Dodson and Commissioner of Taxation (Taxation)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Dodson and the Commissioner of Taxation. The dispute concerned the Applicant's eligibility for the Senior and Pensioner Tax Offset (SAPTO) and the associated Medicare Levy threshold for the 2019 income year. The Commissioner had issued an amended income tax assessment, disallowing the Applicant's claim for these concessions, resulting in a tax liability.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the Applicant met the eligibility criteria for the SAPTO under section 160AAAA of the *Income Tax Assessment Act 1936* (ITAA 1936). Specifically, the Tribunal had to assess if the Applicant satisfied the conditions relating to being entitled to a pension payment, not being in gaol, being under age pension age, and having assessable income that included a social security pension or a payment under the *Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986* or the *Defence Force (Home Loans Assistance) Act 1990*. The Tribunal also needed to consider the Applicant's rebate income in relation to the relevant income cut-off threshold.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the Applicant received a carer payment, this payment was tax-exempt and therefore did not constitute an assessable income amount of a social security pension for the purposes of SAPTO eligibility under section 160AAAA(2)(c)(i). Furthermore, the Applicant did not meet the requirements of section 160AAAA(2)(a) as she was not entitled to a pension under the *Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986*, nor did she meet the requirements of section 160AAAA(2)(b) as she was not entitled to receive the age pension. Although the Applicant's rebate income was below the threshold under section 160AAAA(3), she failed to satisfy the other conditions for the SAPTO.

Consequently, the Tribunal found that the Applicant was not eligible for the SAPTO and the associated Medicare Levy concessions. The Tribunal concluded that the Applicant had not discharged her onus to prove that the amended assessment was excessive or incorrect, and therefore affirmed the Commissioner's decision.