Paul Thompson

Expertise

Paul has over five years’ of experience in the area of taxation, disputes and litigation, primarily in matters involving the Australian Taxation Office (ATO).

His experience in tax controversy includes, engaging with the ATO in respect of reviews and audits involving Division 7A, Part IVA general anti-avoidance provisions, capital gains tax, general income tax provisions and GST.

These engagements with the ATO have involved bringing issues to resolution through: objections, litigation in the Federal Court, settlements or voluntary disclosures.

He has also been involved in provision of front end legal advice covering a range of taxation issues including: GST, superannuation guarantee obligations, director penalty notices and state taxes including payroll tax and stamp duty.

Experience

Paul’s experience includes:

• Apted v Commissioner of Taxation: [2020] AATA 5139 – the applicant successfully appealed the Commissioner’s decision to deny Jobseeker payments on the basis that he didn’t hold an ABN on the required date. The subsequent appeal to the full Federal Court upheld the AAT’s decision to exercise the Commissioner’s discretion to allow a later time for the applicant to have an ABN
• Cheryl Anne King v Commissioner of Taxation: QUD 717-721 of 2018 – a dispute arising from default income tax assessments over a number years that were based on an audit conducted using the asset betterment method. The dispute was settled with  the applicant’s objections to the all of the amended assessments being upheld and the ATO agreeing to the payment of a portion of her legal costs
• Guardian AITCS Pty Ltd as trustee for the Australian Investment Trust v Commissioner of Taxation and Alexander Springer v Commissioner of Taxation: [2021] FCA 1619 & [2023] FCAFC 3 – a dispute regarding income tax assessments arising under section 100A and Part IVA of the Income Tax Assessment Act. The Primary Judge found in favour of the applicants on both section 100A and Part IVA. The appeal to the Full Federal Court resulted in the Primary Judge’s decision for section 100A being fully upheld and the decision for Part IVA partially overturned.