Aulsbury and Aulsbury (Child support)

[2022] AATA 3526

Aulsbury and Aulsbury (Child support) [2022] AATA 3526 (26 August 2022)

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION

DIVISION:  Social Services & Child Support Division

REVIEW NUMBER:  2022/BC023980

APPLICANT:  Mr Aulsbury

OTHER PARTIES:  Child Support Registrar Ms Aulsbury

TRIBUNAL:  Senior Member K Dordevic

DECISION DATE:  26 August 2022

CATCHWORDS

CHILD SUPPORT – dismissal of application for review - particulars of the   administrative assessment – estimate reconciliation - 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.The Tribunal is satisfied that the application for has no reasonable prospect of success and dismisses the application for review pursuant to subsection 42B(1) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (AAT Act).

2.The reasons for this decision are set out in the following paragraphs.

3.On 26 May 2022 the applicant, Mr Aulsbury, lodged an application for review with the Social Services and Child Support Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) in relation to a decision made on 14 April 2022 by an objections officer of Services Australia – Child Support (the Agency).

4.The objections officer disallowed Mr Aulsbury’s objection to a decision dated 20 February 2022 to reconcile his 2021 income estimate of $88,069 with his 2021 adjusted taxable income, as advised by the Australian Taxation Office, of $103,414.

5.The statutory scheme outlined in the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (the Act) provides some flexibility for parents whose circumstances change from one year to the next. Relevantly, in specified circumstances, section 60 of the Act allows a person to elect that their adjusted taxable income is their current adjusted taxable income rather than the adjusted taxable income from the previous financial year.

6.The Agency must reconcile estimates after the end of the relevant financial year when it receives advice from the Australian Taxation Office of the parent’s taxable income. There is an exception for estimates the Agency amended because a person provided information in accordance with a notice. This exception is not relevant to this case.

7.The method for reconciling an estimate set out in section 64 of the Act applies where a person has lodged only one estimate that has not been revoked or amended. Subsections 64(3) and (4) of the Act effectively provide a formula for reconciling a single estimate. The Agency reconciled Mr Aulsbury’s estimate in accordance with these provisions, based on the information provided by the Australian Taxation Office.

8.The Tribunal held an early case appraisal conference on 11 July 2022.

9.On 18 July 2022 the Tribunal issued a notice to the Australian Taxation Office to provide Mr Aulsbury’s 2021 tax return. This was received by the Tribunal 22 July 2022, confirming that Mr Aulsbury’s 2021 adjusted taxable income was $103,414.

10.On 2 August 2022 the Tribunal wrote to Mr Aulsbury. The letter stated:

As discussed at your Early Case Assessment Conference, the Tribunal is considering whether to dismiss your application under section 42B(1)(a) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 on the basis that the application has no reasonable prospect of success.

You have 21 days from the date of this letter to give us any evidence or written submission that you wish to have considered before that decision is considered.

11.No response was received from Mr Aulsbury as at close of business on 25 August 2022.

12.In view of there being no submission or evidence received from Mr Aulsbury to contradict the findings made by the Agency in regards to his reconciled income estimate the Tribunal is satisfied that the application for review has no reasonable prospect of success and so dismisses the application pursuant to subsection 42B(1) of the AAT Act.