JK payments??





Jack Malarkey said:


> You are ineligible to receive jobkeeper as a business participant if during the relevant jobkeeper fortnight you are also an employee (other than a casual employee) of any entity.
> 
> View attachment 519370
> 
> 
> https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobkeeper-payment/sole-traders/
> Australian Taxation Office (with emphasis added):
> 
> https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobkeeper-payment/sole-traders/#Eligiblebusinessparticipant
> *Work out if you are an eligible business participant*
> 
> If you are a sole trader - that is, you own your business and are not an employee of your business - only you can be the eligible business participant.
> 
> You will qualify as an eligible business participant provided you satisfy all the following conditions:
> 
> 
> You are actively engaged in your business (at 1 March 2020 and for the fortnight you are claiming).
> You were a sole trader at 1 March 2020 and for the fortnight you are claiming.
> At 1 March 2020, you are both
> at least 18 years old. If you are 16 or 17 you can also qualify if you are independent or not studying full time.
> an Australian resident (under section 7 of the _Social Security Act 1991_), or a resident for income tax purposes and the holder of a Special Category (Subclass 444) visa.
> 
> 
> 
> You are not receiving government parental leave or Dad and Partner Pay.
> You are not totally incapacitated for work and receiving payments under an Australian workers' compensation law in respect of your total incapacity to work.
> *You are not an employee (other than a casual employee) of another entity.*
> 
> Additional comment by Jack Malarkey:
> 
> The Tax Office moderator is simply and correctly saying that the relevant rules for business participants differ from those for long-term casual employees who receive jobkeeper as eligible employees via their employer.
> 
> The statement by the moderator doesn't undo anything they said earlier.


This Tax Office example is also relevant:

*Example 4 - Sole trader and employee*

Penny is a sole trader and actively manages her florist business. She is also employed in another business owned by another entity on a permanent part-time basis as an administrative assistant.

Penny's business has suffered a significant decline in turnover due to COVID-19. Penny's hours at her permanent part-time job have also been reduced.

Penny is an eligible employee for the purpose of the JobKeeper Payment scheme for her permanent part-time job, and her employer qualifies for a JobKeeper payment.

Penny, in her capacity as a sole trader, isn't eligible for the JobKeeper payment because she is a permanent (not casual) employee of another entity. This conclusion would be the same whether her employer qualifies for JobKeeper payments or not.

https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobK...sinessparticipant#Eligiblebusinessparticipant


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Thursday 29 October 2020

Jotham Lian

[HEADING=2]'Critical' 31 October deadline looms for new JobKeeper enrolments[/HEADING]

First-time JobKeeper entrants have been urged to get a move on a key deadline this Saturday.

While the JobKeeper extension kicked in late last month, the ATO has allowed employers until 31 October to meet the wage condition for all employees.

New JobKeeper entrants will need to go one further by enrolling and submitting their "Check decline in turnover" online form to the ATO by 31 October.

On the other hand, entities who were claiming JobKeeper before 28 September will have until 14 November to check that their business has satisfied the actual decline in turnover and complete their monthly business declaration.

The Institute of Public Accountants general manager of technical policy Tony Greco believes businesses looking to enrol for the first time, particularly Victorian businesses, may have lost sight of the 31 October deadline.

"For those new entrants applying for the first time, this week is a critical week; they have to enrol, meet the decline in turnover test, and meet the wage condition by 31 October," Mr Greco told Accountants Daily.

"If you are already on JobKeeper 1, you've pretty much got until 14 November on the basis that you keep on paying your employees."

*Emphasis on decline in turnover test*

The ATO has since announced its compliance focus areas for the JobKeeper extension, with close attention to be given to the actual decline in turnover test.

Mr Greco believes businesses have reason to be cautious, compared with the first round of JobKeeper which relied on projected turnover figures.

"We know there's no wiggle room this time. JobKeeper 2.0 is based on the actual decline in turnover and you don't want to get that number wrong," Mr Greco said.

"If the employer is banking on that reimbursement then you've got to make sure there's none of this projection or wiggle room of falling short; it has to be a real number based on the definition of current GST turnover.

"For some entities, that is easy; for other entities, not so much because of adjustments, but I think everyone's going to be a lot more cautious bedding down that number."

While 3.6 million employees were being supported by JobKeeper by the end of September, the Treasury believes the figure will fall to 2.24 million employees by the December quarter, and drop further to 1.75 million employees for the March 2021 quarter.

It also estimates that 60 per cent of employees on JobKeeper will come from Victoria who, until Wednesday, had endured four months of coronavirus lockdown restrictions.


----------



## UberDriverAU

Jack Malarkey said:


> Some detective work reveals that the Australian Taxation Office has modified its decline in turnover check form to omit from the possible options for not using the pre-filled data 'Haven't lodged activity statement'.
> 
> Original form:
> 
> View attachment 519309
> 
> 
> Modified form:
> 
> View attachment 519310


I haven't lodged my BAS yet and still have this option available. So it appears that it only gets removed if you've already lodged and they'll use the lodged values. Which makes sense, it closes a possible loophole where someone could claim they pass the test by inputting arbitrary data. Then there's all sorts of followup work created for the ATO to deal with that.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Now that we have reached Sunday 1 November 2020, we have from today until Saturday 14 November 2020 to complete the process of applying for the extended jobkeeper payment for the jobkeeper fortnights that ended in October 2020. The sooner we complete this process, the sooner we’ll be paid (if eligible).

(1) If you haven’t already done so, submit your decline in turnover check.

(2) Click on ‘maintain employees’ and ensure that ‘business participant’ is ticked. Then select the payment tier for which you qualify and the fortnights you are eligible for.

It’s not separately shown but the declaration for tier 1 (higher rate) refers to the ‘reference period’ rather than to ‘February 2020’ so it incorporates the alternative test if you’re eligible for the higher rate on that basis.

You need to keep records that support your declaration.

(3) Click on ‘declare’ and make the relevant monthly GST turnover declarations.

You have completed the process only once a 13-digit ID reference appears on the screen. Print that page or carefully copy down the number.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Wednesday 4 November 2020

Jotham Lian

[HEADING=2]ATO to examine data on 10m individuals under new JobKeeper compliance program[/HEADING]
_The ATO's data-matching program with the Department of Home Affairs will be extended for another three years, with a particular focus on identifying compliance with the JobKeeper program._

The Tax Office will now acquire data on active and newly granted visas in the period 2020-21 to 2022-23 financial years, building on its visa data-matching program that began more than a decade ago.

Records for up to 10 million individuals are estimated to be obtained each financial year and will help the ATO ensure visa holders, visa sponsors and migration agents are meeting their tax and superannuation obligations.

The extension of the data-matching program will bear greater significance this year as visa data will be used to confirm eligibility for the JobKeeper program.

Eligible employees under the JobKeeper program have been defined as an Australian resident under the _Social Security Act 1991_, and requires that they are an Australian citizen, the holder of a permanent visa or a Protected Special Category Visa Holder.

Accordingly, the ATO will examine visa data from 1 March 2020 to 28 March 2021 to ensure individuals are correctly entitled to the wage subsidy.

"The data will support pre-issue and post-issue compliance checks enabling us to follow up potentially false or misleading declarations," the ATO said.

The visa data will also be addressing other taxation risks including identifying and cancelling Australian business numbers (ABNs) obtained and used inappropriately by visa holders as contractors, when they should be classified as employees.

It will also examine employers' tax treatment of visa holders including the appropriate registration, lodgement, reporting and payment obligations for PAYG withholding, fringe benefits tax and super guarantee.

The JobKeeper focus of the visa data-matching program follows other similar programs that have been established to ensure compliance with a range of COVID-19 stimulus measures.

A notable example includes Services Australia trading data with the ATO to ensure individuals are not incorrectly claiming both JobKeeper and social security payments at the same time.

The ATO has also acquired data of 3 million individuals from Services Australia to identify eligibility for the early release of super and the cash flow boost measure.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Some drivers have had difficulty with their claims for extended jobkeeper.

If you haven’t yet received your first payment under extended jobkeeper but have applied for it, you can check all is well:

I suggest you do the following:

(1) Log into your myGov ATO account;

(2) Click on ‘Tax’;

(3) Click on ‘Account’;

(4) Click on ‘Critical response account’;

(5) Click on ‘Critical response description’.

The heading ‘Processed date’ should have the date the Tax Office processed your claim.

The heading ‘Effective date’ should have the date on which you’ll be paid. (I understand that many who completed the application on Sunday 1 November 2020 are scheduled to be paid on Monday 9 November 2020.)

Look for the reference to ‘JobKeeper 1 Oct to 31 Oct’. Also, ensure that the amount under ‘Debit (DR)’ is $2,400 (assuming you claimed for tier 1 (higher rate)).

If anything isn’t right, give the Tax Office a call on 13 28 66.

They are available from 8.00 am to 8.00 pm Monday to Friday and 10.00 am to 2.00 pm on Saturdays.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Don't wait until the very last day (Saturday 14 November 2020) to complete your extended jobkeeper application.

Australian Taxation Office:










[HEADING=2]Contact us[/HEADING]
You can manage your tax and super online using a myGov account. You can also talk to us over the phone, in writing or using live chat.







www.ato.gov.au

Systems maintenance

ATO online systems may be impacted in part or in full at the following times.

Systems maintenance; start and finish times


Start timeEnd timeMaintenance typeSaturday 14 November 2020 6.00am AEDTSunday 15 November 2020 11.00pm AEDTSystem maintenance

https://www.ato.gov.au/General/Online-services/System-Maintenance/


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_My Business _

[HEADING=2]Small-business owner takes JobKeeper eligibility dispute to AAT[/HEADING]
Maja Garaca Djurdjevic

09 November 2020

A small business has taken the ATO to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal over a rejected JobKeeper application, a challenge which could overturn the previous ineligibility of many small businesses across the country.

On Melbourne Cup Day, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal fast-tracked a small-business owner's appeal over a rejected JobKeeper application. According to the owner's legal representative, Holding Redlich, the small-business owner's JobKeeper entitlements were rejected by the ATO on a "technicality".

The ATO's refusal was based on the business owner not having a registered ABN on 12 March, despite paying tax on business income and managing a business as a sole trader.

JobKeeper eligibility rules require applicants to have had a registered ABN in place on 12 March and for a more than 30 per cent drop in turnover to have been recorded.

According to senior tax controversy partner at Holding Redlich Sue Williamson, her client previously ceased operating his business and terminated his ABN.

He then restarted his trade in 2019 and while he was paying tax on his profits, he forgot to apply for a new ABN.

Ms Williamson told MyBusiness that when her client applied for JobKeeper assistance due to a major loss of trade during the coronavirus pandemic, the ATO backdated his registration to 2019.

"The register now says his ABN has been valid since that date in 2019," Ms Williamson said.

Regardless, his application was denied on the basis of the 12 March rule.

Ms Williamson believes that the ATO's reasoning is unjust, arguing that business like that of the applicant's should not be denied access to JobKeeper given that they satisfy the principle that underpins the program - supporting businesses put at risk by coronavirus lockdowns.

"The ATO has done an amazing job at administering the JobKeeper program at short notice; however, the decision to reject the business owner's application in this case means small-business owners who do not qualify for state relief are denied a financial lifeline," Ms Williamson said.

"Small businesses operating at 12 March which experienced a material (30 per cent plus) drop in turnover should have been fast-tracked for support, not rejected."

[HEADING=2]'Accountants, review your files'[/HEADING]
With the judgment expected to be delivered at the end of November, Ms Williamson has advised accountants who have clients that have been refused JobKeeper to review their files.

"Accountants who have clients that have been refused JobKeeper should now be reviewing the relevant files to assess whether the client's position could be improved if the applicant in this case succeeds," Ms Williamson told MyBusiness.

"You should assess why claims were denied and check to see if there was an option to request the commissioner for further time to comply with an obligation.

"If so, request it. If a request for further time has been denied, speak to the client about lodging an objection to protect their rights."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> Don't wait until the very last day (Saturday 14 November 2020) to complete your extended jobkeeper application.
> 
> Australian Taxation Office:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [HEADING=2]Contact us[/HEADING]
> You can manage your tax and super online using a myGov account. You can also talk to us over the phone, in writing or using live chat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ato.gov.au
> 
> Systems maintenance
> 
> ATO online systems may be impacted in part or in full at the following times.
> 
> Systems maintenance; start and finish times
> 
> 
> Start timeEnd timeMaintenance typeSaturday 14 November 2020 6.00am AEDTSunday 15 November 2020 11.00pm AEDTSystem maintenance
> 
> https://www.ato.gov.au/General/Online-services/System-Maintenance/


Announcement made by the Australian Taxation Office on Tuesday 10 November 2020:










https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobkeeper-payment/


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Today at our local rideshare lunch, a driver explained how he has unexpectedly found himself ineligible for jobkeeper extension 2 from 4 January 2021.

The driver was rear ended at his daughter’s school while waiting to pick her up. The insurance company has written off the car and paid its agreed value. The insurance payout counts as disposal proceeds for the car.

The driver had claimed a GST credit on the car when he purchased it. This means that the sale proceeds (insurance payout) count as GST turnover.

This unanticipated payment will result in loss of eligibility for jobkeeper extension 2 from 4 January 2021 as the driver will now fail the 30% decline in turnover test for the quarter ending on 31 December 2021.

The rules don’t allow for the fact that the disposal was involuntary or that the driver has used the insurance payout to help fund a replacement car.


----------



## UberDriverAU

Jack Malarkey said:


> The driver had claimed a GST credit on the car when he purchased it. This means that the sale proceeds (insurance payout) count as GST turnover.


That's certainly an unfortunate set of circumstances. What about the case where drivers already owned the vehicle they use, and didn't buy the car specifically for business use?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

UberDriverAU said:


> That's certainly an unfortunate set of circumstances. What about the case where drivers already owned the vehicle they use, and didn't buy the car specifically for business use?


In that case, there would be nothing included in actual GST turnover as the driver would not have claimed a GST credit on purchase.

https://www.ato.gov.au/business/gst...-and-transport/gst-and-motor-vehicles/?page=3


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Queensland Country Life_

[HEADING=2]JobKeeper claims for sole traders[/HEADING]
_Sole traders who have been denied JobKeeper should be aware that the Administrative Appeals Tribunal is currently considering whether the Commissioner of Taxation's approach in denying certain JobKeeper claims is valid._







www.queenslandcountrylife.com.au

Sue Williamson, Damien Bourke and Paul Thompson 13 Nov 2020, noon

Sole traders who have been denied JobKeeper should be aware that the Administrative Appeals Tribunal is currently considering whether the Commissioner of Taxation's approach in denying certain JobKeeper claims is valid.

If you had your JobKeeper claim denied, you should check to see if you need to do anything to protect your rights pending the outcome of the case.

Under the JobKeeper legislation, sole traders may be eligible to receive JobKeeper payments if they are carrying out a business enterprise, meet other tests and have had a decrease to their turnover of at least 30 per cent compared to the previous year.

In circumstances where an applicant does not meet certain statutory tests, the commissioner has the discretion to allow applicants further time to satisfy the tests.

We are representing a sole trader fighting to receive JobKeeper payments. The applicant's business turnover declined by more than 30 per cent due to the impact of the coronavirus, but the commissioner refused to register the applicant on the basis that he did not have an ABN on 12 March 2020.

This was an oversight by the applicant as he failed to reactivate it in July 2019 when he recommenced his business. However, the applicant reactivated the ABN in late March 2020, with an effective date recorded in the Australian Business Register of July 2019.

The applicant also asked the commissioner to exercise his discretion to extend the time for having an ABN to fully protect his position. The request was denied.

The case was brought to the tribunal for a review into the commissioner's decision that the applicant was ineligible for JobKeeper.

It is expected that the tribunal will provide guidance on issues affecting a number of sole traders who have been denied JobKeeper including:


what it means to have an ABN on 12 March 2020
what factors the commissioner should take into account when exercising his discretion to allow further time for applicants to do various things to enable them access to JobKeeper payments
whether the tribunal has the power to review the decisions made by the commissioner in relation to the exercise of his discretion.

The decision of the tribunal might help sole traders who feel that they have been unfairly denied JobKeeper payments.

For example, the commissioner has denied JobKeeper payments because he incorrectly maintained the applicant did not have an ABN on 12 March 2020 or the commissioner has refused to grant further time to disclose business income or obtain an ABN.

Those affected should check that they have protected their rights to challenge the decisions made so that they can take advantage of the outcome of the case if it is positive for the applicant.

- _Holding Redlich partners Sue Williamson and Damien Bourke, and associate Paul Thompson_

*Jack Malarkey comments:*

I think the applicant in this AAT case has reasonable prospects of success.

In my view, the Tax Office may have approached the exercise of its discretion in an overly restrictive way as if the discretion applied only 'in special circumstances' (which was not part of the actual legislative test).


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Monday 9 November 2020

Tony Zhang

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www...-19-forces-rethink-in-national-tax-policy/amp
[HEADING=2]Long-term impacts from COVID-19 forcing rethink in national tax policy[/HEADING]

The long-term considerations from the pandemic have caused the government to review its tax and spending priorities, the nation's top economic bureaucrat has warned, as strong fiscal stimulus will be key despite record-low interest rates.

In a speech to the Australian Business Economists, Dr Steven Kennedy, secretary to the Treasury, assessed that the COVID-19 shock has been a challenging exercise for the Treasury and would have long-term ramifications for the budget that could force a rethink of national tax policy.

He said the federal budget had "used a wide range of levers and incentives to support aggregate demand" including income tax cuts, business tax concessions and infrastructure spending.

The government had also allowed extra welfare payments and lower tax receipts to boost the economy rather than cut back to shrink the $281 billion deterioration in the underlying cash balance.

But Mr Kennedy warned that "given the lack of conventional monetary support available, the recovery could falter without a strong fiscal policy response leading to years of anaemic growth".

He said the recession had affected the main drivers of economic growth and the hit to population growth was likely to require governments to revisit their tax and spending priorities.

Mr Kennedy said the JobKeeper payment and the coronavirus supplement were designed and introduced to replace the lost incomes for businesses and households who were substantially and directly affected. Importantly, JobKeeper was specifically "designed to keep a connection between employees and employers".

"They helped to resolve the financial uncertainty faced by the private sector and transferred it to the public balance sheet where it could be more easily absorbed," he said.

"Both policies were deliberately designed to be need or demand-based because the size of the shock to the economy was difficult to predict."

Mr Kennedy noted that the Treasury's analysis of ATO Single Touch Payroll data and the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey indicates that higher-income households on average saw close to no change in disposable income between the March and June quarters, while the average income of the lowest income households increased by around 20 per cent.

After the announcement of JobKeeper, business confidence increased by 20 points in April and by another 25 points in May. Consumer confidence also jumped significantly.

Looking ahead, Mr Kennedy touched on keys to economic recovery and the importance of lowering fiscal thresholds for the future.

"We do not know precisely when we will get a vaccine, how effective that vaccine will be and how much faster the recovery will be once a significant proportion of the population is vaccinated," he said.

"[The] Treasury is already forecasting more frequently than it ever has and we have incorporated the use of real-time data during this crisis."

"The Treasury is actively considering how our processes can be adjusted to make more up-to-date assessments of the appropriate stance of fiscal policy.

"However, fiscal policy tools are more complex than the cash rate. There is effectively an infinite suite of different fiscal policy tools."

Mr Kennedy pointed to fiscal policy instruments for stabilisation ideally could be implemented very quickly in response to a shock; however, a complex policy development process could create additional lags.

"In many ways, the design of the government's initial response to COVID-19 was to put in place temporary automatic stabilisers," he said.

"Any move towards more active fiscal policy needs to be pinned to credible long-run anchors.

"In the case of Australia, this is achieved through a continued commitment to sound public finances, underpinned by the tax-to-GDP cap, balanced budgets, and stabilising and reducing debt in the longer term."

Mr Kennedy said the first phase of the strategy focuses on supporting the economy and promoting economic growth until the recovery is assured. This phase of the strategy will remain in place until the unemployment rate is comfortably below 6 per cent.

"In the longer term, the strategy will transition to being focused on stabilising and reducing debt as a share of the economy. This will ensure that we will rebuild our fiscal buffers and are well placed to respond to future economic shocks," he said.

"We are normally debating small amounts of macroeconomic variation from the trend and small changes to tax and spending, but this budget has been unusual in that there is so much uncertainty about the future of the economy."

*Jack Malarkey comments:*

Here's a link to Dr Kennedy's speech:

https://treasury.gov.au/speech/policy-and-evolution-uncertainty


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Tuesday 17 November 2020

Jotham Lian

[HEADING=2]ATO extends JobKeeper monthly declaration after system downtime[/HEADING]
Late business monthly declarations for October JobKeeper payments will continue to be accepted by the ATO throughout November after its online systems were unavailable over the weekend.

Despite the business monthly declaration for October JobKeeper payments due on 14 November, the ATO had scheduled its system maintenance for online services for agents over the weekend, effectively affecting access over both days.

As such, the ATO has now confirmed it will continue to accept and process late declarations.

"As our systems were unavailable last weekend due to planned system maintenance, we will continue to process the monthly declaration to reimburse employers for October payments past 14 November 2020," an ATO spokesperson told Accountants Daily.

"As always, the sooner declarations are lodged, the sooner payments are processed. We work closely with software providers and the community, and if employers have any questions or need assistance on their JobKeeper monthly declarations, they should contact us."

...


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Accountants Daily

Tuesday 1 December 2020

Jotham Lian

[HEADING=2]ATO extends JobKeeper deadlines ahead of Christmas, New Year[/HEADING]
JobKeeper deadlines for the second extension period have now been extended by the ATO ahead of the festive season.

Completion of the December business monthly declaration, for employers to be reimbursed for payments between 23 November 2020 to 3 January 2021, has also been extended from the usual 14th of each month to 28 January 2021.

To account for the New Year weekend, the Tax Office will also allow employers to meet the wage condition for payments between 21 December and 3 January 2021 by 4 January 2021.

From 4 January, the second extension period for JobKeeper will kick in, reducing payment rates to $1,000 per fortnight for those on the Tier 1 rate, and $650 per fortnight for those on Tier 2.

Entities will be required to demonstrate that their actual GST turnover has declined by the requisite shortfall for the December 2020 quarter, with the ATO to make the new decline in turnover form available on its systems from 4 January.

New employers enrolling for the first time, and existing employers, will be required to submit the decline in turnover form by 31 January.

Employers will also be given until 31 January 2021 to meet the wage condition for fortnights starting on 4 January and 18 January 2021.

*JobKeeper figures*

The new dates come as statistics released by the government show that 450,000 businesses stopped accessing JobKeeperafter eligibility was tightened at the end of September.

The number of Australian workers on JobKeeper also fell from 3.6 million recipients at the height of the program to 1.5 million by the end of November.

Around 86 per cent of workers are now on the Tier 1 payment of $1,200 per fortnight, with around 14 per cent on the Tier 2 payment of $750 per fortnight.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg said the lower-than-forecast take-up of JobKeeper was evidence that economic recovery was well underway in Australia.


----------



## Sleepo

Jack Malarkey said:


> Accountants Daily
> 
> Tuesday 1 December 2020
> 
> Jotham Lian
> 
> [HEADING=2]ATO extends JobKeeper deadlines ahead of Christmas, New Year[/HEADING]
> JobKeeper deadlines for the second extension period have now been extended by the ATO ahead of the festive season.
> 
> Completion of the December business monthly declaration, for employers to be reimbursed for payments between 23 November 2020 to 3 January 2021, has also been extended from the usual 14th of each month to 28 January 2021.
> 
> To account for the New Year weekend, the Tax Office will also allow employers to meet the wage condition for payments between 21 December and 3 January 2021 by 4 January 2021.
> 
> From 4 January, the second extension period for JobKeeper will kick in, reducing payment rates to $1,000 per fortnight for those on the Tier 1 rate, and $650 per fortnight for those on Tier 2.
> 
> Entities will be required to demonstrate that their actual GST turnover has declined by the requisite shortfall for the December 2020 quarter, with the ATO to make the new decline in turnover form available on its systems from 4 January.
> 
> New employers enrolling for the first time, and existing employers, will be required to submit the decline in turnover form by 31 January.
> 
> Employers will also be given until 31 January 2021 to meet the wage condition for fortnights starting on 4 January and 18 January 2021.
> 
> *JobKeeper figures*
> 
> The new dates come as statistics released by the government show that 450,000 businesses stopped accessing JobKeeperafter eligibility was tightened at the end of September.
> 
> The number of Australian workers on JobKeeper also fell from 3.6 million recipients at the height of the program to 1.5 million by the end of November.
> 
> Around 86 per cent of workers are now on the Tier 1 payment of $1,200 per fortnight, with around 14 per cent on the Tier 2 payment of $750 per fortnight.
> 
> Treasurer Josh Frydenberg said the lower-than-forecast take-up of JobKeeper was evidence that economic recovery was well underway in Australia.


Hey Jack, 
sounds to me like we will get the 3 fortnights (18 -20) extension 1, paid after 4/1/21 as we cant do declaration until after this date


----------



## kMh

Hi everyone. I had to leave Australia with exemtion. I cannot work while I am abroad. Do you think I can be eligible for JobKeeper?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

kMh said:


> Hi everyone. I had to leave Australia with exemtion. I cannot work while I am abroad. Do you think I can be eligible for JobKeeper?


Australian Taxation Office:

You will not be able to receive JobKeeper while overseas.

You cannot receive JobKeeper while overseas as part of the eligibility criteria states:

_ you were either_


_an Australian resident (within the meaning of the Social Security Act 1991) - see residence descriptions on the Services Australia website_
_an Australian resident for the purpose of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 and the holder of a Subclass 444 (Special Category) visa_
An Australian resident according to the social Security Act is:

a person who:

(a) resides in Australia; and

(b) is one of the following:

(i) an Australian citizen;

(ii) the holder of a permanent visa;

(iii) a special category visa holder who is a protected SCV holder.

It states you have to reside in Australia. If you move or travel overseas you no longer reside in Australia. Similarly, if you are both an Australian resident for the purpose of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 and the holder of a Subclass 444 visa you would need to have New Zealand citizenship work or study in Australia and be considered an Australia resident for tax purposes.

https://community.ato.gov.au/t5/COVID-19-response/jobkeeper-payment-overseas/td-p/106809


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Accountants Daily

Tuesday 1 September 2020

Jotham Lian

[HEADING=2]Treasurer hails economic recovery as 2 million Australians drop off JobKeeper[/HEADING]

More than 2 million Australians have been weaned off JobKeeper payments, a sign that the country's economic recovery is well underway, says Treasurer Josh Frydenberg.

The number of JobKeeper recipients has fallen from 3.6 million to 1.5 million in less than two months, outperforming federal budget forecasts of 2.2 million recipients.

Around 86 per cent of workers are on the tier 1 payment of $1,200 per fortnight, with around 14 per cent on the tier 2 payment of $750 per fortnight.

The latest data from the ATO shows that around half a million entities are still accessing the wage subsidy, with about 450,000 businesses dropping off from the scheme after eligibility was tightened at the end of September.

Businesses had to prove that they had suffered the specified 15 per cent, 30 per cent or 50 per cent decline in turnover for the September quarter to qualify for the first JobKeeper extension, which runs until the start of the new year.

The second extension period, which runs from 4 January to 28 March 2021, will require entities to satisfy the decline in turnover test for the December 2020 quarter.

"The lower-than-forecast take-up of the JobKeeper payment extension in October is further evidence that Australia's recovery from this once-in-a-century pandemic is well underway," Mr Frydenberg said.

"Recent economic data shows that outside Victoria, employment has recovered to be less than 1 per cent below March levels, with some 650,000 jobs created in the past five months nationwide.

"The Reserve Bank of Australia has recently updated its forecast for the unemployment rate, which it now expects to peak at around 8 per cent, down from its earlier forecast of 10 per cent."

JobKeeper payment rates will fall again in January to $1,000 per fortnight for those working 80 hours or more in a four-week period before the pandemic, and $650 per fortnight for everyone else.

Despite trending in the right direction, the Treasurer said "that the road ahead will be hard, it will be bumpy, it will be long".

"There will be some businesses that don't make it and some jobs that cannot be saved. But it's our analysis the unemployment rate will come down next year and the year ahead even after JobKeeper comes off at the end of March," he said.

The Treasurer also pointed out the current trade issues with China are hurting both countries' recovery.

"This is a challenging time, with Australia's largest trading partner in China. But it is a mutually beneficial relationship. China benefits greatly from Australia's iron ore, which underpins its economic growth.

"So, we will obviously work through these issues."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

SmartCompany

SMEs granted extra time for JobKeeper reporting over holiday season

Small and medium businesses will have extra time to meet their JobKeeper reporting requirements over the Christmas and New Year period.







www.smartcompany.com.au

[HEADING=2]ELOISE KEATING[/HEADING]

DECEMBER 4, 2020

Small and medium businesses will have extra time to meet their JobKeeper reporting requirements over the Christmas and New Year period, with the Australian Taxation Office extending key reporting dates in December and January.

The extensions apply to December monthly declarations, as well as the wage conditions that employers must meet for JobKeeper fortnights 20, 21 and 22.

December monthly declarations will now be due by January 28, instead of the 14th of the month. This will cover JobKeeper fortnights 18, 19 and 20, which include payments made to employees between November 23, 2020, and January 3, 2021.

The wage condition for JobKeeper fortnight 20, which covers the period from December 21, 2020 to January 3, 2020, has been extended to Monday, January 4, to give employers additional time to pay the appropriate JobKeeper amounts.

The ATO will also give employers the whole of January to meet the wage condition for eligible employees for JobKeeper fortnights 21 and 22, which cover the period from Monday, January 4 to Sunday, January 31.

The tax office said this extension is to make sure businesses have been able to pay all eligible employees before submitting their February monthly declarations.

The extensions come as employers start preparing for the second part of JobKeeper 2.0, which commences on Monday, January 4, and will run until Sunday, March 28.

Under this phase, payments will drop to $1,000 for 'tier 1' eligible employees or business participants, and $650 for those on 'tier 2'.

To access JobKeeper payments under this phase, businesses will need to complete a new decline in turnover test to show a decline in actual GST turnover in the December 2020 quarter, against a comparable period.

Existing JobKeeper recipients and businesses enrolling in JobKeeper for the first time will need to complete this test by the end of January 2021.

About 500,000 businesses are continuing to receive JobKeeper payments, with around 450,000 entities coming off the program in October, according to figures released by Treasurer Josh Frydenberg on Monday.

Between March and September, about 1 million businesses and more than 3.6 million workers qualified for the first phase of the JobKeeper program, with close to $70 billion paid out over 13 fortnights.

Businesses were required to retest their eligibility for the second phase of the program, which commenced in October, and this led to 450,000 businesses and about 2 million employees no longer qualifying for the wage subsidies.

Of the employees and business participants that did qualify in October, 86% received the 'tier 1' payment of $1,200 a fortnight and 14% received the lower 'tier 1' payment of $750 per fortnight.

Frydenberg said the take-up of the payments was lower than forecast in October and this shows Australia's recovery from the pandemic is "well underway".

"These preliminary October JobKeeper figures suggest an improvement on the 2020-21 Budget assumption of 2.2 million recipients for the December quarter, with around 700,000 fewer employees/eligible business participants covered by the payment in October due to their employer no longer meeting the required decline in turnover test," he said.

More information about key JobKeeper dates is available on the ATO website here.

Jack Malarkey comments:

As @Sleepo correctly predicted (and @Jack Malarkey(scoundrel extraordinaire) did not correctly predict), it will be the payment in January 2021 that covers three jobkeeper fortnights and not the payment in February 2021.

They won't have a blend of payments in the one month for jobkeeper extension 1 and extension 2. Rather, they'll cover off jobkeeper extension 1 in the January payment.

This means that the January payment will be $3,600 (3 X $1,200) for those receiving the higher payment.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office:

[HEADING=2]JobKeeper - timeline of content updates[/HEADING]
A timeline of new information and content updates for the JobKeeper Payment:


30 November 2020

30 NovemberUpdate: We've updated the JobKeeper key dates page to provide more information on the extension-two period in January 2021.
[HEADING=2]JobKeeper - timeline of content updates[/HEADING]
A timeline of new and updated JobKeeper Payment information on ato.gov.au.







www.ato.gov.au


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Recent information from the Australian Taxation Office leads necessarily to the conclusion that it will be the jobkeeper payment in January (not February) that will be bigger than usual as it covers three jobkeeper fortnights rather than the regular two. This is different from what many of us had been expecting but will result in an earlier payment for one of the fortnights.

There will NOT be a blend of payments in February as a transitional month for jobkeeper extension 1 and extension 2. Rather, the payment in January will completely cover off extension 1 (three fortnights) while the payment in February will cover two fortnights (both from extension 2).

This means that the payment in January will be $3,600 (3 X $1,200) for those on tier 1 (the higher rate). For those on tier 2 (the lower rate), the payment in January will be $2,250 (3 X $750).

The amounts will then be $2,000 (2 X $1,000) for each of the payments in February, March and April for tier 1 and $1,300 (2 X $650) for tier 2.

The payment in January will include the final fortnight for extension 1 ending on 3 January. This involves a departure from the usual practice of paying only for fortnights that have ended in the previous calendar month. This results in a bringing forward by one month of the payment for that fortnight.

A consequence of all this is that we won't be able to make the required GST turnover declarations for the payment in January until 4 January rather than from 1 January.

https://www.ato.gov.au/General/JobKeeper-Payment/JobKeeper-key-dates/


----------



## Jack Malarkey

ABC Australia

Wednesday 9 December 2020

[HEADING=2]Tax office pursuing 19 criminal investigations, issues fines over JobKeeper fraud[/HEADING]
The Australian Tax Office has revealed there are 19 active criminal investigations into fraud against the $101 billion JobKeeper scheme, with a further 19 applicants fined for making false or misleading statements.
[HEADING=2]Criminal investigations into JobKeeper rorts ramp up as scheme winds down[/HEADING]
ABC Investigations

Exclusive by Pat McGrath

The Australian Taxation Office has 19 active criminal investigations into fraud against the $101 billion JobKeeper scheme.

[HEADING=1]Key points:[/HEADING]

More than $120 million in JobKeeper payments have been clawed back from ineligible claimants
The Australian Tax Office fraud hotline has received 10,000 tip-offs alleging JobKeeper rorts
The Australian National Audit Office is considering an audit into the $101 billion scheme

It has also issued fines to another 19 applicants to the wage subsidy program who have made false or misleading statements, and is considering penalties for another 24.

Since JobKeeper was launched in March, the ATO has clawed back $120 million in payments to applicants who made it into the system but were later found to be ineligible.

"While most businesses and employees are doing the right thing, we have identified concerning and fraudulent behaviour and claims by a small number of organisations and employees," the ATO said in a statement.

The agency declined to comment on whether the criminal investigations relate to employers or employees and would not provide details about any of the businesses involved or when the investigations began.

However, ABC Investigations understands employers and individual workers are being investigated over fraud and abuse of the scheme.

Applicants could face a prison sentence or fines if found guilty of defrauding the scheme.

The program was designed to keep workers in jobs during the COVID-19 economic crisis by paying struggling business $1,500 per fortnight for each eligible employee.

In July, the Federal Government extended JobKeeper to March next year but reduced the fortnightly payment to $1,200 for full-time workers and $750 for part-timers and casuals from September.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg is expected to downgrade the estimated final cost of the scheme in this month's mid-year economic and fiscal outlook, after the number of workers on JobKeeper almost halved in October as the economy gathered pace.

In a statement, Mr Frydenberg said the government was "committed to ensuring the integrity of the JobKeeper payment."

"Comprehensive integrity and compliance arrangements have been put in place to support the delivery of the JobKeeper Payment," he said.

"To date, the ATO has reported that the vast majority of JobKeeper applicants are doing the right thing with very low incidences of fraud being observed."

The fraud investigation revelations come as the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) considers its own probe into the scheme.

According to its website, the ANAO has flagged JobKeeper for a potential audit next year that would include an "examination of the implementation of integrity measures designed to protect the scheme against fraud and other abuse."

The ATO fraud hotline has received more than 10,000 tip-offs about fraud against JobKeeper, including claims that some employers have not been passing on the full subsidy to their employees.

ABC Investigations has also spoken to workers concerned that their employers may have artificially suppressed their revenue in order to qualify for the scheme, for example by delaying invoicing customers or removing popular items from sale in retail stores.

The ATO says it has initiated 14 of the fraud investigations using its powers under the Taxation Administration Act and has referred a further five cases to the Australian Federal Police's Serious Financial Crimes Taskforce.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Accountants Daily

Tuesday 15 December 2020

Jotham Lian

[HEADING=2]Auditor-General endorses ATO's COVID-19 response[/HEADING]
The ATO's rapid implementation of COVID-19 economic response measures has been given a tick of approval from the Auditor-General.

Tabled on Monday, the Australian National Audit Office's (ANAO) performance audit report concluded that the ATO had effectively managed risks, undertook appropriate planning and implemented the six economic response measures it was tasked with in a timely manner.

The six measures include the JobKeeper scheme, the cash flow boost, the early release of superannuation, the enhanced instant asset write-off, the backing business investment, and the temporary reduction of superannuation minimum drawdown rates.

The audit cost the ANAO $437,000 and did not include an assessment of the design, effectiveness or outcomes of the six measures.

Auditor-General Grant Hehir ultimately made no recommendations but provided key messages to other government entities to rely on.

The ANAO has since flagged, however, that it is currently considering a standalone audit on the ATO's administration of the JobKeeper scheme, which would include an examination of the implementation of integrity measures designed to protect the scheme against fraud and other abuse.

Snapshot of findings

The audit found that the ATO reassigned over 10,000 staff to support the rollout of the six measures. It later also recruited over 1,500 casual employees to further support the implementation of the measures and to cover tax time 2020 demands.

Despite the mobilisation of staff, the Tax Office hit its limit between 21 and 28 April - the week where JobKeeper enrolments formally opened - resulting in 71,563 calls being blocked. Severe degradation of its contact centre service also saw close to 110,000 calls being prevented from connecting to the ATO.

The audit also found that the ATO had appropriately considered a number of risks associated with the measures and developed the requisite risk mitigation strategies.

The ANAO revealed that the ATO's risk and compliance strategies had resulted in 46 businesses being investigated for JobKeeper fraud by mid-August, while around 800 early access to super requests were flagged on the suspicion of fraud.

Responding to the audit, the ATO noted that it implemented the new measures within weeks, despite the typical timeline for such activities hovering between six and 12 months. It has since thanked the Auditor-General for the positive assessment of its risk management activities.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

ABC Australia









[HEADING=2]ATO made 'flawed decisions' on denying small businesses JobKeeper, says tax ombudsman[/HEADING]
The tax ombudsman says the ATO has made flawed decisions on some people's eligibility for the stimulus measure payments, and needs to give taxpayers clearer guidance.
www.google.com.au

Monday 21 December 2020

[HEADING=2]More than 9,000 small businesses object to ATO decisions on JobKeeper, business cashflow boost[/HEADING]

By business reporter Nassim Khadem

More than 9,000 small businesses have objected to the Australian Taxation Office's (ATOs) decisions to deny them coronavirus stimulus payments including JobKeeper and the small business cash flow boost, the tax ombudsman says.

[HEADING=1]Key points:[/HEADING]

The tax ombudsman says the ATO has made errors in determining whether small businesses are eligible for JobKeeper and the business cashflow boost
The ombudsman is also worried the ATO's public guidance is not clear and businesses may miss out on payments because they do not understand they are eligible
The ATO says the errors are a very small portion of millions of stimulus payments successfully delivered

The Inspector-General of Taxation and Taxation Ombudsman (IGTO) Karen Payne's review found that the ATO's handling of small business complaints was sometimes "unfair" and that its guidance on whether small businesses were eligible for the stimulus payments was inadequate.

The ATO has itself received more than 9,000 objections on its administration of two of the Federal Government's coronavirus stimulus measures - the $1,500 fortnightly (rate at the time) JobKeeper wage subsidy and the tax-free cash flow boosts of between $20,000 and $100,000.

The ATO told ABC News it has reversed its original decision in about 30 per cent of those 9000 objections but that only a small portion of reversed decisions related to the issues raised in the IGTO's report.

The IGTO has received 66 direct complaints from taxpayers to its office about the ATO's decision to deem them ineligible, and the Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman Kate Carnell received 200 complaints on the same matter.

Some of the complaints may have overlapped across watchdog agencies and some of the complaints have been resolved (but neither agency will say how many have been resolved).

Ms Payne's investigations found that some of the 66 people making direct complaints to her office were in fact eligible for the stimulus payments based on the legal definition of what defines someone carrying on a business.



> "The ATO's original correspondence to some taxpayers didn't provide them with procedural fairness before they made an adverse decision [against the taxpayer]," Ms Payne told ABC News.


She said had the ATO considered taxpayer views and evidence before finalising its decisions, "the ATO would have decreased the risk of flawed decision-making".

In its response to the IGTO, the ATO's acting second commissioner of law design and practice, Kirsten Fish, said that the errors applied to "a very small number of cases on a specific technical issue".

They were part of stimulus measures of an "unprecedented scale" which had resulted in more than $100 billion in financial support payments being delivered to more than 1 million business supporting more than 6 million workers.

The ATO, Ms Fish said, was "committed to procedural fairness" and had tried to provide "timely and clear" information in its guidance for taxpayers that "could be understood by broad audiences".

But Ms Payne said while the number of "flawed decisions" may be a small portion of the millions of Australians who claimed the JobKeeper payment, the small businesses impacted suffer financially and emotionally, as do their employees and their families.

Some disputes have also ended up in court, leaving some taxpayers having to pay for legal advice and representation.

The IGTO's report noted that at the end of November, of 374 cases that went before the small business taxation division within the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), 35 of them related to the JobKeeper payments and 30 related to the cashflow boost.

Ms Payne is also worried that many more taxpayers will remain unaware of their potential eligibility because the ATO won't update its guidance.



> "It [the ATO's previous update to its public guidance] did not expressly address this issue in a clear or comprehensive way," she said.


"Without updated guidance, there may be small business taxpayers who get left behind [by missing out on the stimulus payments]."
[HEADING=1]An 'erosion of trust' in Australia's tax system?[/HEADING]
Ms Payne said she considered more than 9,000 objection cases on the ATO's handling of the stimulus measures to be too high. It is in the context of more than 22,000 objections by taxpayers to ATO decisions each year.

And her fear is that, as complaints are still being investigated, it could later emerge that the ATO was wrong in many other cases.

The ATO's second commissioner, Jeremy Hirschhorn, had previously told Senate budget estimates the ATO would claw back $120 million out of $69 billion in JobKeeper payments due to "deliberate" or "reckless" mistakes.

The ATO told ABC News in a statement that about 30 per cent of the 9,000 objections had been allowed in whole or part, but not all of them related to the issues raised in the IGTO's report.

It said some taxpayers had seen the decision reversed after they provided more information, raised new issues or addressed ineligibility issues such as lodging outstanding returns.



> "These objections relate to a variety of issues and most of these objections are unrelated to the issues covered by the IGTO report," the ATO statement said.


"Only a very small proportion of the objections relate to cases where the Commissioner is seeking repayment of monies paid to ineligible recipients."

It said "new business entities who received some JobKeeper payments before being advised they were ineligible, have been advised by the ATO they do not need to repay us amounts".

Asked why the ATO would not update guidance in line with the IGTO's recommendations, the ATO said: "the advice and guidance strikes an appropriate balance in providing practical information for business".

Ms Payne said some complainants would not have had their eligibility reconsidered if it were not for the IGTO's complaint investigation and that "it is likely that there are many other affected taxpayers" who could be eligible.



> "If the ATO does not take action to identify affected taxpayers and initiate appropriate remedial action &#8230; it will risk the erosion of public confidence in the fair and transparent administration of Australia's tax system," she said.


The ATO used template decision letters in these complaint cases that "did not advise taxpayers of these other avenues or rights of review - they only advised entities of the objection process".

Ms Payne said small businesses would have also benefited from an "independent review" of ATO decisions.

She also called for a faster process for dealing with these objections, which would help reduce costs for the taxpayer as well as the ATO's administrative costs.

She said the IGTO does not have full unfettered access to ATO records and it took the agency one month - while her investigations were already underway - before they revealed the problem to her office.



> "If we had better unfettered access to ATO records, maybe these issues could be resolved more quickly," Ms Payne said.


Why the ATO's decision turned out to be wrong

The small businesses thought they were eligible to receive the stimulus payments because they were actively trading prior to March 2020, before the COVID-19 pandemic shutdowns in Australia.

By actively trading, Ms Payne said this meant that they had started new leases or got bank loans to run their business but may have not yet opened their doors to the public to make sales of goods and services.

Ms Payne's report gives the following example of why the ATO's decision turned out to be wrong. It centres on what actually incorporates someone running a business:

A company was incorporated in July 2019 to fit out and run a cafe.

From August 2019 to December 2019 the company applied for the required council approvals to operate as a café and spent considerable funds fitting out the café premises.

The café opened in January 2020 with five employees. It made [about] $13,000 per week in sales until it was forced to shut in March 2020 due to a State Government lock-down that was implemented in response to the pandemic.

At the time of the lock-down, the café employed 11 staff. The company reported GST on a quarterly basis and therefore reported its first sales in the tax period that ended on March 31, 2020.

The ATO decided that the taxpayer was ineligible for the [business cashflow boost] payment on the following grounds:

"We have reviewed your GST registration and you report GST on a quarterly basis. The last quarter that ended prior to March 12, 2020 was the quarter ended December 31, 2019.

"You commenced business after January 1, 2020 and could not lodge a GST return for the quarter ended December 31, 2019."

Ms Payne told ABC News: "The issue is that when you read the letter it suggests that you would have had to make a sale before December 31 and reported to the [Tax] Commissioner to be eligible.

"But I can make a financial supply by opening a bank account or taking out a loan," she added.

"That's an eligible taxable supply that counts to show that you were carrying on an enterprise before December 31. It includes all the activities you do before you open your doors to carry out a business."

She said the ATO's ability to identify taxpayers affected by its adverse decisions is a broader issue that may warrant review by the Auditor-General.

Ms Payne in her report also noted an "inconsistency" between the ATO and Treasury published guidance on the stimulus measures.

She said disputes often arise "because there is a different understanding of the words as enacted and different expectations of the intentions of those words by those who are subject to the law as compared with those responsible for administering the law".

She said it was important that the same people involved in drafting the law - including the ATO who assist or advise the drafters - should not also be responsible for determining how the law should be interpreted or administered.



> "Without separation, there can be unnecessary disputes and confusion, which is not in the interests of efficient tax administration," Ms Payne said.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Here's a link to the recent report by the Inspector-General of Taxation and Taxation Ombudsman:

https://www.igt.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-12/IGTO Report on Administration of JobKeeper and Boosting Cash Flow - December 2020_0.pdf


----------



## Jack Malarkey

AAT DECISION ON BACKDATED ABNs

Australian Taxation Office

Tuesday 22 December 2020

[HEADING=2]AAT decision on backdated ABNs[/HEADING]
Information on the AAT decision in Apted and Federal Commissioner of Taxation.







www.ato.gov.au

AAT decision on backdated ABNs

On 21 December 2020, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) handed down its decision in _Apted and Federal Commissioner of Taxation (_Tribunal reference 2020/4562).

[HEADING=2]AAT decision[/HEADING]
The AAT held that the applicant did meet the requirement to have an ABN on 12 March 2020, in circumstances where the ABR Registrar decided to reactivate a previously cancelled Australian business number (ABN) after 12 March 2020 and backdated the reactivation to have effect on or before 12 March 2020.

[HEADING=2]How it affects you[/HEADING]
We are currently considering the decision and its implications, including whether to appeal.

The AAT's decision has not changed the need to satisfy all of the other eligibility conditions. If your JobKeeper application was declined because you did not meet the requirement to have an ABN on 12 March 2020, and you are satisfied that you meet all other eligibility requirements, check this webpage over the coming weeks for an update.

We will provide further information on your next steps once we have considered the AAT decision and its implications.

[end of Tax Office announcement]

Copy of AAT decision:

Apted and Commissioner of Taxation (Taxation) [2020] AATA 5139 (21 December 2020)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> AAT DECISION ON BACKDATED ABNs
> 
> Australian Taxation Office
> 
> Tuesday 22 December 2020
> 
> [HEADING=2]AAT decision on backdated ABNs[/HEADING]
> Information on the AAT decision in Apted and Federal Commissioner of Taxation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ato.gov.au
> 
> AAT decision on backdated ABNs
> 
> On 21 December 2020, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) handed down its decision in _Apted and Federal Commissioner of Taxation (_Tribunal reference 2020/4562).
> 
> [HEADING=2]AAT decision[/HEADING]
> The AAT held that the applicant did meet the requirement to have an ABN on 12 March 2020, in circumstances where the ABR Registrar decided to reactivate a previously cancelled Australian business number (ABN) after 12 March 2020 and backdated the reactivation to have effect on or before 12 March 2020.
> 
> [HEADING=2]How it affects you[/HEADING]
> We are currently considering the decision and its implications, including whether to appeal.
> 
> The AAT's decision has not changed the need to satisfy all of the other eligibility conditions. If your JobKeeper application was declined because you did not meet the requirement to have an ABN on 12 March 2020, and you are satisfied that you meet all other eligibility requirements, check this webpage over the coming weeks for an update.
> 
> We will provide further information on your next steps once we have considered the AAT decision and its implications.
> 
> [end of Tax Office announcement]
> 
> Copy of AAT decision:
> 
> Apted and Commissioner of Taxation (Taxation) [2020] AATA 5139 (21 December 2020)


The Tax Institute Blog
[HEADING=2]Decision in Apted and FC of T[/HEADING]
Written by The Tax Institute | Dec 23, 2020 4:39:13 AM

Some of you may have read or heard about the AAT case, _Apted and Federal Commissioner of Taxation [2020_] AATA 5139 handed down on 21 December 2020 regarding JobKeeper eligibility and whether an entity 'had an ABN' on 12 March 2020.

Very briefly, and as noted by the ATO, the AAT held that the applicant did meet the requirement to have an ABN on 12 March 2020, in circumstances where the ABR Registrar decided to reactivate a previously cancelled Australian Business Number (ABN) after 12 March 2020 and backdated the reactivation to have effect on or before 12 March 2020.

Given the proximity to Christmas, we wanted to ensure our members remain informed and up to date on this issue.

At this time, we note that the ATO is presently considering its appeal options and therefore we anticipate that we will understand more of the ATO's next steps around mid- to late-January.

We acknowledge that access to JobKeeper is a particularly sensitive matter for clients of our members, particularly where they may have previously been denied access to the stimulus measure.

Similar to the ATO's request as outlined on the ATO's website, we request our members await further guidance before contacting the ATO on this issue.

We will continue to work with the ATO to understand more and establish efficient and effective channels to liaise with the ATO on this issue at the relevant time.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

MyBusiness

[HEADING=2]Ms Carnell puts hope in third JobKeeper extension for businesses in distress[/HEADING]
The small business ombudsman is hopeful that the government will extend JobKeeper beyond March for businesses that continue to do it tough.

[HEADING=2]Maja Garaca Djurdjevic[/HEADING]

30 December 2020

The small business ombudsman is hopeful that the government will extend JobKeeper beyond March for businesses that continue to do it tough.

In a recent MyBusiness webcast, the Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman, Kate Carnell, expressed hope that the government would find value in extending the JobKeeper wage subsidy for businesses in distress, beyond the current 28 March 2021 hard cutoff date.

Ms Carnell's opinion is based on jobs statistics, with the ombudsman explaining that JobKeeper allowed small businesses to hold onto their workforces until the end of September, with many then forced to make cuts following the end of the first phase of the wage subsidy.

"JobKeeper got small businesses with less than 20 employees back to almost the same levels of jobs as pre-March by the end of September. But by the second week of November, there'd been quite a significant reduction in jobs again. And I think that is probably because as people came off JobKeeper, they had to reassess their cash flow, reassess their business capacity to keep people on their books," she said.

"But medium to larger businesses are tracking along quite well. So, I think what we're seeing is what I talked about before and that's businesses as they come off JobKeeper having to really reassess the number of staff they've got. For many of them, they can afford to pay and that will result in a reduction in employment."

She expects a similar trend to occur in January and February, as yet more businesses fall off the wage subsidy.

"I must admit I'm hopeful that the government will extend JobKeeper for those industries that are still doing it really tough, but they certainly haven't announced that," Ms Carnell said.

"And that's just me personally. I feel incredibly concerned about those businesses like travel agents... and helping shops in major office buildings, adventure tourism operators, large events operators,the list goes on."

According to data from the Treasury, currently there are some 500,000 businesses in JobKeeper after some 450,000 businesses lost their eligibility when JobKeeper entered the second phase. This number is expected to decrease significantly with the launch of the second part of the second phase on 4 January.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office:

Eligible entities can complete their business monthly declaration from 4 January 2021 ... for payments ... [for] JobKeeper fortnights 18, 19 and 20 (23 November 2020 to 3 January 2021).

We will continue to process monthly declarations ...for payments for the month of December past the usual due date of the 14th of the month, until Thursday 28 January 2021.

[HEADING=2]From 4 January 2021 - new decline in turnover form available[/HEADING]
Eligible entities will be able to access and submit the decline in turnover form to determine their eligibility to participate in the second JobKeeper Payment extension period from 4 January 2021 to 28 March 2021.

This new decline in turnover form must be submitted before ...[you] can complete ...business monthly declarations from 1 February 2021.

See Decline in turnover.

[HEADING=2]JobKeeper key dates[/HEADING]
Key dates for the JobKeeper Payment.







www.ato.gov.au


----------



## Jack Malarkey

SmartCompany









[HEADING=2]As JobKeeper enters its final stage, SME advocates call for an extension[/HEADING]
COSBOA chief executive Peter Strong says the government should continue JobKeeper wage subsidies beyond March.







www.smartcompany.com.au

[HEADING=2]JobKeeper enters its final stage, but small business advocates call for extension[/HEADING]

ELOISE KEATING

JANUARY 6, 2021

The JobKeeper payment rate was cut again on Monday, but Peter Strong from the Council of Small Business Organisations Australia (COSBOA) says the government should now be preparing to continue the wage subsidy scheme beyond its expiry in March.

Since March 2020, thousands of Australian businesses have accessed the JobKeeper scheme, which moved into its final stage this week.

From January 4, the 'tier 1' JobKeeper rate for eligible employees and business participants working 80 hours or more each month dropped from $1,200 to $1,000 per fortnight, and the 'tier 2' rate dropped from $750 to $650 per fortnight.

To continue accessing the scheme, businesses must complete a new turnover test, with the Australian Taxation Office giving SMEs extra time over the Christmas and New Year period to meet their reporting obligations.

Approximately 500,000 businesses were still accessing the payments in November, with about 450,000 entities coming off the program in Octoberas the economy began its recovery.

However, with new coronavirus outbreaks over the Christmas and New Year period, and restrictions once again placed on businesses in New South Wales and Victoria, there are concerns that small businesses remain vulnerable.

Speaking to _SmartCompany_, COSBOA chief executive Peter Strong says JobKeeper should be extended beyond its March 28 end date.

"It should be continued in a different form, by targeting it," he says.

"We can collect data about which businesses and geographical areas are suffering the most. That would be a much better use of the funds, to get to the businesses that need them."

Small business ombudsman Kate Carnell previously told _MyBusiness_ she hopes to see the government continue the payments for businesses in distress.

"JobKeeper got small businesses with less than 20 employees back to almost the same levels of jobs as pre-March by the end of September. But by the second week of November, there'd been quite a significant reduction in jobs again," she said during a podcast.

"And I think that is probably because as people came off JobKeeper, they had to reassess their cashflow, reassess their business capacity to keep people on their books."

Elsewhere, Strong says the government should also be focused on supporting small businesses to access the new insolvency process if needed, following changes that came into effect on January 1.

Under the new arrangements, businesses with liabilities of under $1 million will be able to stay in control of their business and continue to trade while they restructure debts.

Strong says these arrangements will be key for some small businesses when JobKeeper payments end, and so the government needs to ensure the changes are well-communicated.

Communication with small businesses is also needed in relation to the COVID-19 vaccine, says Strong, who says it is vital business owners understand how the vaccine will be made available and what to do if people within their business do not wish to be vaccinated.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_New Daily_

[HEADING=2]JobKeeper: Treasury presents case for ending scheme in March[/HEADING]
_The Morrison government has committed to ending JobKeeper in March after data showed households and businesses had squirrelled away more than $200 billion._

10:00pm, Jan 14, 2021 Updated: 9:16pm, Jan 14
[HEADING=2]JobKeeper will end in March. But do economists believe that's a good idea?[/HEADING]

Euan Black

The Morrison government has doubled down on withdrawing JobKeeper at the end of March after data showed households and businesses had squirrelled away more than $200 billion in extra savings.

Data from financial regulator APRA shows household deposits increased by almost $113 billion, or 11.4 per cent, between the start of January and the end of November last year, while non-financial business deposits increased by almost $104 billion or 17.6 per cent.

The massive run-up in savings has convinced Treasury that the economy will no longer fall off a "fiscal cliff" when JobKeeper is removed on March 28, as households and businesses will have more than $200 billion of extra cash to spend and invest.

"There is a huge sum of money available to be spent across the economy, helping to create jobs and maintain the momentum of our economic recovery," Treasurer Josh Frydenberg said in a statement.

New modelling from Treasury also shows the government's stimulus package will lead to economic activity or real GDP being 5 per cent higher in 2020-21 - and 4.5 per cent higher in 2021-22 - than it otherwise would have been without the support.

The modelling comes after Mr Frydenberg told media earlier this week that JobKeeper was only ever a temporary program and other measures would continue to help the economy after its removal.

JobKeeper was initially designed to run from March 2020 until the end of September, but in July the government extended it to March 28, 2021.

Economist Cameron Murray said it made "total sense" to withdraw JobKeeper at the end of March.

A post-doctoral research fellow in the Henry Halloran Trust at the University of Sydney, Dr Murray said businesses were already flush with cash and only a few industries still needed support.

He said the turnover test for JobKeeper was "the biggest joke ever" as companies could "choose the time at which expenses and incomes are incurred" and consequently qualify for the payment without suffering an actual drop in turnover.

Lifting the permanent JobSeeker rate would therefore be preferable to extending JobKeeper, as the money would go directly to those who need it.

"I have no worries about [government] debt. I have no worries about inflation," said Dr Murray, when asked why he thought JobKeeper should end on March 28.

"It's just the upwards distribution of wealth."

[HEADING=2]Savings might not be spent[/HEADING]
Equity Economics lead economist Angela Jackson and Blueprint Institute chief economist Steven Hamilton also agreed that the government should end JobKeeper in March.

But both challenged the government's assumption that households and businesses would spend the $200 billion of savings.

"Confidence is key," Ms Jackson said.

"At the moment there is every indication that Australian households are confident and this should help drive spending.

"But if households lose confidence or sense that the recovery is stalling, things could change quickly."

Dr Hamilton, meanwhile, said improved economic conditions drive business investment rather than additional savings.

"It's the economic outlook. It's the degree of demand. It's fundamental factors that drive those decisions," he said, noting that companies could easily dish out the extra savings to shareholders or keep it in the bank.

He said the key to getting businesses to spend the extra cash was to provide more incentives.

For example, the federal government could increase the subsidy given to businesses via the JobMaker hiring credit, or expand the scheme to include older workers as well as the young.

They could also continue the instant asset write-off scheme.

"Improving incomes drives spending but what drives it more is directly increasing incentives," Dr Hamilton said.

"And the more tightly you can tie the provision of support to the decision [to spend], the bigger bang for buck you're gonna get."

However, both economists said that extending JobKeeper beyond March would have perverse economic outcomes.

Dr Hamilton said the scheme had achieved its stated aim of helping companies keep on staff during the worst of the lockdowns, but extending it would keep people in jobs with no long-term future and prevent resources from flowing to more productive uses.

"It sort of gums up the job market," he said.

"It prevents the reallocation of resources."

Ms Jackson said there was a clear case for the continuation of support to sectors still affected by COVID-19 restrictions, such as tourism, but beyond specific industries "the case for continuation is not strong".


----------



## Jack Malarkey

From the Australian Taxation Office's small business newsroom:

[HEADING=2]JobKeeper extension 2 has started[/HEADING]
_Find out about eligibility and key dates for JobKeeper extension 2._







www.ato.gov.au

[HEADING=2]







[/HEADING]
18 January 2021

The second JobKeeper extension has started. It covers the JobKeeper fortnights between Monday 4 January and Sunday 28 March 2021.

You might be eligible for JobKeeper extension 2 even if you weren't eligible for extension 1.

If you are eligible, you can enrol for the second JobKeeper extension until the end of the program.

To be eligible you need to show that your actual GST turnover declined in the December 2020 quarter relative to a 'comparable period'. This is generally the December 2019 quarter.

There are different payment rates for eligible employees in the second JobKeeper extension.

These are:

Tier 1: $1,000 per fortnight (before tax)
Tier 2: $650 per fortnight (before tax).
To support you over December and January we've extended some reporting dates:

The December business monthly declaration is now due by 28 January 2021.
For JobKeeper fortnights 21 and 22 (starting Monday 4 January 2021 and Monday 18 January 2021) you have until Sunday 31 January 2021 to meet the wage condition for your eligible employees.
Find out about:

JobKeeper extension


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_









[HEADING=2]ATO launches appeal against JobKeeper decision[/HEADING]
_The ATO has turned to the Federal Court in an attempt to overturn an Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision that granted a sole trader access to JobKeeper._

Jotham Lian

Wednesday 20 January 2021

The ATO has turned to the Federal Court in an attempt to overturn an Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision that granted a sole trader access to JobKeeper.

The AAT had earlier ruled that sole trader Jeremy Apted was entitled to JobKeeper because his backdated ABN registration had satisfied the integrity rule of holding an ABN before or on 12 March 2020.

However, the ATO fundamentally believes that a backdated ABN fails to meet the point-in-time test of holding an active ABN on 12 March 2020 for the purposes of the JobKeeper rules, and has now lodged an appeal to the Full Federal Court to reverse the ruling.

The ATO has also sought for the appeal to be expedited, and will hold off from finalising appeals and objections for similarly affected taxpayers in the meantime.

"While the appeal outcome is pending, we will continue to resolve matters where an eligible business participant's eligibility can be determined in a manner favourable to them," said the ATO.

"However, we will not pre-emptively finalise decisions in circumstances where we determine a client does not satisfy the eligibility criteria but consider they might become eligible depending on the views of the Full Federal Court on the issues in this case.

"Where the client would like us to make a decision prior to the Full Federal Court appeal decision, we will apply the current ATO view for sole traders and partnerships, trusts and companies."

*The facts of the case*

The JobKeeper test case centred around whether Mr Apted had held an active ABN on or before 12 March 2020- an integrity rule contained in the $90 billion wage subsidy scheme.

Mr Apted, a specialist retail valuer, had held an ABN since 2012 but cancelled it in 2018 as he sought retirement.

He resumed work in September 2019 but failed to reactivate his ABN because he mistakenly assumed that he only needed one if he was required to be registered for GST.

When COVID-19 struck, Mr Apted reactivated his ABN and applied for JobKeeper, but was knocked back because he missed the 12 March 2020 deadline, prompting him to reach out to the Australian Business Registrar to backdate his ABN reactivation to 1 July 2019.

The AAT ruled that it effectively made him eligible for JobKeeper, noting that the Registrar was satisfied with Mr Apted's business evidence in backdating the date of effect of registration.

"The ABN Act explicitly authorises the Registrar to determine a date of effect that predates the application for registration where he is satisfied it is appropriate to do so," said AAT president Justice David Thomas and deputy president Bernard McCabe.

"We are satisfied Mr Apted was not even aware of the disincentive posed by the no-ABN rules. He certainly did not make a decision to persist in business without an ABN until he became aware of the Jobkeeper scheme.

"We are satisfied the applicant is the kind of person who was intended to benefit from the Jobkeeper scheme. While his business was small and his income irregular, he still satisfies all of the eligibility criteria."

However, the ATO is now pushing back because it believes that a backdated ABN fails to meet the point-in-time test of holding an active ABN on 12 March 2020 for the purposes of the JobKeeper rules.

*Uncertainty awaits*

Holding Redlich senior tax controversy partner, Sue Williamson, who will continue to represent Mr Apted in the appeal, said the ATO's decision to escalate the issue would disappoint taxpayers who were previously buoyed by the tribunal's decision.

"What it essentially means is uncertainty for those who have been denied JobKeeper," Ms Williamson told Accountants Daily.

"When we had the first decision of the tribunal, many taxpayers thought that it was a positive sign that the ATO's decision would be reversed, whereas now they need to wait for the Full Federal Court hearing.

"My concern is that there are tight deadlines for lodging objections, and filing appeals in the tribunal or the court&#8230; and if people aren't aware of it, or can't afford to file, they could lose their rights. It is very much about being aware of your rights and doing everything possible to protect them so you keep your claims alive."

While the ABN requirement also appears for the boosting cash flow program, Ms Williamson said the result of the appeal would have wider ramifications beyond the two support measures.

"This isn't just about JobKeeper because there was a lot of relief that was provided during COVID-19 that was connected to JobKeeper eligibility," said Ms Williamson.

"A lot of the state governments gave out grants and connected all their relief to JobKeeper entitlement.

"It's not just a JobKeeper issue, there's a lot riding on it."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Thursday 28 January 2021:

Last day for monthly declaration for payments made in jobkeeper fortnights 18, 19, and 20 to close off jobkeeper extension 1. This is an extension from the usual 14th of each month.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

This article mainly concerns employees rather than business participants but may still be of interest.

ABC Australia

Thursday 28 February 2021









[HEADING=2]'Client is in jail' among red flags in thousands of JobKeeper claims under scrutiny[/HEADING]
_Dodgy employers have signed up jailed criminals, people living outside Australia and the dead to receive $1,500-a-fortnight JobKeeper payments - and are now being pursued over rorting of the $90 billion wage subsidy program._
[HEADING=2]JobKeeper payments for prisoners, the dead and other fraud cases probed by ATO[/HEADING]
By business reporter Daniel Ziffer

Dodgy employers have signed up jailed criminals, people living outside Australia and even the dead to receive $1,500-a-fortnight JobKeeper payments.

[HEADING=1]Key points:[/HEADING]

Employers claiming JobKeeper on behalf of fictitious employees are being pursued by an ATO investigation
"Client is in jail" is a category under scrutiny where people may have taken advantage of the $130 billion scheme
FOI documents show the ATO was investigating 5,974 cases of "inflated employees" as at September
These fictitious employees are among thousands of people being pursued by an Australian Taxation Office (ATO) investigation into rorts of the $130 billion wage subsidy program.

"Client is in jail" is one of the categories being scrutinised as a red flag in around 6,000 cases where employers may have created fictitious employees to take advantage of the JobKeeper scheme, hurriedly launched at the end of March last year to keep the economy afloat during the coronavirus pandemic.

Documents obtained using a freedom of information (FOI) application show that, by the end of September, the ATO was investigating 5,974 cases of "inflated employees" in applications for the wage subsidy.

"The reality is you cannot check every application," said lawyer and corporate investigator Niall Coburn.

"So certain things may have been overlooked, but that doesn't stop the Government from now being able to go back and look at the applications in more detail, and that's what seems to be the case here."

[HEADING=1]Paying the dead[/HEADING]
By the end of September, the ATO had 5,974 cases under investigation, with almost a third found to be ineligible. The majority were ineligible because they "involve employers applying under the wrong ABN (business number)".

In the internal report, categories of suspicious employees are listed under the topic "Risk Evaluation".

It noted there "have also been instances of putting spouses 'on the books'," as well as people overseas ("has a valid visa but &#8230; out of the country").

A further category of fictious employees were the dead. "Employee in their JobKeeper application that is deceased," the report observed.

For bosses who listed employees that are incarcerated prisoners, the ATO documents suggested it will not be able to confirm their status until it receives further information from state and territory authorities.

"[Confirming] this will not work until we have the data acquired and in the office," the report stated.

Most of the document was redacted, with the reasoning that it could "disclose lawful methods or procedures for preventing, detecting, investigating, or dealing with [fraud]" and could make efforts to stop fraud less effective.

[HEADING=1]ATO 'pleased with the compliance' in JobKeeper program[/HEADING]
JobKeeper works by eligible businesses applying for the scheme before nominating their employees to receive a fortnightly payment.

The payment was initially $1,500 a fortnight. It has now been trimmed back to $1,000, or $650 for people working fewer than 20 hours a week. All payments are currently set to end on March 28.

The total cost of the JobKeeper program is estimated to be $90 billion. Treasurer Josh Frydenberg said any action on potential rorts was a matter for the tax office.

"Whilst we recognise most businesses and employees are doing the right thing, there are a range of penalties available to the ATO, consistent with other tax laws they administer," he said in a statement.

"Enforcement associated with any non-compliance with the JobKeeper program is a matter for the ATO."

ATO Deputy Commissioner James O'Halloran said the vast majority of people do the right thing.

"We've found people who've made honest mistakes, and we've treated them accordingly. To correct it, and to get the payments to continue," he told the ABC.



> But there's people that perhaps have tried to rort the system, and they haven't tried to rort the ATO, they've rorted the community.


"So those people we're going to continue to be harsh on. Penalising them, stopping their payments, or in fact prosecutions."

While the tax office is examining thousands of cases of potentially fraudulent activity, it is satisfied with the rate of wrongdoing, both considering the scale and speed of JobKeeper, and relative to issues in other large welfare programs.

"It's probably lower than we thought and well within tolerance of what you'd expect given the scale," Mr O'Halloran said.

"Broadly, probably less than 1 per cent of what you and I might call 'intentional disregard' or 'rorting'. We've prosecuted a small number but, by and large, we've been very pleased with the compliance and cooperation."

[HEADING=1]Fraud prevention efforts[/HEADING]
In July, the ATO told ABC News 3,000 staff would be doing ongoing reviews of JobKeeper applications.

"At any particular time, we are reviewing between 2 and 3 per cent of JobKeeper applications," an ATO spokeswoman said.



> "We will identify those who are intentionally defrauding the system and we will use the full force of the law [to punish them]."


More than 6,500 applications were rejected for a range of reasons, from people making genuine errors to fraudulent behaviour.

In December, the ABC revealed the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) was pursuing criminal investigations into fraud and had issued fines to program applicants who had made false or misleading statements.

The numbers at the time were small: 19 investigations, 19 fines and the consideration of fines in 24 more cases.

The number of potentially ineligible cases revealed in these documents is far higher, but the penalty numbers have scarcely moved, with 35 penalties.

Currently, there are only about half a dozen serious criminal investigations that will likely end up being presented to court.

"That is in that order," Mr O'Halloran said.

"That's why I say we're pretty comfortable with the levels of compliance and the cooperation from the community."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Jotham Lian

Monday 1 February 2021

[HEADING=2]'No successful claims for dead or fictitious employees': ATO denies JobKeeper fraud[/HEADING]
The Tax Office has denied processing JobKeeper payments to dead or fictitious workers after new internal documents revealed that investigations on close to 6,000 such cases had been made.
[HEADING=2]ATO documents released under the _Freedom of Information Act_that 5,974 investigations were conducted into claims for the wage subsidy program by the end of September 2020, with about a third found to be ineligible.[/HEADING]
Certain businesses were found to have claimed under the wrong ABN, while other employers had not previously registered for PAYG withholding or added an employee after 12 March 2020 but backdated their employment to claim the payments.

The internal ATO files also showed that ineligible and fictitious employees had also been signed up for the program, with the Tax Office grouping them into risk categories, such as deceased, in jail, or out of country, as part of their investigations.

The ATO has confirmed that no known payments have been made to such employees.

"Where claims including fictitious employees are identified, no JobKeeper payments are or have been made," said the ATO in an update on Saturday.

"Contrary to the impression given by some media coverage, the 6,000 red-flagged cases under investigation relate to all attempted claims stopped for investigation prior to payment. There have been very few attempted claims for fictitious employees.

"The ATO is not aware of any ultimately successful claim for deceased or other fictitious employees."

The Tax Office also confirmed that it verifies the ABN of every business, as well as the tax file number of each employee, while using a range of "red-flag checks&#8230; over and above the use of Single Touch Payroll and other data sources".

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg said he was "very confident" with the ATO's robust compliance program.

"The ATO has comprehensive processes in place using Single Touch Payroll where they're able to assess the employees of organisations and to ensure that that money flows," Mr Frydenberg said.

"I'm very confident in the processes of the ATO around compliance and what has been delivered so far as a remarkable program that has helped save our economy in one of its darkest hours of need."

Over $80 billion has been paid since JobKeeper was introduced in March last year. A total of 3.6 million workers were supported at the height of the program, with the figure dropping to 1.5 million employees after eligibility was tightened at the end of September 2020.

The JobKeeper program runs to 28 March, with the government standing firm on its decision to not extend it beyond its scheduled end date.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Wednesday 3 February 2021

Jotham Lian









[HEADING=2]Auditor-General launches JobKeeper audit[/HEADING]
_The Australian National Audit Office has agreed to examine the JobKeeper program after concerns from Labor on large corporates paying executive bonuses while on the wage subsidy._

[HEADING=2]Auditor-General launches JobKeeper audit[/HEADING]
The Australian National Audit Office has agreed to examine the JobKeeper program after concerns from Labor on large corporates paying executive bonuses while on the wage subsidy.

Auditor-General Grant Hehir has commenced an audit to examine the effectiveness of the ATO's administration of the JobKeeper program, with the report to be tabled in October.

The audit will look into the Tax Office's handling of the rules, and whether it implemented effective measures to identify and address any fraud and abuse.

The new inquiry comes after the ANAO endorsed the ATO's rapid implementation of COVID-19 economic response measures, which included the JobKeeper program. It flagged at the time, however, that the $90 billion program warranted a potential standalone audit.

The Auditor-General has also revealed that he will consider the opposition's request for his office to take a closer look at large corporates who paid executive bonuses while receiving JobKeeper support.

Shadow assistant minister for Treasury, Andrew Leigh, had written to Mr Hehir last December with three specific lines of inquiry that he hoped the ANAO would consider, including determining how much JobKeeper support was paid out to large firms that paid executive bonuses.

Dr Leigh had also requested for the ANAO to uncover how much JobKeeper support was paid out to large firms that experienced higher revenue in 2020 than 2019, and if large firms had manipulated their revenue to qualify for the wage subsidy.

Mr Hehir has since responded, noting that "the three questions listed in [Dr Leigh's] letter will be considered during any planning of objective and scope of the potential JobKeeper audit".

The audit comes after a number of firms began handing back their JobKeeper payments off the back of profits generated over the past year.

Domino's Pizza is the latest JobKeeper recipient to return $792,000 in subsidies, following Iluka Resources' $13.6 million repayment, Super Retail Group's $1.7 million, and Toyota Australia's $18 million.

Large corporates such as Premier Investments and Harvey Norman have continued to draw Dr Leigh's ire for holding off on returning JobKeeper payments despite recording revenue rises and paying executive bonuses or dividends.

"One of the things I hope the Auditor-General will go to is exactly how a program like this could have been better put together," Dr Leigh told 5AA on Wednesday.

"But we also need to make sure that the Auditor-General's looking there at the rorts.

"We know that there's firms that have been handing out significant dividends at the time in which they were also saying to the taxpayer that they're in so much strife that they needed government handouts. It just can't be consistent."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Thursday 4 January 2021

Jotham Lian









[HEADING=2]RBA backs JobKeeper end[/HEADING]
_Reserve Bank of Australia governor Philip Lowe has backed the government's decision to let JobKeeper expire in March despite potential "job shedding" once the wage subsidy is withdrawn._

[HEADING=2]RBA backs JobKeeper end[/HEADING]
Reserve Bank of Australia governor Philip Lowe has backed the government's decision to let JobKeeper expire in March despite potential "job shedding" once the wage subsidy is withdrawn.

Speaking at the National Press Club on Wednesday, Dr Lowe said he understood the government's decision to wind down the JobKeeper program at the end of March due to indicators of recovery across the economy.

"Am I disappointed the government is stopping the JobKeeper program? No. The government made it clear this was a temporary program," Dr Lowe said.

"It's been an incredibly important program. I think it's saved many people their jobs and helped people in their lives. So, it's been incredibly important.

"Given the recovery of the economy, I can understand why the government wants to stop that program."

Dr Lowe, however, has foreshadowed job losses once the wage subsidy program is withdrawn.

"It's quite possible we have a month or two with the unemployment rate blips up," Dr Lowe said.

"When we talk to businesses, our sense is that job creation is going to continue. I'm hoping that will be enough to offset the job losses from the ending of the JobKeeper program.

"But it's something that there's a degree of uncertainty round. We haven't been in this area before. We don't have any experience to draw on.

"It's possible it could go the other way. But the central scenario is we continue to recover."

Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Treasurer Josh Frydenberg have both stood firm on the government's decision to end the JobKeeper program by its legislated end date despite pressure from the tourism and aviation industries.


----------



## KissMyHybrid

Anyone received their January payment yet?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

KissMyHybrid said:


> Anyone received their January payment yet?


Yes, payment for January jobkeeper fortnights ending after 3 January received early last Thursday (4 February).


----------



## KissMyHybrid

Jack Malarkey said:


> Yes, payment for January jobkeeper fortnights ending after 3 January received early last Thursday (4 February).


My December BAS was lodged on the 2nd of February, new JobKeeper scheme declaration done only 4th February (the system would not let me do it earlier, possibly due to the late BAS lodgment). Do you think that's what causing the delay in payment?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Yes, that would be the reason for the delay.

You can find the expected payment date in your critical response account in myGov:

(1) Go to ATO in myGov;

(2) Go to menu;

(3) Select ‘tax’;

(4) Select ‘accounts’;

(5) Select ‘Critical response account’; and

(6) Click on ‘critical response’ tab.

The ‘effective payment date’ is the date on which you can expect to receive the payment in your bank account.


----------



## KissMyHybrid

Jack Malarkey said:


> Yes, that would be the reason for the delay.
> 
> You can find the expected payment date in your critical response account in myGov:
> 
> (1) Go to ATO in myGov;
> 
> (2) Go to menu;
> 
> (3) Select 'tax';
> 
> (4) Select 'accounts';
> 
> (5) Select 'Critical response account'; and
> 
> (6) Click on 'critical response' tab.
> 
> The 'effective payment date' is the date on which you can expect to receive the payment in your bank account.


Thanks Jack much appreciated!


----------



## Jack Malarkey

IMPORTANT REMINDER

14 FEBRUARY IS SOONER THAN YOU THINK!

To receive the February payment under jobkeeper extension 2 for the January fortnights ending after 3 January 2021, you must make your monthly declarations no later than Sunday 14 February 2021.

BEFORE you can do that, you need to complete the decline in turnover form for the quarter ended 31 December 2021. If you’ll be using the Tax Office’s pre-fill facility, you need to submit your business activity statement as soon as possible.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> IMPORTANT REMINDER
> 
> 14 FEBRUARY IS SOONER THAN YOU THINK!
> 
> To receive the February payment under jobkeeper extension 2 for the January fortnights ending after 3 January 2021, you must make your monthly declarations no later than Sunday 14 February 2021.
> 
> BEFORE you can do that, you need to complete the decline in turnover form for the quarter ended 31 December 2021. If you'll be using the Tax Office's pre-fill facility, you need to submit your business activity statement as soon as possible.


Australian Taxation Office:

[HEADING=1]Systems maintenance[/HEADING]
ATO online systems may be impacted in part or in full at the following times.

Systems maintenance; start and finish times


Start timeEnd timeMaintenance typeSaturday 13 February 2021 10.00pm AEDTSunday 14 February 2021 4.00pm AEDTMaintenance - All SBR/Practitoner Lodgment Services will be unavailable until 4:00pm AEDT
All other systems may be unavailable from 11.30pm until 7.00am AEDT

https://www.ato.gov.au/general/online-services/system-maintenance/


----------



## Jack Malarkey

SmartCompany

https://www.smartcompany.com.au/finance/tax/ipa-ato-50-million-jobkeeper-errors/
[HEADING=2]IPA backs ATO decision not to claw back $50 million in JobKeeper payments made in error[/HEADING]
ELOISE KEATING
FEBRUARY 12, 2021

A leading accounting group has backed the Australian Taxation Office's decision not to pursue $50 million in JobKeeper payments from businesses that made genuine errors when applying for the wage subsidies.

The comments were in response to calls from Labor politicians Katy Gallagher and Andrew Leigh for business owners to give back any funds they received in error.

"If you've received money incorrectly, there's a responsibility for you to either return it or for the authorities to collect it," Gallagher told _The New Daily_.

Labor was responding to evidence given on Thursday by ATO second commissioner Jeremy Hirschhorn to the Senate select committee on COVID-19.

During the hearings, Hirschhorn disclosed that $340 million in JobKeeper subsidies have been overpaid to businesses since the massive stimulus measure was introduced last March.

The ATO has recovered about $135 million of those payments and is still pursuing about $150 million.

However, Hirschhorn said the tax office will not be seeking to recover another $50 million, which was overpaid as a result of genuine mistakes made by businesses.

The ATO had previously said it would not seek repayment in cases where business owners applied for JobKeeper payments and got the rules wrong, and Hirschhorn confirmed during Thursday's hearings the ATO would not attempt to recover payments that were passed on to employees.

Hirschhorn also noted the overpayment rate of 0.4% for the $80 billion wage subsidy program - an outcome which he described as "very positive".

Tony Greco, general manager of technical policy for the Institute of Public Accountants (IPA), agrees with this assessment, and says it is important to remember the JobKeeper program was designed and implemented "in response to a crisis".

"We were all working at warp speed trying to develop the rules; it was a real 'team Australia' moment," he tells _SmartCompany_.

It was critical that the businesses received the payments as fast as possible, says Greco, and the ATO took a "pragmatic" approach in an emergency situation.

"People have got short memories. This was a crisis payment and there was so much uncertainty," he adds.

"Hindsight is a wonderful thing."

While Greco acknowledges there were incorrect claims that "slipped through", the number of these is relatively small compared to the enormous size of the program. And those incorrect payments ended up in the pockets of employees, which is "in the spirit of what was asked".

He also notes the Inspector-General of Taxation has found there were cases in which the ATO was too restrictive in its approach to determining eligibility for the subsidies, and some new small businesses who were told they were ineligible should have in fact received payments.

Just under 500,000 businesses were still receiving JobKeeper payments in December, supporting about 1.6 million jobs.

This compares to 1 million businesses claiming JobKeeper during the first phase of the program to support about 3.8 million jobs.

In total, the ATO has reviewed $7.5 billion in JobKeeper claims, with $6.9 billion worth of claims reviewed prior to payments being made. About $900 million of reviews are still in progress.

Hirschhorn said the ATO rejected about $180 million in claims before money was paid out, and stopped an estimated $650 million of future claims from applicants who were found to be ineligible.

Penalties have been issued in 43 instances and 14 other cases are under investigation for potential penalties.

The wage subsidy scheme is due to expire at the end of March, despite calls from businesses and industry groups for Treasurer Josh Frydenberg to extend the support payments.


----------



## UberDriverAU

Jack Malarkey said:


> SmartCompany


-o:


----------



## Jack Malarkey

SBS Australia

Thursday 11 February 2021

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp...housands/eba76d13-2235-434a-84fa-9657f467d533
[HEADING=2]Treasury expects the end of JobKeeper to cause job losses, but not by the 'many hundreds of thousands'[/HEADING]
_Steven Kennedy says people will lose jobs when JobKeeper ends but he doesn't expect it to be "many hundreds of thousands"._

Treasury Secretary Steven Kennedy has declined to predict how many jobs will be lost when wage subsidies end in less than two months.

JobKeeper, which is supporting an estimated 1.3 million Australians' employment, will wind up at the end of March with workers and businesses anxious about the scheme's death.

Dr Kennedy told the Senate's coronavirus response committee the number of wage subsidy recipients who would join the dole queue was unclear.

"I don't expect it to be many hundreds of thousands by any stretch of the imagination," he told the hearing in Canberra on Thursday.

He expects the majority of employers accessing the scheme to keep workers on.

"I don't expect it to disturb the trajectory of the unemployment rate coming down and more employment being generated over the year," Dr Kennedy said.

But high levels of post-lockdown job growth aren't expected to continue.

Containing coronavirus outbreaks will be crucial to avoiding shutdowns that could throw any predictions off course.

Dr Kennedy said the government was weighing up support for aviation and other sectors that will continue to come under severe pressure.

Treasury believes the scheme's impact on economic growth will linger for two to three years because of its size and the way it boosted balance sheets.

Dr Kennedy agreed New Zealand's wage subsidy ending and that country's unemployment falling to 4.9 per cent gave him hope the sky wouldn't fall in when JobKeeper is withdrawn.

The government is also weighing up a permanent increase to the JobSeeker unemployment benefit, which has been lifted above $40 a day during the pandemic.

Anglicare and UnitingCare on Wednesday released research that showed cutting it back to the old rates will put people back into poverty.

The coronavirus supplement of $150 a fortnight is being paid until 31 March.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison is remaining tight-lipped about JobSeeker's future.

"These are matters we're still considering. When we're in a position to make a statement on those, then we will," he told reporters in Melbourne.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Illawarra Mercury,_ Wollongong

https://www.illawarramercury.com.au...e-last-nail-in-the-coffin-for-dapto-business/
FEBRUARY 16 2021 - 7:00PM
[HEADING=2]Dapto business Leisure Coast Limousines fears closure once JobKeeper ends[/HEADING]
[HEADING=3]Natalie Croxon[/HEADING]

The owners of a family business that has operated for more than 30 years say they face the possibility of closure after JobKeeper ends next month.

Mark Horsley, co-owner of Dapto-based Leisure Coast Limousines, described the year since the COVID-19 pandemic struck as "hell".

They had lost two-thirds of their business, Mr Horsley said, and in the first week of the crisis alone they processed $10,500 in refunds.

The business has gone from 32 to 23 drivers, all casuals, and last year an office employee was let go.

But the federal government's JobKeeper subsidy offered a lifeline to the business.

"Without JobKeeper, we would have closed up shop," Mr Horsley said.

However, the scheme is due to end on March 28.
Mr Horsley said come next month, he would be faced with the task of laying off his own son, Chad, who works as a mechanic.

"Without JobKeeper or work picking up", he said, "I don't know what we're going to do".

"We've diversified to try meet the need, but we need more assistance from the government," Mr Horsley said.

He said there was no longer any business from cruise ships or international travel, and even within Australia, people did not have the confidence to travel interstate.

Those that did travel drove, he said, which was of no help to them.

Mr Horsley said weddings had started to pick up again, but were still nowhere near pre-pandemic levels.

He wants to see JobKeeper extended and eligibility assessed according to each business' current situation.

Mr Horsley's comments come as new figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics show the rate of growth in the number of businesses in Wollongong has slowed.

Between June 2018 and June 2019, the number of businesses operating in the local government area grew by 3.1 per cent.

However, in the year to June 2020, the number of businesses rose by 1.4 per cent.

Growth remained steady in Shellharbour, but Kiama saw the number of businesses in the municipality drop by 1.5 per cent between June 2019 and June 2020.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg's office has been contacted for comment.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Sydney Morning Herald_

[HEADING=2]Melbourne man first in Australia to be convicted over JobKeeper fraud[/HEADING]
_A 33-year-old man from Mernda has been convicted of recklessly making a false statement to the ATO after he pretended to operate a business in an attempt to receive $6000 in JobKeeper payments._

[HEADING=3]By Tammy Mills[/HEADING]
February 24, 2021 - 4.25pm

A Melbourne man has become the first Australian to be convicted of JobKeeper fraud after pretending to operate a business in order to receive more money from the government during the coronavirus pandemic.

Raed Saleh, 33, was convicted in the Heidelberg Magistrates Court on Wednesday after pleading guilty to three counts of recklessly making a false statement to the Australian Taxation Office in an attempt to receive $6000 in JobKeeper payments.

The Mernda man was fined $3000 and ordered to pay $3000 in compensation and $282 in costs.

According to the ATO, Saleh applied for and lodged two months of JobKeeper claims online, saying he had lost 30 per cent of business revenue - the threshold for the payment - in May and June. He claimed he was a sole trader.

But, the ATO said, he didn't have a genuine business and already had a job, having agreed to be nominated by his full-time employer for the allowance.

While there are other prosecutions before the court, this is the first conviction in the country for JobKeeper fraud.

The stimulus scheme was set up as a buffer against the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic with the aim of supporting businesses to keep people in their jobs.

Saleh received $3000 from the false May 2020 claim, but his June claim was stopped by the ATO when the investigation began.

ATO deputy commissioner Will Day said fraud against the stimulus measures effectively stole from taxpayers at a time when the community needed it the most.

"We know most people are honest, and we work with employers to overcome genuine mistakes," Mr Day said.

"However, as this case demonstrates, where people deliberately seek to exploit the stimulus measures, we will put a stop to it and apply the full force of the law,"


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Friday 26 March 2021

Jotham Lian

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www...eeper-test-case-in-the-full-federal-court/amp
[HEADING=2]ATO loses JobKeeper test case in the Full Federal Court[/HEADING]
A sole trader has been granted access to JobKeeper after the Full Federal Court unanimously ruled that the ATO had erred in its decision not to grant the business more time to establish its eligibility.

The JobKeeper test case centred around sole trader Jeremy Apted and whether he met an eligibility requirement to hold an ABN on or before 12 March 2020.

Mr Apted, a specialist retail valuer, had held an ABN since 2012 but cancelled it in 2018 as he sought retirement.

He resumed work in September 2019 but failed to reactivate his ABN because he mistakenly assumed that he only needed one if he was required to be registered for GST.

When COVID-19 struck, Mr Apted reactivated his ABN and applied for JobKeeper, but was knocked back because he missed the 12 March 2020 deadline, prompting him to reach out to the Australian Business Registrar to successfully backdate his ABN reactivation to 1 July 2019.

Despite the backdated ABN registration, the ATO disallowed Mr Apted's objection, leading the taxpayer to apply to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) for a review.

The tribunal found in favour of Mr Apted, noting that he satisfied all of the eligibility criteria and was "the kind of person who was intended to benefit from the JobKeeper scheme".

The ATO, however, turned to the Full Federal Court to appeal the AAT decision, arguing that the 12 March 2020 requirement was a point-in-time test and that if the Australian Business Register had been inspected on that date, it would have shown if an entity had an ABN.

The Full Federal Court agreed with the ATO's view, but ultimately ruled that the commissioner should have exercised his discretion to allow a later date for Mr Apted to hold an ABN and thereby satisfy the eligibility rules for JobKeeper.

"As is made plain by government announcements and the provisions of the legislation, the JobKeeper payment was intended to benefit taxpayers in Mr Apted's general circumstances," said Honourable Justice Thomas Thawley.

"The commissioner, in his reasons, did not point to any good reason not to exercise the discretion in s 11(6) in Mr Apted's favour; it is clear that the real reason for the commissioner's refusal to exercise the discretion was the lack of ABN registration on 12 March 2020.

"But this was the very thing which lay the foundation for the exercise of the discretion. Of itself, this was not a proper basis to refuse to exercise the discretion."

Honourable Justice John Logan also pointed out that the Australian Business Registrar - the Commissioner of Taxation in another guise - had accepted that Mr Apted was carrying on an enterprise before 12 March 2020, giving "pause for thought as to why Mr Apted has been put to so much bother in relation to his eligibility to receive a payment the object of which 'is to provide financial support directly or indirectly to entities that are directly or indirectly affected by the coronavirus known as COVID-19'."

'Justice delivered'

Holding Redlich senior tax controversy partner Sue Williamson, who represented Mr Apted in the test case, said the ruling was important as the commissioner's discretion also appears within the cash flow boost's requirements.

"The broader application is that in every decision that the commissioner has made where he has refused to exercise a discretion, he now needs to go back and check it because the Full Federal Court has said you've taken a far too narrow approach in exercising the discretion and you need to look at the facts of the taxpayer," Ms Williamson told Accountants Daily.

"A lot of state relief was based on the fact that you needed to be registered for JobKeeper, so there's going to be flow-on issues if businesses can now get it."

The ATO, who covered the legal costs of the taxpayer, has not yet ruled out applying for special leave with the High Court to appeal the judgment.

"The ATO is currently considering the decision and its implications to both the JobKeeper and cash flow boost programs," said an ATO spokesperson.

"Updated advice and guidance will be published to the ATO website as soon as possible."

[end of article]

Copy of the Full Federal Court decision:

Commissioner of Taxation v Apted [2021] FCAFC 45 (24 March 2021)


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Canberra Times_

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/7183966/requiem-for-jobkeeper-a-policy-that-had-to-end/
MARCH 27 2021 - 5:30AM
[HEADING=2]Requiem for JobKeeper: a policy that had to end[/HEADING]
[HEADING=3]Simon Cowan, Robert Carling[/HEADING]










What must surely be the most expensive fiscal policy experiment in Australia's history comes to an end this weekend; and not a moment too soon.

JobKeeper was a subsidy to businesses whose turnover shrank by a specified percentage as an incentive to keep employees on the books - whether or not they had any work to do.

The government was adamant the program introduced during the height of the initial lockdown would be strictly temporary and has finally stuck to its word, despite having extended the program for six months beyond the original end date of 28 September. The financial cost looks like being around $90 billion. To put this into perspective, it is two or three times what the federal government will spend this year on defence, or on income support for seniors, or on medical benefits.

But to point out that JobKeeper has been massively expensive is not necessarily to condemn it. At least not in its entirety. There are arguments for and against the policy.

Millions of employer-employee relationships that might otherwise have dissolved were kept intact for a period of enforced hibernation of large swathes of the private sector.

Jobkeeper made it easier for employers and employees to pick up where they left off and has limited the longer-term scarring that happens when employees lose touch with the labour market, find it difficult to re-enter and see their skills decay.

Jobkeeper also tempered some of the opposition to COVID restrictions driven by businesses and individuals who would have borne the full cost of government shutting down the economy for months on end.

This opposition, in the United States for example, has hampered efforts to combat coronavirus.
And had it not been invented, there would have been some alternative additional outlays by government, such as on JobSeeker; though surely not as much as $90 billion.

These benefits have led many to accept - albeit absent detailed cost-benefit analysis - that the core concept of JobKeeper was appropriate to the unique circumstances of the corona-crisis.

However, the design of the scheme also had serious flaws, some of which were (or should have been) apparent from the beginning. Others have emerged as the economic consequences of COVID unfolded.

First, it was so generous - especially in its original form - that it enabled some employees to be paid more from the public purse than they were being paid in their jobs. It is hard to see a justification for a taxpayer-funded payrise in the midst of a severe recession. However, it's not just that the excessive design added to the cost. It also distorted the incentives for employers, employees and state governments.

Anecdotes abound of businesses delaying full reopening and employees preferring to remain on JobKeeper even when they had work to go back to. Some employees would have been better off looking for a new job long before the expiration of JobKeeper.

State premiers have surely been more inclined to barricade and shut borders in the knowledge the federal coffers would pick more of the tab than their own state budgets.

Nor was JobKeeper well-targeted. Some businesses that received it didn't need it at all.
The eligibility test for employers enabled them to qualify for the entire first six months simply by demonstrating an actual or expected decline in turnover in one month or quarter. Given that general economic conditions improved far more rapidly than expected, many firms would not have qualified had they been retested.

This has led to some companies that received JobKeeper also reporting substantial profits, dividends and executive bonuses.

While there is a strong moral case for profitable businesses to return the money to the government, no contingency or provision was written into the legislation to require it.

Given the uncertainty around economic conditions when JobKeeper was introduced - the very rationale for such an open-ended subsidy in the first place - the need for some clawback really should have been foreseeable. It would also have been reasonable and relatively simple to require businesses to assess their continued eligibility on a monthly or quarterly basis, and withdraw from the scheme if things improved.

This lack of forethought is perhaps the defining feature of JobKeeper. We have never seen anything like the program before, and the unseemly rush to introduce something - anything - to combat the supposedly looming economic disaster meant there was certainly little or no ex-ante analysis of the merits of the policy.

In retrospect, important questions must be answered. How much did it cost; was it well-designed; was its objective the right one and did it achieve it; did the benefits justify the costs; should it have been terminated earlier; and should it or something like it be a policy option in the future?

Such questions should be answered in a rigorous ex-post review by an agency such as the National Audit Office or the Productivity Commission. However, there is no question it was time for JobKeeper to end. The cost of its flaws and distortions was bound to grow the longer it remained in place.

It was thrown together in an emergency that seems now to have passed, given the remarkable labour market recovery confirmed just last week by the February fall in unemployment to below 6 per cent.

The reality is there are zombie businesses and jobs that have no future but were kept going mainly by JobKeeper. Removing JobKeeper, while perhaps painful in the short-term, will enable them to find more productive alternative uses.

Treasury estimates suggest 100,000 to 150,000 jobs could be lost in coming months once JobKeeper ends, but this must be kept in perspective. First, this represents just 1 per cent of the labour force.

Second, the job market (which added 89,000 jobs in February) appears strong enough to absorb the shock.

As for the future, while a scheme like JobKeeper may have been fit for purpose in the unique circumstances of 2020, there is no place for it in a normal recession, let alone as a permanent feature.

Suggestions JobKeeper should be the foundation stone of a guaranteed minimum income or universal basic income scheme are fanciful. JobKeeper has made clear both the financial costs and economic distortions of such universal schemes.

Robert Carling is a senior fellow at the Centre for Independent Studies and a former IMF and federal and state Treasury economist. Simon Cowan is research director at the Centre for Independent Studies and a regular columnist.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office:

'Monthly business declarations for JobKeeper Fortnights in March need to be completed by 14 April 2021 to receive final JobKeeper payments. The JobKeeper Payment scheme finished on 28 March 2021.'

https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobkeeper-payment/


----------



## KissMyHybrid

Jack Malarkey said:


> Australian Taxation Office:
> 
> 'Monthly business declarations for JobKeeper Fortnights in March need to be completed by 14 April 2021 to receive final JobKeeper payments. The JobKeeper Payment scheme finished on 28 March 2021.'
> 
> https://www.ato.gov.au/general/jobkeeper-payment/


Anyone received their payment for March yet? Declaration done OK 2nd April but no payment to date. Was planning to do my 1st quarter bas a little later, could this have something to do with the delay?


----------



## Jack Malarkey

KissMyHybrid said:


> Anyone received their payment for March yet? Declaration done OK 2nd April but no payment to date. Was planning to do my 1st quarter bas a little later, could this have something to do with the delay?


The earliest payments are expected to be received early on Thursday 8 April 2021.

The delays are due to the Easter public holidays.

In addition, many of the Australian Taxation Office staff temporarily working on jobkeeper have already returned to their original work areas:

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/7136755/ato-begins-its-jobkeeper-wind-back/
Holding off lodging the business activity statement for the quarter ended 31 March 2021 would have no bearing on the delays.

You can find the expected payment date in your critical response account in myGov:

(1) Go to ATO in myGov;

(2) Go to menu;

(3) Select 'tax';

(4) Select 'accounts';

(5) Select 'Critical response account'; and

(6) Click on 'critical response' tab.

The 'effective payment date' is the date on which you can expect to receive the payment in your bank account.


----------



## KissMyHybrid

Jack Malarkey said:


> The earliest payments are expected to be received early on Thursday 8 April 2021.
> 
> The delays are due to the Easter public holidays.
> 
> In addition, many of the Australian Taxation Office staff temporarily working on jobkeeper have already returned to their original work areas:
> 
> https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/7136755/ato-begins-its-jobkeeper-wind-back/
> Holding off lodging the business activity statement for the quarter ended 31 March 2021 would have no bearing on the delays.
> 
> You can find the expected payment date in your critical response account in myGov:
> 
> (1) Go to ATO in myGov;
> 
> (2) Go to menu;
> 
> (3) Select 'tax';
> 
> (4) Select 'accounts';
> 
> (5) Select 'Critical response account'; and
> 
> (6) Click on 'critical response' tab.
> 
> The 'effective payment date' is the date on which you can expect to receive the payment in your bank account.


Thank you Jack much appreciated!


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office tax time information on including jobkeeper in your income tax return:

[HEADING=2]Supporting your small business[/HEADING]
Tax time essentials, learning resources, tools and services to support small business.







www.ato.gov.au

[HEADING=2]Reporting JobKeeper payments[/HEADING]
JobKeeper payments are taxable and need to be included in tax returns.

If you're a sole trader who has received JobKeeper payments, you need to include the payments as business income in your individual tax return.

If your business is a partnership, trust or company, and your business received JobKeeper payments, you don't need to include it as assessable income in your individual tax return, but you still need to report JobKeeper payments as either:


business income in your partnership or trust tax return
income in your company tax return.
Your accounting method will also affect the total JobKeeper payments that need to be included in your tax return. If your business operates on:


an accruals accounting basis
JobKeeper payments relating to valid business monthly declarations made on or before 30 June 2020 are included in your 2019-20 tax return
JobKeeper payments relating to valid business monthly declarations made on or after 1 July 2020 are included in your 2020-21 income tax return

a cash accounting basis
JobKeeper payments you received on or before 30 June 2020 are included in your 2019-20 income tax return
JobKeeper payments received on or after 1 July 2020 are included in your 2020-21 income tax return.

If you have received a JobKeeper overpayment, you will need to repay the amount.

Depending on the circumstances, we may decide it does not have to be repaid (particularly if there was an honest mistake) and will let you know.

If you:


have repaid, or are repaying JobKeeper overpayments, you do not need to include the amount as assessable income in your income tax return. If you have already included the overpaid amount in your business income tax return in an earlier year, you will need to amend that earlier return to reduce your assessable income by the amount you have repaid.
don't need to repay JobKeeper overpayments because we have waived it, you will still need to include the overpaid amounts as assessable income in your business income tax return.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Australian Taxation Office:









Tax professionals newsletter
















Issue No. 165 May 2021













News highlights this weekEligibility for JobKeeper and cash flow boost
Learn more on the recent court decision about eligibility for JobKeeper payments and cash flow boost credits.





*Eligibility for JobKeeper and cash flow boost*

A recent Full Federal Court decision _Commissioner of Taxation v Apted_ may mean that some eligible business participants could now be able to claim JobKeeper payments.

The decision does not apply to employers who sought to apply for JobKeeper.

If your clients have previously not been granted further time to demonstrate eligibility under the Commissioner's discretion to have an ABN or to provide notice of assessable income or taxable supplies, they may now be able to make claims for JobKeeper or become eligible for cash flow boost credits. All other eligibility conditions for JobKeeper and Cash Flow Boost must still have been met.

You or your clients do not need to contact us about this decision. We will automatically review all decisions where the Commissioner's discretion was not granted, and where the outcome may have been different if the court’s reasoning was applied. We will make contact when we have completed our review, or if we need more information. This process should be completed by June 2021.

If the Commissioner decides to exercise his discretion and your clients proceed to claim for the JobKeeper payment, your client's claim may be subject to a post-enrolment review of all the other eligibility conditions.

Practice Statement PSLA 2020/1 explains the circumstances in which Commissioner's discretion may be exercised.

For more information about the decision and how it potentially applies to you and your clients, including JobKeeper eligibility checklists see JobKeeper Payment and the 'later time' discretion and Boosting cash flow for employers.

Last modified: 04 May 2021

*Eligibility for JobKeeper and cash flow boost*
Learn more about the recent court decision on eligibility for JobKeeper payments and cash flow boost credits.







www.ato.gov.au


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Full Federal Court judgment in _Apted:_

Commissioner of Taxation v Apted [2021] FCAFC 45 (24 March 2021)

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Commissioner of Taxation v Apted [2021] FCAFC 45

_Accountants Daily_

30 April 2021

*ATO to review ‘thousands’ of JobKeeper, cash flow boost denials*


Jotham Lian


*ATO to review ‘thousands’ of JobKeeper, cash flow boost denials*

Thousands of taxpayers could now retrospectively receive JobKeeper and cash flow boost payments following the ATO’s acceptance of the Full Federal Court’s decision.
www.google.com.au


Thousands of taxpayers could now retrospectively receive JobKeeper and cash flow boost payments following the ATO’s acceptance of the Full Federal Court’s decision.

The ATO has now committed to automatically reviewing decisions where it denied businesses access to JobKeeper and the cash flow boost based on its erroneous interpretation of its discretion to grant further time for a business to hold an ABN or provide notice to the commissioner of assessable income or supplies.

The revelation comes after the Full Federal Court had ruled in March that the ATO’s use of the discretion was narrower than intended.

The ATO on Thursday published its decision impact statement in response to the court case, confirming that it would not appeal the decision and that it would revisit earlier ATO decisions where the outcome may have been different if the court’s reasoning was applied.

The Tax Office has also updated its law administrative practice statement PSLA 2020/1 to reflect its broader discretion to allow further time for an entity to hold an ABN or provide notice to the commissioner of assessable income or supplies.

The ATO noted, however, that it will only review cases where all other eligibility criteria have been satisfied.

The Tax Institute’s senior advocate, Robyn Jacobson, said the ATO’s change in approach would potentially impact thousands of businesses who had been previously denied the COVID-19 stimulus payments.

“For clients who received a previous decision which declined to exercise the commissioner’s discretion, the commissioner will automatically review their circumstances and whether his discretion should be applied. The ATO will contact these taxpayers when they have completed their review or if further information is required,” Ms Jacobson said.

“There will be some taxpayers who never enrolled in JobKeeper, because they thought they were not eligible, or had sought advice and were advised that they were not eligible. These taxpayers will be able to contact the ATO for a review of their case.

“I would expect it would affect thousands of taxpayers.”


----------



## Jack Malarkey

ABC Australia

11 May 2021










*ATO tells Uber driver to apply for JobKeeper, then demands he repay almost $30k*

A number of migrant workers are being told they should never have received the payments and the tax office wants the money back.


ATO tries to recover JobKeeper payments from migrant workers

ABC Radio Melbourne
/ By Matilda Marozzz

Last year, Hassan Jaber was living in Australia on a temporary protection visa and driving an Uber to make ends meet.


Key points:

The tax office is trying to recover JobKeeper payments from a number of people who were not eligible because of their visa status
The Migrant Workers Centre says several people have received overpayment letters
The ATO says it continues to monitor and review JobKeeper payments to ensure compliance
When the pandemic hit and JobKeeper was introduced he went to his tax agent to ask if he was eligible.

"I remember that it took about 35 minutes talking to Australian Taxation Office (ATO)," Mr Jaber told ABC Radio Melbourne.

"They said, 'You know what, submit the application — if you are eligible we will pay for you, if you are not we will refuse it.'"

While some of his friends on international student visas were knocked back, Mr Jaber's application was accepted.

But nine months later he received a letter from the ATO saying he had not been eligible for JobKeeper and that he owed the department $27,900.

"When I received that I was very stressed," Mr Jaber said.

"I didn't accept it … because this is not my mistake — the ATO said [I was] eligible."

With the help of his tax agent he submitted an objection.

After two reviews the ATO agreed to exercise their discretion, meaning Mr Jaber no longer had to pay back any of the JobKeeper funding he received.

ATO trying to recover payments

Mr Jaber is not the only one.

Now a community organiser at the Migrant Workers Centre, he has helped another Uber driver contest an ATO request to repay $13,500 he received through the JobKeeper scheme.

"He was crying because he does not speak English, he's not reading, he's not writing — he said, 'I did not do any mistake,'" Mr Jaber said.



> "The question is … how many people now are struggling with this repayment?"


Who was eligible?

An ATO spokesperson said in statement that since January 2021 the department had been undertaking compliance reviews in cases where there were eligibility concerns.

"We have found that some individuals have not met the JobKeeper residency requirements and were not eligible to receive JobKeeper payments," the statement said.

Under the legislation a person only qualified for JobKeeper if they were a resident of Australia under the Social Security Act 1991, or a resident for tax purposes and the holder of a Special Category visa.

but because the scheme was rushed through, many people were confused about which visa categories would be accepted.

"In determining whether repayment will be sought, we consider factors such as whether the entity has made an honest mistake, for example where an employer has relied on the information provided to them by their employee as to their residency status," the statement said.

"This factor may not apply where a sole trader is claiming for themselves as an eligible business participant, with knowledge of their own residency status."


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Message received from the Australian Taxation Office via myGov:

Australian Taxation Office

Reminder: Include JobKeeper payments in your 2020-21 income tax return

18:38 AEST 30/06/2021

Hi JACK,

Our records show that since 1 July 2020, you received a gross amount of $27,900.00 in JobKeeper payments.

Don't forget that your JobKeeper payments are part of your assessable income and need to be included in your 2020-21 tax return.

If you're a sole trader, you need to include JobKeeper payments as business income in your individual tax return.

If your business is a partnership or trust, you need to report JobKeeper payments as business income in your partnership or trust tax return.

If your business is a company, you need to report JobKeeper payments as business income in your company tax return.

You don't need to include any JobKeeper payments you've repaid, or are repaying, in your 2020-21 tax return.

The amount you include in your 2020-21 income tax return will also depend on whether your business operates on a cash or accruals accounting basis.

If you need help, a registered tax professional can assist you or you can find more information by visiting the link below.
• 
• 2020-21 JobKeeper payment amounts
• How to include JobKeeper payments in your income tax return: Supporting your small business


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Australian Financial Review_

Rear Window







*The comeuppance of JobKeeper architect Jenny Wilkinson*

Joe Aston

Jul 27, 2021 – 5.16

It bears repeating that in just its first 12 weeks, JobKeeper paid $12.5 billion to entities that did not ultimately satisfy its eligibility criteria. That finding was released by the Parliamentary Budget Office last week. 

It therefore stands to reason that in the total 24 weeks of JobKeeper 1.0, a staggering $25 billion was paid to firms that subsequently failed the scheme’s turnover test. Treasurer Josh Frydenberg has shattered all previous records in this country for the mis-spending of public money.

At the request of Labor frontbencher Andrew Leigh, the PBO crunched the figures for JobKeeper’s first 12 weeks, AKA the final quarter of fiscal 2019-20 (or FY20). The data for July-September 2020 won’t be far now.









Jenny Wilkinson: stitched up by her former colleagues at the PBO. Alex Ellinghausen

There is some irony in the analysis of this data by the independent PBO, which reports to the Australian Parliament, not the government. Because right up until December 2019 – halfway through the sample period – the PBO was led by Jenny Wilkinson.

Wilkinson was appointed Deputy Secretary of the Fiscal Group in Frydenberg’s Treasury Department in January 2020, where barely three months later she was designing the JobKeeper scheme. Incredibly, she was awarded the Public Service Medal on Australia Day this year “for outstanding public service in the development of fiscal policy, particularly in the formulation of the Australian government’s economic response to COVID-19”.

For being the architect of the most poorly designed expenditure program in the history of the Commonwealth, she got a medal! Here we were thinking a 20-year secondment to the Office of Sport and Recreation would be about right.

Members of Parliament can ask the PBO to analyse anything. It doesn’t mean they actually have to do it! Make no mistake, Wilkinson’s former colleagues have stitched her up _deluxe_ by obliging Dr Leigh’s request. It’s a comeuppance of beauty.

A chorus of CEOs (and even the NSW Treasurer) is now pleading for the resurrection of JobKeeper, refusing to accept the plain and welcome reality that Scott Morrison has pivoted from wage subsidy to home-grown furlough scheme. The COVID-19 Disaster Payment, co-funded with the states, accrues directly to the employee. 

Of course business prefers JobKeeper, which only accrued to employees who are stood down. Employers got to keep the JobKeeper payments for their employees who continued to work, which the majority of them did.

A chorus of CEOs (and even the NSW Treasurer) is now pleading for the resurrection of JobKeeper, refusing to accept the plain and welcome reality that Scott Morrison has pivoted from wage subsidy to home-grown furlough scheme.

The COVID-19 Disaster Payment, co-funded with the states, accrues directly to the employee. Of course business prefers JobKeeper, which only accrued to employees who are stood down. Employers got to keep the JobKeeper payments for their employees who continued to work, which the majority of them did.

On Monday, Best & Less chief executive Rod Orrockwas the latest calling for JobKeeper 3.0. “I certainly think there needs to be a bit more than the disaster relief … to ensure the marketplace has the appropriate stimulus to bounce back the way it has previously.”

Best & Less got $42.6 million of JobKeeper in calendar 2020. Bear in mind the company’s total annual labour bill is around $90 million, so last year the taxpayer covered 47 per cent of it. Yet only $15.7 million of that was passed on to employees.

The other $26.9 million went straight to its bottom line and down the funnel to private equity owners Allegro Funds, which paid itself a $43.2 million dividend (no doubt to an entity in Jersey or the Caymans).

Put another way, that $26.9 million of JobKeeper that Best & Less employees never saw would be enough to pay every Best & Less employee in New South Wales not just the $600 per week Disaster Payment but their full salary for 62 weeks.

In FY20, Best & Less increased earnings by 62 per cent on the prior year (and 32 per cent of those earnings was pure JobKeeper). In FY21, it increased earnings by a further 100 per cent! 

The Australian taxpayer is now $800 billion in the mire and this bloke wants more free money so Best & Less and every other corporate freeloader can “bounce back the way [they have] previously”? As if doubling your earnings year-on-year is now an entitlement underwritten by the public. This pandemic has evoked a monstrous welfare mindset, and it’s nowhere near Centrelink.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Jack Malarkey said:


> _Australian Financial Review_
> 
> Rear Window
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The comeuppance of JobKeeper architect Jenny Wilkinson*
> 
> Joe Aston
> 
> Jul 27, 2021 – 5.16
> 
> It bears repeating that in just its first 12 weeks, JobKeeper paid $12.5 billion to entities that did not ultimately satisfy its eligibility criteria. That finding was released by the Parliamentary Budget Office last week.
> 
> It therefore stands to reason that in the total 24 weeks of JobKeeper 1.0, a staggering $25 billion was paid to firms that subsequently failed the scheme’s turnover test. Treasurer Josh Frydenberg has shattered all previous records in this country for the mis-spending of public money.
> 
> At the request of Labor frontbencher Andrew Leigh, the PBO crunched the figures for JobKeeper’s first 12 weeks, AKA the final quarter of fiscal 2019-20 (or FY20). The data for July-September 2020 won’t be far now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jenny Wilkinson: stitched up by her former colleagues at the PBO. Alex Ellinghausen
> 
> There is some irony in the analysis of this data by the independent PBO, which reports to the Australian Parliament, not the government. Because right up until December 2019 – halfway through the sample period – the PBO was led by Jenny Wilkinson.
> 
> Wilkinson was appointed Deputy Secretary of the Fiscal Group in Frydenberg’s Treasury Department in January 2020, where barely three months later she was designing the JobKeeper scheme. Incredibly, she was awarded the Public Service Medal on Australia Day this year “for outstanding public service in the development of fiscal policy, particularly in the formulation of the Australian government’s economic response to COVID-19”.
> 
> For being the architect of the most poorly designed expenditure program in the history of the Commonwealth, she got a medal! Here we were thinking a 20-year secondment to the Office of Sport and Recreation would be about right.
> 
> Members of Parliament can ask the PBO to analyse anything. It doesn’t mean they actually have to do it! Make no mistake, Wilkinson’s former colleagues have stitched her up _deluxe_ by obliging Dr Leigh’s request. It’s a comeuppance of beauty.
> 
> A chorus of CEOs (and even the NSW Treasurer) is now pleading for the resurrection of JobKeeper, refusing to accept the plain and welcome reality that Scott Morrison has pivoted from wage subsidy to home-grown furlough scheme. The COVID-19 Disaster Payment, co-funded with the states, accrues directly to the employee.
> 
> Of course business prefers JobKeeper, which only accrued to employees who are stood down. Employers got to keep the JobKeeper payments for their employees who continued to work, which the majority of them did.
> 
> A chorus of CEOs (and even the NSW Treasurer) is now pleading for the resurrection of JobKeeper, refusing to accept the plain and welcome reality that Scott Morrison has pivoted from wage subsidy to home-grown furlough scheme.
> 
> The COVID-19 Disaster Payment, co-funded with the states, accrues directly to the employee. Of course business prefers JobKeeper, which only accrued to employees who are stood down. Employers got to keep the JobKeeper payments for their employees who continued to work, which the majority of them did.
> 
> On Monday, Best & Less chief executive Rod Orrockwas the latest calling for JobKeeper 3.0. “I certainly think there needs to be a bit more than the disaster relief … to ensure the marketplace has the appropriate stimulus to bounce back the way it has previously.”
> 
> Best & Less got $42.6 million of JobKeeper in calendar 2020. Bear in mind the company’s total annual labour bill is around $90 million, so last year the taxpayer covered 47 per cent of it. Yet only $15.7 million of that was passed on to employees.
> 
> The other $26.9 million went straight to its bottom line and down the funnel to private equity owners Allegro Funds, which paid itself a $43.2 million dividend (no doubt to an entity in Jersey or the Caymans).
> 
> Put another way, that $26.9 million of JobKeeper that Best & Less employees never saw would be enough to pay every Best & Less employee in New South Wales not just the $600 per week Disaster Payment but their full salary for 62 weeks.
> 
> In FY20, Best & Less increased earnings by 62 per cent on the prior year (and 32 per cent of those earnings was pure JobKeeper). In FY21, it increased earnings by a further 100 per cent!
> 
> The Australian taxpayer is now $800 billion in the mire and this bloke wants more free money so Best & Less and every other corporate freeloader can “bounce back the way [they have] previously”? As if doubling your earnings year-on-year is now an entitlement underwritten by the public. This pandemic has evoked a monstrous welfare mindset, and it’s nowhere near Centrelink.


I think this article is very unfair to the Treasury’s Jenny Wilkinson.

Not having a clawback or retesting of turnover in the first six months of jobkeeper was defensible in the context of what was in large part an economic stimulus measure where they didn’t want to provide perverse incentives to businesses from the smallest to the largest to hold back on economic activity during the recovery.

The idea that it would be appropriate for the Parliamentary Budget Office to hold back in its analysis simply because Jenny Wilkinson previously headed it is also offensive.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Monday 2 August 2021

Jotham Lian









Holden dealer denied JobKeeper


A Holden dealership in Cessnock has had its JobKeeper appeal knocked back despite arguing that it had relied on guidance on the ATO’s website.




www.accountantsdaily.com.au





*Holden dealer denied JobKeeper*

A Holden dealership in Cessnock has had its JobKeeper appeal knocked back despite arguing that it had relied on guidance on the ATO’s website.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal has affirmed the ATO’s decision that Cessnock Holden Central Pty Ltd was not entitled to JobKeeper for employees from an acquired business.

The tribunal heard that Jorge Lamas, the sole director and shareholder of Cessnock Holden Central, had sought to acquire Cessnock City’s Cessnock Holden business, and had relied on ATO website guidance to determine if the business would be eligible for JobKeeper payments for former employees of Cessnock City if they were to be employed by him.

Mr Lamas claimed that guidance on the ATO’s website reassured him and his advisers that his employees would be eligible for JobKeeper payments even if the business changed hands after 1 March 2020.

Cessnock Holden Central was then incorporated on 16 June 2020 and completed the acquisition from Cessnock City on 1 August 2020.

Mr Lamas duly engaged the former employees of Cessnock City and paid them wages in the expectation of receiving JobKeeper payments for them for August and September 2020.

However, the ATO then advised that Cessnock Holden Central was not eligible for the wage subsidy payments, having failed to satisfy key JobKeeper eligibility requirements — that it carried on a business on 1 March 2020 and suffered a decline in turnover.

AAT senior member Robert Olding found that while the former Cessnock City employees had met the requirements set out in the JobKeeper rules, Cessnock Holden Central had fundamentally failed the eligibility requirements because it did not exist on 1 March 2020.

He also ruled that there was no need to determine if Cessnock Holden Central had satisfied the decline in turnover test because it had not carried on a business on 1 March 2020.

Mr Olding said that the decision “may seem harsh” to Cessnock Holden Central, but he noted that there was no other basis on which eligibility for JobKeeper payments might be considered.

“It is unfortunate if Mr Lamas was misled by or misunderstood the commentary on the ATO website, although, notably, the extract provided did not refer to the applicant’s situation; that is, a company not in existence at 1 March 2020,” said Mr Olding.

“The tribunal can only decide the review by applying the relevant legislation. Commentary that may have appeared on the ATO website is irrelevant to that task.

“There is no discretion available to the tribunal if the legislative requirements are not satisfied.”


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Friday 13 August 2021

Jotham Lian and John Buckley





__





Redirect Notice






www.google.com.au





*ATO locks horns with Senate over JobKeeper disclosure order*

The Tax Commissioner has refused to comply with a Senate order that would have revealed over 10,000 businesses that were on JobKeeper, arguing that it would violate taxpayer confidentiality and undermine public confidence in the ATO.

Commissioner of Taxation Chris Jordan has claimed public interest immunity against a Senate order that would have required the ATO to publish a list of businesses with a turnover of more than $10 million who were recipients of the JobKeeper wage subsidy.

The Senate order, moved by independent senator Rex Patrick, would have also compelled the commissioner to reveal how much these businesses received and how much they had moved to repay.

Mr Jordan, however, failed to comply with the order, arguing that revealing such details would undermine public confidence in the ATO’s ability to keep tax information confidential.

“Requiring disclosure of protected taxpayer information to the Parliament will harm the public interest by undermining public confidence in the commissioner’s ability to keep taxation information confidential and the administration of the tax system beyond the administration of the Coronavirus Economic Response Package more generally,” said Mr Jordan in his reply to the Senate.

“That harm outweighs any public interest in disclosing the information in a public forum, including through parliamentary processes.”

Mr Jordan said that roughly 10,000 businesses — including public and private companies, sole traders, and partnerships and trusts — would have made the list and argued that there was insufficient time to advise them that their information was going to be disclosed.

“We are mindful of the gravity of the order of the Senate,” Mr Jordan said.

“However, we are concerned to ensure that the Senate is fully cognisant of the potential and serious implications for taxpayer confidentiality and confidence in providing information to the commissioner, not just in the immediate case, but as a general precedent, in making such an order.”

Senator Patrick rejected the claim, stating that tax information had not been sought.

“The information the Senate is asking for is not related to an employers’ business or taxation information, it is related to the amount of public money they were provided,” Senator Patrick said.

“In that respect, it is no different to grant money or the total amount of money received under a government contract, which is already published information.”

Senator Patrick pointed to the fact that JobKeeper has attracted copious amounts of criticism and controversy since it was revealed that some companies received the wage subsidy and went on to book major profits, when that was not what the measure was intended for.

“There is huge controversy around the abuse of the JobKeeper scheme, a program set up to assist struggling businesses during the pandemic,” Mr Patrick said.

“JobKeeper was a wage subsidy scheme for businesses significantly affected by COVID-19. And yet some businesses took it, improved their profits and then paid larger dividends to their shareholders and bonuses to their executives.”

Senator Patrick has now called on the Senate to reject Mr Jordan’s public interest immunity claim and to compel the commissioner to comply fully with the order by 4.30pm on 26 August.

He said that the employers who didn’t use the subsidy to maximise profits should take no issue with the list’s publication — only those that rorted it.

“Those employers that used the money in a manner consistent with the intent of the JobKeeper program need not be concerned in any way by the proposed disclosure, only those that rorted the system,” Senator Patrick said.

The House of Representatives last week batted away key transparency amendments to the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021, which would have forced businesses to reveal key details related to the amount of JobKeeper payments they had received, and whether they had moved to repay it.

The amendments, tabled by Mr Patrick, would have seen the names of businesses with a turnover of more than $10 million that received JobKeeper published on the ATO’s website, along with the number of employees they received the subsidy for and the total amount of support received.

The Senate voted to pass the bill and the amendment before it returned to the House of Representatives, where it was rejected.

The attempted amendments emerge off the back of a groundswell of calls for more transparency around the recipients of substantial government support, and mimic a similar system in New Zealand, where company details are made publicly available.

In New Zealand, where the government spent $12.35 billion on its JobKeeper equivalent, as much as $673 million — or 5.45 per cent — has been voluntarily repaid. Comparatively, in Australia, where only $225 million of the $89.3 billion shelled out for JobKeeper has been repaid, the rate is far lower at just 0.25 of a percentage point.

“The New Zealand government publishes the names of employers who received a wage subsidy payment and how much they were paid,” Senator Patrick said.

“If the employer fully repaid the money, their name was removed from the published list. Transparency had an effect and is something we should do here.”


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Friday 27 August 2021

John Buckley









Frydenberg launches JobKeeper gag order to block transparency move


The Treasurer has mounted a last-ditch effort to block a Senate order that would have required the Tax Commissioner to provide a list to the Senate of employers that received JobKeeper.




www.accountantsdaily.com.au






*Frydenberg launches JobKeeper gag order to block transparency move*

The Treasurer has mounted a last-ditch effort to block a Senate order that would have required the Tax Commissioner to provide a list to the Senate of employers that received JobKeeper.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg on Thursday made an eleventh-hour attempt to claim public interest immunity over the publication of details related to the payment of JobKeeper to large companies, which he believes would undermine public confidence in tax law and administration.

The Senate order, moved by independent senator Rex Patrick, would have required the ATO to table the list in the Senate at 4.30pm on Thursday, publicising the names of businesses with a turnover of more than $10 million that received the JobKeeper wage subsidy.

It would have also compelled the commissioner to reveal how much these businesses received and how much they had moved to repay.

Mr Frydenberg said businesses and taxpayers provide the government with private tax details on the basis that the government won’t publicise it.

He said businesses would expect his government to take the necessary steps to keep it confidential.

“Crucially, the confidential information that is the subject of this order has been collected by the Australian government under strict tax secrecy laws which restrict both the use and sharing of that confidential information,” Mr Frydenberg said.

“Upholding these laws is therefore vital to the continued confidence of Australians in government and the assurances it provides about the protection of their confidential information.

“Almost every aspect of government would be significantly and adversely impacted were Australians to lose confidence in the protection of the confidential information they provide to the Australian government.”

Mr Frydenberg also claimed that disclosing details related to those who received JobKeeper payments could also do damage to the commercial interests of the entities that received it.

“The harm resulting from disclosure would include revealing the extent to which those entities suffered a substantial decline in turnover as a consequence of the economic impacts of the coronavirus, which has ongoing and, like adverse, implications for the market position of those largely private businesses,” he said.

Commissioner of Taxation Chris Jordan said on Thursday that he would wait for the Senate to determine whether Mr Frydenberg’s public interest immunity claim would be accepted before moving forward, two weeks after the ATO launched a public interest immunity claim of its own.

“It is my understanding that if the government’s claim for public interest immunity is accepted by the Senate, it will have the practical effect of relieving me of my obligations to provide documents in response to the order which is required by 4.30pm today,” Mr Jordan said.

“Given the public interest immunity claim has been lodged, I believe the best course of action is to wait for the determination of that claim by the Senate.”

The Treasurer’s public interest immunity claim was described by Senator Patrick as an interference effort launched to cover up “JobKeeper misuse”.

“Australians have a right to know which large employers have received taxpayer money and how much they received,” Senator Patrick said.

Senator Patrick argued that the information sought by the Senate isn’t related to an employers’ business or tax information, but instead, the amount of public money they were provided.

“It is no different to grant money or the total amount of money received under a government contract, which is already published information,” Senator Patrick said.

“There is huge controversy around the abuse of the JobKeeper scheme, a program set up to assist struggling businesses during the pandemic.

“JobKeeper was a wage subsidy scheme for businesses significantly affected by COVID-19. And yet some businesses took it, improved their profits and then paid larger dividends to their shareholders and bonuses to their executives.

“Those companies that abused the taxpayers’ goodwill should pay it back.”

Some members of the accounting profession have welcomed the publication of details related to JobKeeper payments received by large companies. Institute of Public Accountants general manager of technical policy Tony Greco said doing so would level the playing field.

“Making this information publicly available levels the playing field, as there are many entities that received JobKeeper that are not disclosing entities,” Mr Greco said.

“Only reporting entities that have disclosed this information have so far been the subject of public scrutiny.

“Most of the voluntarily refunded JobKeeper support has so far come from listed companies, so when more information becomes publicly available on all recipients, expect more pressure on others to do the same.”

Mr Greco said that, while the subsidy’s design flaws are understandable, it’s worth remembering that the Treasury was provided an opportunity to tighten eligibility to thwart profiteering, but opted not to.

“In the mid-point review it was noted [that] ‘since its introduction, the rate of decline in employment has slowed, then stabilised, and towards the end of May was showing tentative signs of recovery’,” Mr Greco said.

“Treasury had an opportunity to tighten the eligibility so that entities that did not experience an actual decline in turnover would not continue to receive the Jobkeeper payment for the full six months, particularly in cases where projected turnover was the avenue for meeting eligibility.

“JobKeeper version two tightened eligibility, requiring an actual decline rather than a forecast decline.”

Thursday’s development comes off the back of a groundswell of calls for more transparency around the recipients of substantial government support, and mimics a similar system in New Zealand, where company details are made publicly available.

In New Zealand, where the government spent $12.35 billion on its JobKeeper equivalent, as much as $673 million — or 5.45 per cent — has been voluntarily repaid.

Comparatively, in Australia, where only $225 million of the $89.3 billion shelled out for JobKeeper has been repaid, the rate is far lower at just 0.25 of a percentage point.

“The New Zealand government publishes the names of employers who received a wage subsidy payment and how much they were paid,” Senator Patrick said on Thursday.

“If the employer fully repaid the money, their name was removed from the published list. Transparency had an effect and is something we should do here.

“Those employers that used the money in a manner consistent with the intent of the JobKeeper program need not be concerned in any way by the proposed disclosure, only those that rorted the system.”


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Monday 30 August 2021

John Buckley





__





Redirect Notice






www.google.com.au






*$13bn in JobKeeper pocketed by profitable businesses*

The amount of JobKeeper payments made to profitable firms has now surpassed $13 billion, as the Senate closes in on an accountability play.

New data from the Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) shows that more than $13 billion in JobKeeper payments was given to nearly 195,381 large companies that went on to turn a profit over the course of the first six months of the scheme, the _AFR_ reported on Monday.

More than 13 per cent of the $98 billion wage subsidy, which expired in March this year, went to businesses that recorded increased turnover between 1 April and 30 September 2020, compared to the same period the year before.

The latest PBO analysis of confidential ATO data, which was commissioned by shadow assistant minister for Treasury Andrew Leigh, comes just one month after an earlier PBO analysis, which found that $12.5 billion in JobKeeper payments were made to businesses that didn’t record a shortfall in revenue between April and June last year.

The PBO also found that $4.6 billion was paid to 157,650 firms whose turnover actually increased over the same period.

Both PBO analyses follow the emergence of an_Ownership Matters_ report released in March which showed that 58 of the 66 ASX 300 companies that received JobKeeper between July and December last year reported positive earnings.

The 58 companies to report positive earnings, via their preferred earnings metrics, received a total of $741 million in JobKeeper payments, accounting for approximately 30 per cent of wage subsidy payments received by ASX 300-listed companies in 2020.

In the half-year ended 31 December 2020, 34 of the 66 companies that received the wage subsidy reported a boost in their underlying earnings metrics relative to pre-pandemic levels, accounting for 20 per cent of all payments made in the second half of the year.

Dr Leigh said the Morrison government was made aware of early red flags, and had the opportunity to make changes to the program to prevent profiteering, but chose not to.

“By mid-2020, Scott Morrison and Josh Frydenberg already had a report from Treasury warning that billions of dollars of JobKeeper were going to firms with rising revenue,” Dr Leigh said.

“Red flashing lights should have gone off at that moment.”

It’s a sentiment which is shared by some in the accounting profession, too. Institute of Public Accountants general manager of technical policy Tony Greco said that, while the subsidy’s design flaws are understandable, the Treasury ignored early warning signs.

“In the mid-point review, it was noted [that] ‘since its introduction, the rate of decline in employment has slowed, then stabilised, and towards the end of May was showing tentative signs of recovery’,” Mr Greco said.

“[The] Treasury had an opportunity to tighten the eligibility so that entities that did not experience an actual decline in turnover would not continue to receive the Jobkeeper payment for the full six months, particularly in cases where projected turnover was the avenue for meeting eligibility.”

New PBO analysis emerges amid a heated Senate effort led by independent senator Rex Patrick to publicise the names of large firms that received JobKeeper, how much they received, and whether they’ve moved to repay any of the wage subsidy.

Late last week, Treasurer Josh Frydenberg made an eleventh-hour attempt to claim public interest immunity over the publication of details related to the payment of JobKeeper to large companies, which he believes would undermine public confidence in tax law and administration.

The Senate order, moved by Senator Patrick, would have required the ATO to table the list in the Senate at 4.30pm on Thursday, publicising the names of businesses with a turnover of more than $10 million that received the JobKeeper wage subsidy.

Mr Frydenberg said businesses and taxpayers provide the government with private tax details on the basis that the government won’t publicise it. He said businesses would expect his government to take the necessary steps to keep it confidential.

“Crucially, the confidential information that is the subject of this order has been collected by the Australian government under strict tax secrecy laws which restrict both the use and sharing of that confidential information,” Mr Frydenberg said.

“Upholding these laws is therefore vital to the continued confidence of Australians in government and the assurances it provides about the protection of their confidential information.

“Almost every aspect of government would be significantly and adversely impacted were Australians to lose confidence in the protection of the confidential information they provide to the Australian government.”

The Treasurer’s public interest immunity claim was described by Senator Patrick as an interference effort launched to cover up “JobKeeper misuse”.

“Australians have a right to know which large employers have received taxpayer money and how much they received,” Senator Patrick said.

Senator Patrick argued that the information sought by the Senate isn’t related to an employers’ business or tax information, but instead, the amount of public money they were provided.

“It is no different to grant money or the total amount of money received under a government contract, which is already published information,” Senator Patrick said.

“There is huge controversy around the abuse of the JobKeeper scheme, a program set up to assist struggling businesses during the pandemic.

“JobKeeper was a wage subsidy scheme for businesses significantly affected by COVID-19. And yet some businesses took it, improved their profits and then paid larger dividends to their shareholders and bonuses to their executives.

“Those companies that abused the taxpayers’ goodwill should pay it back.”


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Australian Financial Review_, Friday 3 September 2021, page 8:

*One Nation blocks JobKeeper transparency push*









Tom McIlroy

Sep 2, 2021 – 11.11am

Hours after frustrating a plan for a public register of firms banking COVID-19 wage assistance payments, One Nation says it wants to work with other minor parties to establish an audit of the $90 billion JobKeeper program.

Labor and crossbencher Rex Patrick were optimistic One Nation’s Pauline Hanson and Malcolm Roberts would vote for a disclosure register of firms with turnover above $10 million who received JobKeeper.

But on Wednesday night One Nation broke with the plan and instead offered amendments, limiting disclosure to publicly listed firms.

That approach was derided by Senator Patrick, Labor and the Greens because listed firms are already required to include JobKeeper funds in public reports to the corporate regulator.

Senator Roberts on Thursday told a Senate “a real audit” of JobKeeper was needed.

“Senator Hanson and I actually want something meaningful and strong that gets the money back, gets the money back to the peoples’ government,” he said.

He suggested co-operation with the Greens and other crossbenchers to achieve that outcome.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg has rallied business groups critical of the transparency push, and intervened in a Senate order for the production of documents, which would see Taxation Commissioner Chris Jordan hand over the list of business recipients.

*Need to know companies*

The debate follows retailer Harvey Norman opting to repay $6 million in JobKeeper funds.

Greens spokesman Nick McKim accused One Nation of letting the Morrison government off the hook.

“At least $6 billion in JobKeeper payments went to companies that increased their turnover in both the June and September quarters of last year,” Senator McKim said.

“But, thanks to One Nation’s stitch-up with the government, we won’t know who the majority of those companies are.

“We need to know every company that received significant JobKeeper payments and how much they got.”

Shadow assistant treasurer Andrew Leigh hit out at efforts to stop the disclosure list becoming public. The opposition wants to know if the Coalition did a deal with One Nation this week.

“Australians want answers on the $13 billion in JobKeeper that the Liberals gave to firms with rising revenue,” Dr Leigh said.

“There’s strong public support for transparency, but this fake measure won’t make a lick of difference, since it only requires disclosure of information that’s already public.

“It’d be funny if it weren’t so tragic.”

Senator Patrick said firms banking JobKeeper and then paying dividends to shareholders or executive bonuses needed to be exposed.

“This is not private money. This is not like when a company goes to a bank and says, ‘I’d like to have a loan’. That is a private matter,” he said.

“This is when a company has taken public money and that is a public matter.”

Senator Patrick said the money needed to be returned.

“This is the biggest public expenditure scandal in the history of the Commonwealth,” he said.

Mr Frydenberg told ABC radio politics was at play in the debate.

“JobKeeper saved the country, and it saved more than 700,000 jobs, and we saw the country avoid a scaring of the labour market that occurred in the ’80s and ’90s recessions,” he said.

An ATO spokeswoman said Mr Jordan respected the powers of the Senate.

“The Commissioner finds himself in an unprecedented situation, given the government has lodged its own claim for public interest immunity in respect of the documents sought under the order.

“Last week, the Commissioner advised the Senate he had decided the government’s own public interest immunity claim should be determined by the Senate before any other action is undertaken.

“It is the Commissioner’s understanding that if the government’s claim for public interest immunity is accepted by the Senate, it will have the practical effect of relieving him of his obligations to provide documents in response to the order.”


----------



## Jack Malarkey

ABC Australia

Friday 3 September 2021









The JobKeeper program could see the tax office boss jailed. This is why


A senator is warning tax commissioner Chris Jordan may be found guilty of contempt if he does not hand over more information about which large companies received JobKeeper, as data about how thousands of companies profited massively from the scheme continues to trickle out.




www.google.com.au






*Senate demand for JobKeeper data escalates to threat of fines or jail for ATO boss*

By business reporters Nassim Khadem and Gareth Hutchens

Tax commissioner Chris Jordan is being warned he could be fined or jailed under the Parliamentary Privileges Act for failing to comply with a Senate order to publish the names of large private companies that received JobKeeper payments.

*Key points:*

The political fight continues to reveal the names of private companies that saw revenues increase after receiving JobKeeper wage subsidies
18 per cent of JobKeeper payments that went to companies with rising revenue went to the construction industry
10 per cent went to firms in the retail industry
Some public companies have returned JobKeeper payments in the wake of the corporate regulator, ASIC, requiring them to publish details of how much they received, but the same requirement does not apply to private firms.

As the political stoush intensified over whether or not to publish the names of the private companies, new Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) data showed which industries benefited most from the JobKeeper program.

The PBO data, which is based on information from the Australian Taxation Office (ATO), has provided a breakdown by industry of the JobKeeper payments that went to firms that saw their revenues increase.

The data was provided to Labor's Shadow Assistant Minister for Treasury, Andrew Leigh, and shared with the ABC.

As the table below shows, $4.6 billion in JobKeeper wage subsidies were sent to firms that saw their revenues rise in the first three months of the program alone.

In the construction industry, an estimated $828 million was sent to firms with rising revenues, while in the retail industry, an estimated $460 million was sent to firms with rising turnover.

The data in the first two columns come from PBO analysis.

The data in the third column are based on calculations made by the ABC (based on the PBO's distribution of the $4.6 billion).

*Breakdown of JobKeeper recipients that had an increase in turnover from April to June 2020 compared to the previous year*


ANZSIC broad industryPercentage of JK recipients that saw revenue increasePercentage of JK payments that went to firms with rising revenueAmount of JK paid to firms with rising revenue (April to June)Accommodation and Food Services3%3%$138 millionAdministrative and Support Services3%3%$138 millionAgriculture, Forestry and Fishing6%3%$138 millio





Arts and Recreation Services1%1%$46 millionConstruction23%18%$828 millionEducation and Training1%2%$92 millionElectricity, Gas, Water and Waste Services.........Financial and Insurance Services3%2%$92 millionHealthcare and Social Assistance7%7%$322 millionInformation Media and Telecommunications1%1%$46 millionManufacturing7%10%$460 millionMining...1%$46 million


Other Services6%4%$184 millionProfessional, Scientific and Technical Services16%15%$690 millionPublic Administration and Safety…...…

a) Numbers may not sum due to rounding, b) (...) not zero but rounded to zero.

Table: Gareth Hutchens Get the data

It comes after other PBO data showed hundreds of millions of dollars in JobKeeper flowed to companies where turnover doubled or even tripled.

*ATO boss remains firm he will not disclose JobKeeper details*

Dr Leigh had pushed for new laws that would have required the ATO to publish the names of all businesses with a turnover of more than $10 million that received the JobKeeper wage subsidy.
That legislation was defeated in the Senate after failing to win the approval of One Nation.

That saw independent senator Rex Patrick move a motion in the Senate ordering the tax commissioner to hand over the information.

Mr Jordan refused, citing public interest immunity.

The Senate rejected his argument and again demanded that the information be handed over on Friday last week, but Mr Jordan again refused.

Now Mr Jordan is being warned that he could be fined or jailed under the Parliamentary Privileges Act for failing to comply with the Senate orders to publish the JobKeeper information.

In citing public interest immunity, Mr Jordan said there were about 10,000 taxpayers across a range of entities including public, private, individuals, sole traders and trusts that the information related to, and many of them had given their information to the ATO on the basis it would remain confidential.

Making it public, he argued, would discourage "the essential flow of information needed for the efficient and effective administration of a self-assessment tax system".

Federal Treasurer Josh Frydenberg also lodged the federal government's own claim for public interest immunity, saying that publishing the details of private firms "would undermine public confidence" in tax law and administration.

Mr Frydenberg said the private businesses provided the government with tax details on the basis that the government would "take all steps necessary to protect their information and maintain confidentiality".

He said "strict tax secrecy laws" restricted both the use and sharing of that confidential information and "upholding these laws is therefore vital to the continued confidence of Australians".

Mr Frydenberg stands by the government's decision to allow firms to join JobKeeper based on an anticipated decline in turnover.

The Treasurer told ABC News Breakfast on Thursday that at the time the stimulus measure was announced, the economy was "staring into the abyss".

"We needed to give businesses confidence to hold on to their workers," he said.



> "We needed to give businesses confidence to keep the doors open where they could. As a result, Jobkeeper was a key part of that very strong [economic] recovery."


*Treasurer has no power over Senate*

But Senator Patrick has asked the Senate to begin contempt proceedings against the tax commissioner for his failure to respond to a lawful order.

"A final order by the Senate to the tax commissioner must be complied with and it would set an unacceptable precedent were the commissioner's non-compliance with the order be allowed to pass," Senator Patrick said.



> "Failure to comply with a final lawful order of the Senate is a contempt."


He said the public interest immunity claim did not stand since the Senate request was not about private information, but rather about the use of a taxpayer subsidy.

Senator Patrick has now lodged a motion referring the matter to the Senate Standing Committee on Privileges, which will then make a decision about how to proceed.

"Whilst the Treasurer had attempted to intervene on August 26, by advancing his own public interest immunity claim, the Senate order was not directed at the Treasurer and he has no power to countermand an order of the Senate," Senator Patrick said.

"This is an important matter that must be resolved.

"The Parliament, empowered directly by voters, is supreme. There is a lot at stake. I will now commence the process of asking the Senate to refer the tax commissioner to the Privileges Committee of the Senate.

“The Senate has the power under the Parliamentary Privileges Act to fine or jail a person who fails to comply with a lawful order it has made."

An ATO spokesman told ABC News Mr Jordan "respects the powers of the Senate and the critical function it undertakes" but "the commissioner finds himself in an unprecedented situation given the government has lodged its own claim for public interest immunity in respect of the documents sought under the order".

"It is the commissioner's understanding that if the government's claim for public interest immunity is accepted by the Senate, it will have the practical effect of relieving him of his obligations to provide documents in response to the order."

While companies have not been made to repay JobKeeper, individuals on Centrelink are being forced to pay back money, with the Senate revealing more than 11,000 Australians have received Centrelink debt letters informing them they must pay back $32.8 million in debt related to COVID-support payments.

*'Biggest waste of taxpayer money'

Labor's Dr Leigh said New Zealand had already taken steps to publicly publish similar data, and there was no reason why Australia should not follow suit.*

"I hope the commissioner does hand over the information, and we will also be pursuing amendments in the Senate to try and force the government to change the law, so as to require a public register," he said.

He said the previous attempt to do this had failed in the Senate because One Nation changed its position and voted against it.

"They were firm supporters of transparency but [they] now seem to only favour transparency if the information is already public," Mr Leigh argued, noting the transparency laws passed by the Senate only applied to public companies already legally obliged to disclose the information.

Dr Leigh said there was a need to bring transparency to what he described as the biggest waste of taxpayer money in Australian history.

"Never before has the government wasted $13 billion," he said.

"The JobKeeper scandal needs to be uncovered."



> "We need to know how on earth the Liberals allowed $13 billion to walk out the door to firms that didn't need it without saving a single job.


"It's very clear that the Australian public wants the information, and that it's not unreasonable to be asking medium and large-sized businesses that received JobKeeper to have that published online."

Asked whether it was unprecedented for the tax commissioner to defy a Senate order and for the government to then also come out and do the same thing, he said:

"We're firmly on the side of public transparency on this."

"This is a question of whether you're for an open and transparent regime or a secretive closed one," he said.

Some companies have been paying back overpayments after public outrage. Retailer Harvey Norman this week announced it had returned $6 million after months of controversy.

To date, about 90 per cent of JobKeeper subsidies that have been returned to the government have come from publicly listed companies.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily _

Monday 6 September 2021

John Buckley









Tax Commissioner threatened with contempt as JobKeeper stoush escalates


Contempt proceedings threatened by the Senate against the Tax Commissioner could see him jailed and fined for standing in the way of a JobKeeper transparency push.




www.accountantsdaily.com.au





*Tax Commissioner threatened with contempt as JobKeeper stoush escalates*

Contempt proceedings threatened by the Senate against the Tax Commissioner could see him jailed and fined for standing in the way of a JobKeeper transparency push.

Independent senator Rex Patrick urged the Senate to commence contempt proceedings against Commissioner of Taxation, Chris Jordan, last week for failing to comply with a final Senate order that required him to publish details related to large companies that received JobKeeper.

Mr Jordan claimed public interest immunity against a Senate order in mid-August that would have required the ATO to publish a list of businesses with a turnover of more than $10 million who were recipients of the JobKeeper wage subsidy, along with how much these businesses received and how much they had moved to repay.

He argued that revealing such details would undermine public confidence in the ATO’s ability to keep tax information confidential.

“Requiring disclosure of protected taxpayer information to the Parliament will harm the public interest by undermining public confidence in the commissioner’s ability to keep taxation information confidential and the administration of the tax system beyond the administration of the Coronavirus Economic Response Package more generally,” Mr Jordan wrote in his reply to the Senate.

“That harm outweighs any public interest in disclosing the information in a public forum, including through parliamentary processes.”

In a letter to Senate president Scott Ryan, Mr Patrick said the Tax Commissioner’s refusal to comply with the Senate order was an act of contempt that could set a dangerous precedent if not overruled.

“A final order by the Senate to the Tax Commissioner must be complied with and it would set an unacceptable precedent were the Commissioner’s non-compliance with the order be allowed to pass,” Senator Patrick said.

“Failure to comply with a final lawful order of the Senate is a contempt.”

After Mr Jordan refused to disclose the list ordered by the Senate, federal Treasurer Josh Frydenberg moved to intervene two weeks later, again citing public interest immunity.

Mr Frydenberg said businesses and taxpayers provide the government with private tax details on the basis that the government won’t publicise it. He said businesses would expect his government to take the necessary steps to keep it confidential.

“Crucially, the confidential information that is the subject of this order has been collected by the Australian government under strict tax secrecy laws which restrict both the use and sharing of that confidential information,” Mr Frydenberg said.

“Upholding these laws is therefore vital to the continued confidence of Australians in government and the assurances it provides about the protection of their confidential information.

“Almost every aspect of government would be significantly and adversely impacted were Australians to lose confidence in the protection of the confidential information they provide to the Australian government.”

Mr Frydenberg also claimed that disclosing details related to those who received JobKeeper payments could also do damage to the commercial interests of the entities that received it.

In his letter to the Senate president, Mr Patrick said there is no scope for either a minister or the Commissioner to deny a Senate order, and requested the matter be considered and debated in the Senate.

“The final order of the Senate is a lawful order directed at an independent statutory officer, and the Commissioner must comply,” Mr Patrick wrote. “There is no scope for a minister to counter a Senate order.

“Accordingly, I request that you give precedence to a notice of motion to refer this matter to the Committee of Privileges,” Mr Patrick wrote. “I would of course be happy to provide the Committee of Privileges with any supporting information the committee requires.”

Mr Patrick’s move to commence contempt proceedings comes off the back of a groundswell of calls for more transparency around the recipients of substantial government support, and mimics a similar system in New Zealand, where company details are made publicly available.

In New Zealand, where the government spent $12.35 billion on its JobKeeper equivalent, as much as $673 million – or 5.45 per cent – has been voluntarily repaid. Comparatively, in Australia, where only $225 million of the $89.3 billion shelled out for JobKeeper has been repaid, the rate is far lower at just 0.25 of a percentage point.

“The New Zealand government publishes the names of employers who received a wage subsidy payment and how much they were paid,” Senator Patrick said on Thursday.

“If the employer fully repaid the money, their name was removed from the published list. Transparency had an effect and is something we should do here.

“Those employers that used the money in a manner consistent with the intent of the JobKeeper program need not be concerned in any way by the proposed disclosure, only those that rorted the system.”


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Tuesday 7 September 2021

John Buckley





__





Redirect Notice






www.google.com.au






*Inquiry launched into Commonwealth COVID-19 policy expenditure*

A raft of Auditor-General reports on the Morrison government’s COVID-19 policy efforts have triggered a parliamentary inquiry, which will probe their efficiency in the face of the pandemic.

The joint committee of public accounts and audit on Monday announced that it has commenced an inquiry into key policymaking processes related to the Management of the Australian Public Service’s Workforce Response to COVID-19, and Planning and Governance of COVID-19 Procurements to Increase the National Medical Stockpile.

It will also examine the government’s Services Australia COVID-19 Measures and Enterprise Risk Management; the ATO’s Management of Risks Related to the Rapid Implementation of COVID-19 Economic Response Measures, and COVID-19 Procurements and Deployments of the National Medical Stockpile.

The committee will be accepting submissions on the inquiry until 8 October, before it moves to public hearings in October and November.

The inquiry comes off the back of audits conducted by the Auditor-General (AG) in each policy area, which to some degree found that each of the programs was effective but could be improved.

The A-G’s reports looked at the use of Commonwealth funds to achieve each of the policies’ objectives, and whether the expenditure was effective in reaching them in the midst of “the COVID emergency”.

Committee chair Lucy Wicks welcomed the opportunity to review the Morrison government’s expenditure infrastructure.

“The examination of the Government’s COVID response [is] an important opportunity for Parliament to review the success of the Commonwealth’s administrative arrangements in the face of the COVID emergency,” Ms Wicks said.

The committee said its inquiries into Commonwealth investments will examine a broad range of issues and identify key lessons for future funding programs and initiatives.

In the case of the A-G’s report on the Management of the Australian Public Service’s Workforce Response to COVID-19, it was found that management of the workforce was effective in implementing the government’s COVID-19 priorities.

Meanwhile, the A-G’s report on the Planning and Governance of COVID-19 Procurements to Increase the National Medical Stockpile found that while the procurement requirement for PPE and medical equipment was met or exceeded, health’s procurement planning could have been improved.

An audit of Services Australia COVID-19 Measures and Enterprise Risk Management found the department, too, was largely effective in managing risks related to the rapid preparation for and delivery of the government’s COVID-19 economic response measures.

Services Australia was found to have considered “new risks and how to mitigate them”, though didn’t fully consider the impacts of changes to its IT system access controls, which have since seen the department move to remediate fraud risks that emerged as a result.

Reviewing the ATO’s Management of Risks Related to the Rapid Implementation of COVID-19 Economic Response Measures, the A-G found the Tax Office has so far been effective in managing risk and support roll-outs.

The A-G’s audit of the ATO found that it took appropriate planning to support the “rapid implementation” of six economic response measures that it rolled out via pre-existing systems and infrastructure. It was also found to have managed fraud and other integrity risks on a “progressive basis”.

The final report subject to the committee’s inquiry found the COVID-19 Procurements and Deployments of the National Medical Stockpile had established procurement processes that were largely consistent with the “proper use and management of public resources.”

However, the program was let down by inconsistent due diligence checks of suppliers impacted on procurement effectiveness, and its record-keeping could be improved, the A-G said.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

13 September 2021

John Buckley





__





Redirect Notice






www.google.com.au






*ASIC bats away privacy concerns over JobKeeper disclosure*

The corporate regulator defended its decision to force listed firms to disclose whether they’ve received JobKeeper, saying it’s within the interests of everyone dealing with those businesses to know.

Speaking to a Senate inquiry on Friday, ASIC commissioner Cathie Armour said the disclosure requirement was a part of the regulator’s approach to all COVID-19 economic relief, and that all stakeholders should be made aware of how subsidies affect a business’ operations.

“The obligation that arises is to make clear material information that affects the performance of the company, so that investors, and others who deal with the company become aware of that,” Ms Armour said.

“It [became] apparent to us that many types of support, particularly the JobKeeper program, but other support [as well], for example, things like rental relief, those sorts of things.

“The expectation was that they would have a substantial impact on the firm’s operations, that was the sort of information that an investor would need to assess how the firm was operating, then it should be disclosed that was a general approach.”

The commissioner’s response emerged just weeks after federal Treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, argued against the disclosure of JobKeeper payments made to businesses with a turnover of more than $10 million, which he said would become exposed to adverse commercial implications as a result.

“The harm resulting from disclosure would include revealing the extent to which those entities suffered a substantial decline in turnover as a consequence of the economic impacts of the coronavirus, which has ongoing and, likely adverse, implications for the market position of those largely private businesses,” he said.

Mr Frydenberg’s argument arrived as part of an eleventh-hour attempt to claim public interest immunity over the publication of details related to the payment of JobKeeper to large companies in late August, ordered by the Senate, which he believes would undermine public confidence in tax law and administration.

The Senate order, moved by independent senator Rex Patrick, would have required the ATO to table the list in the Senate the week before, publicising the names of businesses with a turnover of more than $10 million that received the JobKeeper wage subsidy.

It would have also compelled the commissioner to reveal how much these businesses received and how much they had moved to repay.

Tax Commissioner Chris Jordan has since been left to field threats of contempt from the Senate, led by Senator Rex Patrick, for refusing to table the list under a public immunity claim made two weeks before that of Mr Frydenberg.

Mr Jordan claimed public interest immunity against a Senate order in mid-August that would have required the ATO to publish a list of businesses with a turnover of more than $10 million that were recipients of the JobKeeper wage subsidy, along with how much these businesses received and how much they had moved to repay.

“Requiring disclosure of protected taxpayer information to the Parliament will harm the public interest by undermining public confidence in the commissioner’s ability to keep taxation information confidential and the administration of the tax system beyond the administration of the Coronavirus Economic Response Package more generally,” Mr Jordan wrote in his reply to the Senate.

“That harm outweighs any public interest in disclosing the information in a public forum, including through parliamentary processes.”

In a letter to Senate president Scott Ryan, Mr Patrick said the Tax Commissioner’s refusal to comply with the Senate order was an act of contempt that could set a dangerous precedent if not overruled.

“A final order by the Senate to the Tax Commissioner must be complied with and it would set an unacceptable precedent were the Commissioner’s non-compliance with the order be allowed to pass,” Senator Patrick said.

“Failure to comply with a final lawful order of the Senate is a contempt.”

Mr Patrick’s move to commence contempt proceedings comes off the back of a groundswell of calls for more transparency around the recipients of substantial government support, and mimics a similar system in New Zealand, where company details are made publicly available.

In New Zealand, where the government spent $12.35 billion on its JobKeeper equivalent, as much as $673 million – or 5.45 per cent – has been voluntarily repaid. Comparatively, in Australia, where only $225 million of the $89.3 billion shelled out for JobKeeper has been repaid, the rate is far lower at just 0.25 of a percentage point.

“The New Zealand government publishes the names of employers who received a wage subsidy payment and how much they were paid,” Senator Patrick said on Thursday.

“If the employer fully repaid the money, their name was removed from the published list. Transparency had an effect and is something we should do here.”


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Monday 11 October 2021

John Buckley





__





Redirect Notice






www.google.com.au






*ATO urges caution on publication of JobKeeper documents, responding to reports*

A trail of JobKeeper documents released under freedom of information laws has prompted words of warning from the ATO, which suggests the documents alone portray an incomplete picture.

The ATO last week issued words of warning to publishers who will soon have access to a trove of documents related to the administration of JobKeeper under freedom of information laws, which the department said may not provide sufficient context. 

“The documents released under freedom of information only provide point-in-time data and insights which may not provide appropriate context or may be superseded by events or updates not available within the documents,” the ATO said in a statement. 

“As such, journalists reporting on the FOIs should be cautious in drawing conclusions from these documents.” 

The warning emerged just one day after the Australian Financial Review published a report detailing how the ATO was aware that it lacked a dedicated “oversight committee”, five months into the program. However, some said the report was “overblown”. 

The ATO said that journalists reporting on documents like these need to be “highly conscious” of the differences between the ATO identifying a potential issue for further exploration, how many businesses were selected for a review on that potential issue, and ultimately how many of those businesses were actually in breach of that issue.

“The documents illustrate how the ATO ensured payments were able to flow quickly to eligible businesses, while also ensuring the integrity of the scheme was maintained at all times,” the ATO said. 

“As would be expected, the ATO kept Treasury and the Treasurer’s office regularly informed as to the status of the program, including the ATO’s comprehensive compliance program.

“Our aim was to make JobKeeper payments easy to access for eligible businesses, and extremely difficult to access for ineligible businesses. This aim was achieved.”

The ATO doubled down on its design of the scheme’s compliance architecture, which it said was subject to “comprehensive reviews” of cases that forecasted a decline in turnover, finding that the “vast majority” of taxpayers undertook the projected decline in turnover test in good faith.

“From our review of more than 1,600 entities across all markets, we found more than 95 per cent were eligible,” the ATO said. 

“These entities were not chosen at random, but on the basis of perceived risk. In short, contrary to the perception that may be obtained from some recent reporting, false or bad-faith estimates of turnover declines or manipulation of past BAS’ were the rare exception.

“In these cases, the businesses were required to pay back any amounts they received.

“It is critical to distinguish between the number of entities chosen for review (high, as part of a comprehensive review program for this issue) and the number of entities which were identified as breaching eligibility rules and bore the appropriate consequences (low, less than 5 per cent).”

The messaging comes after an admission that followed the same tune in mid-September, when Tax Commissioner Chris Jordan told a Senate inquiry that the Tax Office had so far conducted audits of 1,600 businesses that received the $90 billion federal wage subsidy, of which 95 per cent met eligibility requirements. 

But “clearly, there were some that [did] not, and we’ve already recovered $194 million”, Mr Jordan said.

“We’re pursuing another $89 million. There’s $6 million in dispute, and we’ve decided not to pursue $180 million, because it went to small businesses who made a genuine attempt, maybe a mistake, but had paid it on to their employees.

“That was a fundamental requirement.”

The ATO’s decision to let scores of businesses off the hook prompted crossbench senator Rex Patrick to question the move, which he said emerges in stark contrast to the government’s approach to 11,000 welfare recipients, who in August received debt letters for overpaid JobKeeper.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

Media release by the federal Treasurer:


11 October 2021

*Insights from the first six months of JobKeeper*

Commonwealth Treasury has today released a report, titled ‘Insights from the first six months of JobKeeper.’
It confirms the JobKeeper program was well-targeted and highly effective in maintaining employment and supporting the economy during the biggest economic shock since the Great Depression.

At the time JobKeeper was designed and implemented, there was unprecedented uncertainty around the economic outlook.

Consumer and business confidence had fallen to record lows. Treasury considered it plausible that GDP could be 10 to 12 per cent lower than forecast in the June quarter. Treasury’s estimate of the unemployment rate was that it could reach 15 per cent. A quarterly fall in GDP of 24 per cent was considered possible.

JobKeeper was designed to guarantee support for six months to provide certainty to business and support the broader economy. This time frame was linked to the health advice that severe restrictions could be in place for six months or more.

Treasury’s Report finds that JobKeeper payments, which supported 4 million Australians and 1 million businesses, were targeted to:

Businesses strongly affected by the pandemic:JobKeeper businesses faced a median decline in turnover of 28 per cent over the year to the June quarter and 23 per cent over the year to the September quarter 2020. This compared with no decline in median turnover for other businesses.
Businesses at high risk of shedding employees: in March 2020, the job separation rate at JobKeeper businesses had almost doubled due to the COVID‑19 health restrictions, but was broadly unchanged in other businesses.
Sectors directly affected by the public health restrictions: JobKeeper payments were made to around half of the individuals employed in the arts and recreation industry and around 35 per cent in the accommodation and food services industry.
Small businesses and not for profit entities:99 per cent of entities receiving JobKeeper had a turnover of less than $50 million or were not-for-profits, and over 80 per cent of JobKeeper payments went to these entities. These groups were particularly vulnerable to the impact of health restrictions because of their limited ability to weather economic shocks. Large businesses with a turnover of more than $250 million made up 0.2 per cent of JobKeeper entities and received around 11 per cent of payments.
Without the Government’s significant fiscal support, including JobKeeper, Treasury has estimated that the unemployment rate would have peaked at least 5 percentage points higher, and remained above 12 per cent for two years.

JobKeeper enabled the Australian economy to rebound strongly, saving more than 700,000 jobs.
By March 2021, Australia had surpassed its pre‑COVID levels of GDP and employment, a better outcome than all major advanced economies.

The Report demonstrates that JobKeeper was more than just a wage subsidy. It was designed to ensure the strongest possible economic recovery and avoid the scarring impacts on the labour market, which were characteristic of previous recessions.

In the words of Treasury “a central consideration in designing the macroeconomic support package was ensuring the overall level of fiscal support was sufficient to provide a credible offset to the economic shock being experienced.”

JobKeeper was specifically designed, not as a furlough scheme, but as one that enabled businesses to adapt and stay open. In the words of Treasury, JobKeeper “enabled many of these businesses to continue operating and then to pivot and grow.”

It was this feature, combined with the 6 month guaranteed support and the absence of a claw-back mechanism that allowed JobKeeper to not only save jobs, but to create them.

With respect to a claw‑back mechanism, Treasury makes clear it “was not included, reflecting a desire to avoid any disincentives for businesses to adapt and recover.”

The introduction of “such a mechanism would likely have reduced the overall level of activity and muted the recovery.”

While the Report finds that some businesses did not experience a 30 per cent (or 50 per cent) decline in turnover for larger businesses over the year, many were “were still significantly impacted by COVID-19.”

Ninety‑nine per cent of these businesses were small businesses, with an average of four supported employees.

In particular, the number of job losses in these businesses increased by around 60 per cent in late March 2020, compared to almost no increase in non-JobKeeper businesses.

Following the introduction of JobKeeper, job shedding declined sharply in these businesses and employment outcomes substantially recovered, with an estimated 200,000 JobKeeper workers brought back once the policy was introduced.

As the economy recovered and these businesses expanded and pivoted production, hours worked for JobKeeper workers increased, as did employment of non-JobKeeper workers by an estimated 150,000.

Treasury’s Report on the first six months of JobKeeper clearly demonstrates that the program did what it was intended to do. It kept employers and employees connected. It saved more than 700,000 jobs and it supported Australia’s world-leading economic recovery.

The report is available on the Treasury website.


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Wednesday 13 October 2021

John Buckley





__





Redirect Notice






www.google.com.au





*Treasury finds $27bn in JobKeeper paid to ineligible businesses*

A review of the $89 billion wage subsidy conducted by Treasury has found that $27 billion was paid to businesses that didn’t record turnover downfalls in line with forecasts.

Treasury on Monday (11 October) released a review of JobKeeper that found that $27 billion of the $89 billion wage subsidy was paid out to businesses that didn’t qualify, but defended the scheme’s omission of a clawback mechanism, which the department said would have “scarred” employment and left administrators exposed to being gamed.

JobKeeper, which was wound up in March, offered employing businesses $1,500 a fortnight, per employee, to maintain staff headcounts through the earliest – which were then thought to be the worst – stages of Australian lockdowns.

To qualify for the scheme, a business needed to reasonably demonstrate that it expected a reduction in turnover of between 30 per cent and 50 per cent through either a comparable week or quarter in 2019.

Once a business was approved for the scheme, they were eligible for payments for a full six-month period.

The Treasury review found that in the June quarter of 2020, $11.4 billion was paid to businesses that didn’t record their forecast reduction in turnover compared to the year before, before a further $15.6 billion was paid out in the September quarter.

Of the full $27 billion that was paid to businesses that didn’t qualify, $13.8 billion was pocketed by businesses that instead went on to record boosted profits, while another $13.2 billion went to businesses that recorded softer reductions in turnover.

But the review suggested that payments to all businesses were crucial in maintaining relationships between employers and their staff.
“JobKeeper payments to these businesses were important to offset the impact of COVID-19 restrictions on their operations and avoid labour shedding,” Treasury wrote.

“In the first six months of the program, JobKeeper went disproportionately to more productive businesses, particularly ones that were financially fragile and which may have had difficulty surviving a period of reduced revenue during restrictions.

“This helped prevent longer-term scarring by preserving important business-specific capital, knowledge and relationships.”

The department’s review emerges as the latest in a series of developments that have fuelled calls for the publication of JobKeeper “profiteers”, after the ATO told a Senate inquiry last month that it had let businesses off the hook for more than $180 million in misfired JobKeeper payments.

Tax Commissioner Chris Jordan said the Tax Office had so far conducted audits of 1,600 businesses that received the $90 billion federal wage subsidy, of which 95 per cent met eligibility requirements.

But “clearly, there were some that [did] not, and we’ve already recovered 194 million,” Mr Jordan said.

“We’re pursuing another $89 million; there’s $6 million in dispute, and we’ve decided not to pursue $180 million, because it went to small businesses who made a genuine attempt, maybe a mistake, but had paid it on to their employees,” he said.

The ATO’s decision to let scores of businesses off the hook prompted crossbench senator, Rex Patrick, to question the move, which he said emerged in stark contrast to the government’s approach to 11,000 welfare recipients, who in August received debt letters for overpaid JobKeeper.

On Monday (11 October), Mr Patrick stood in opposition again, saying that while JobKeeper saved “many jobs”, it was the “most wasteful government program in the history of the Commonwealth.”

“In just six months, nearly $14 billion went to companies that increased turnover,” he said. “We need to know all the big businesses that profited,” he said.

The Senate charge on JobKeeper, led by Mr Patrick, has in recent months escalated so far as to see the Tax Commissioner threatened with contempt of the Senate for refusing to publish a list of every large company that received payments, how much, and whether they have moved to pay any of it back.

Mr Jordan claimed public interest immunity against a Senate order in mid-August that would have required the ATO to publish a list of businesses with a turnover of more than $10 million that were recipients of the JobKeeper wage subsidy, along with how much these businesses received and how much they had moved to repay.

He argued that revealing such details would undermine public confidence in the ATO’s ability to keep tax information confidential.

After Mr Jordan refused to disclose the list ordered by the Senate, federal Treasurer Josh Frydenberg moved to intervene two weeks later, again citing public interest immunity.

Mr Frydenberg said businesses and taxpayers provide the government with private tax details on the basis that the government won’t publicise it.

He said businesses would expect his government to take the necessary steps to keep it confidential.
“Crucially, the confidential information that is the subject of this order has been collected by the Australian government under strict tax secrecy laws which restrict both the use and sharing of that confidential information,” Mr Frydenberg said.

“Upholding these laws is therefore vital to the continued confidence of Australians in government and the assurances it provides about the protection of their confidential information.”

Mr Patrick’s move to commence contempt proceedings came off the back of a groundswell of calls for more transparency around the recipients of substantial government support, and mimics a similar system in New Zealand, where company details are made publicly available.

In New Zealand, where the government spent $12.35 billion on its JobKeeper equivalent, as much as $673 million – or 5.45 per cent – has been voluntarily repaid. Comparatively, in Australia, where only $225 million of the $89.3 billion shelled out for JobKeeper has been repaid, the rate is far lower at just 0.25 of a percentage point.

“The New Zealand government publishes the names of employers who received a wage subsidy payment and how much they were paid,” Senator Patrick said last month.

The House of Representatives in August batted away key transparency amendments to the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No. 2) Bill 2021, which would have forced businesses to reveal key details related to the amount of JobKeeper payments they had received, and whether they had moved to repay it.

[end of article]

Treasury report (63 pages):





__





Insights from the first six months of JobKeeper | Treasury.gov.au


This report presents Treasury analysis on the first six months of the JobKeeper Payment (to 27 September 2020), reflecting on the design and initial impacts of JobKeeper as a key element of the Government’s macroeconomic response to COVID-19. The report draws on ongoing analysis undertaken by...




treasury.gov.au


----------



## Jack Malarkey

_Accountants Daily_

Tony Zhang

Thursday 7 April 2022









National auditor finds JobKeeper delivery effective


The government’s pandemic support scheme was effective despite “shortcomings” across ATO’s compliance program.




 www.accountantsdaily.com.au





*National auditor finds JobKeeper delivery effective*

The government’s pandemic support scheme was effective despite “shortcomings” across ATO’s compliance program.

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) has found the ATO has been effective in the administration of the JobKeeper scheme.

In line with its priority of making timely payments to eligible entities, the ATO largely implemented fit-for-purpose arrangements to protect the integrity of JobKeeper payments.

Around $89 billion in JobKeeper payments were made and 1,160 ATO staff were involved in administering the scheme in August 2020.

However, the audit report found the ATO did not implement all key compliance and integrity measures as intended.

“Of the 22 compliance measures tested, two were partly implemented as intended, seven largely as intended and eight fully as intended,” the ANAO said.

“The ANAO was unable to conclude on five compliance measures due to data integrity issues.

“The ATO’s governance and internal reporting arrangements did not provide clear assurance on the implementation of the compliance measures.”

The auditor-general said a more structured approach for documenting the reasons for exercising discretion on JobKeeper overpayments would have provided more transparency and accountability for the use of public funds.

The ATO had exercised discretion on overpayments largely in accordance with its internal policies and procedures.

“The ATO’s approach was that the exercise of discretion needed to be reasonable based upon the circumstances of the case,” the national auditor said.

“The ATO’s guidance material set out two significant factors to be taken into account when exercising discretion — honest mistake and retention of financial benefit.

“Based on a sample of 63 overpayments, the ATO did not consistently document how its exercise of discretion related to the two significant factors. The ATO’s understanding of the law was that the Commissioner’s discretion on JobKeeper overpayments could not be limited by internal policies and procedures.”

The audit report also raised concerns with the evidence asked for and received by the Tax Office showing a company receiving the JobKeeper payment met the relevant decline in turnover test.

While the ATO conducted reviews on the recipient’s proposed decline in turnover, the audit found inconsistencies in the documentation process.

The ATO was generally accepting of entity assertions with regard to the manner in which the decline in turnover test was completed and did not seek to verify the responses provided.

For instance, the ATO could have requested primary documentation to evidence the date on which the projections were produced.

“While the ATO conducted a decline in turnover reviews in accordance with its internal procedures, the nature of the ATO’s procedures and variability in the documentation maintained did not provide strong assurance on the assessed eligibility of entities that were reviewed,” the ANAO said.

The ATO recognised that finding and said it faced the challenge of delivering a program of the scale and complexity of JobKeeper under exceptional circumstances.

“We recognise the findings identified the potential for better record-keeping practices, particularly in relation to the favourable exercise of discretions and decisions not to continue compliance action, although we do note the actual environment required rapid implementation while balancing the need to support the community in a time of great uncertainty,” the ATO said.

“We note also that the ATO, under a self-assessment system and having regard to the efficient use of resources, has traditionally put more effort into documenting reasons for decisions unfavourable to taxpayers (to ensure rigour in the decision and to provide procedural fairness to a taxpayer who may wish to challenge that decision) than to favourable decisions (which are unlikely to be challenged).

“Whilst there are some differences of opinion, the ATO has taken on board the findings from the ANAO and will continue to refine and improve processes in the delivery of our key programs of work.”

[end of article]

ANAO report:






Administration of the JobKeeper Scheme | Australian National Audit Office







www.anao.gov.au


----------

