Amin and Kahoe (Child support)

[2020] AATA 2133

Amin and Kahoe (Child support) [2020] AATA 2133 (23 April 2020)

DIVISION:Social Services & Child Support Division

REVIEW NUMBER:  2019/MC017764

APPLICANT:  Mr Amin

OTHER PARTIES:  Child Support Registrar

Ms Kahoe

TRIBUNAL:Member S Letch

DECISION DATE:  23 April 2020

CATCHWORDS

CHILD SUPPORT – dismissal of application for review – departure from the administrative assessment – whether determination should be backdated - no reasonable prospect of success - application for review dismissed

Names used in all published decisions are pseudonyms. Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been omitted from this decision and replaced with generic information so as not to identify involved individuals as required by subsections 16(2AB)-16(2AC) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988.

DISMISSAL OF APPLICATION FOR REVIEW:

1. This matter concerns an application by Mr Amin against an objection decision of the Child Support Agency (CSA) disallowing his objection to a “change of assessment” decision dated 22 October 2019.

2. There has been a preliminary proceeding before the Tribunal in this matter. It is useful to set out an extract of the reasons of the CSA objections officer by way of background:

   Department records show Mr Amin lodged his estimation of income on 10 December 2018 and through this application he is seeking to have the estimate applied to the assessment from 3 September 2018 when he ceased employment.

   When considering if it is fair to make a change, I note letters were sent to Mr Amin by the department on 15 September 2019 advising him of the change to the assessment. He also received three monthly statements clearly outlining his child support liability on 22 September 2018, 20 October 2018 and 17 November 2018.

   Mr Amin did not contact the department to advice of a change to his circumstances until 10 December 2018, after the department notified him that we had intercepted his tax refund on 4 December 2018. Based on this evidence I am satisfied Mr Amin was aware of the change to the
   assessment and could have contacted the department prior to 10 December 2018 to amend his income, but chose not to do so until the money owed was recovered.

   Furthermore, Mr Amin’s ATI of $74,266 is only utilised in the assessment for the period 18 September 2018 to 9 December 2018, generating a liability of $1,862.47 for this period. Mr Amin held funds in his bank account that were significantly higher than the assessed rate at the time and also transferred a significant sum to a third party/third party account after ceasing employment and being aware of his child support obligations. I am satisfied Mr Amin had the financial resources available to meet the child support liability as assessed at that time.

   After considering this matter on a whole, I do not find the assessment was unfair. Mr Amin had funds available to meet the liability as assessed at that time and from 1 July 2018, Mr Amin received the benefit of being assessment on his 2015-16 ATI of $48,507 generating a significantly lower assessment when he was actually earning an income equivalent to $74,266 per annum.

   Based on the above information I do not find that Mr Amin’s financial resources render the child support assessment unfair. I am not satisfied that special circumstances exist or that Mr Amin’s capacity to contribute to the support of the children has not fairly been reflected.

1. In the Tribunal’s assessment, there is no prospect the Tribunal will reach a different conclusion. Compelling circumstances are required to backdate the effect of a change of assessment application; they simply do not exist here. There is no evidence Ms Kahoe’s income applied to the assessment is not representative of her financial position. Particularly in light of the sage observation by the objections officer that Mr Amin’s 2017/18 adjusted taxable income has been applied only from September 2018 to December 2018 (indeed, were a change of assessment backdated, Mr Amin would likely be in a significantly worse position in the event the 2017/18 income was to be retrospectively applied from July 2017), there is no basis to suggest there are any special circumstances rendering Mr Amin’s child support liability in any way unfair.

1. The Tribunal is satisfied that the application for review has no reasonable prospect of success and dismisses the application for review pursuant to subsection 42B(1) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975.