Harris & Tax Practitioners Board

Case [2014] AATA 430

SRBP and Tax Practitioners Board [2016] AATA 456 (30 June 2016)

Division

TAXATION & COMMERCIAL DIVISION

File Number

2014/5366

Re

SRBP

APPLICANT

And

Tax Practitioners Board

RESPONDENT

DECISION

Tribunal

F D O'Loughlin, Senior Member
Date 30 June 2016
Place Melbourne

In place of the cancellation of the Applicant’s registration as a tax agent the Tribunal directs that:

(a)pursuant to s 30-15 of the TAS Act the Applicant be given a written caution;

(b)pursuant to s 30-20(1) of the TAS Act, the Applicant’s registration be restricted such that for three years she is not to offer any form of fee from refund service to her clients and is not to be involved in any activity as part of her tax agent practice that includes the receipt of money belong to her clients;

(c)pursuant to s 30-20(1)(a) of the TAS Act, before 30 June 2017 the Applicant is to undertake and satisfactorily complete remedial education in a course approved by the Respondent concerning trust accounting that includes the nature and content of trustees duties and obligations concerning trust moneys and the course Ethics, Tax Agent Services Act (TASA) 2009 and the Code of Professional Conduct offered by The Tax Institute or equivalent course approved by the Respondent;

(d)pursuant to s 30-20(1) of the TAS Act, for the next three years the Applicant is to provide to the Respondent details of any and all bank accounts she operates and access to her tax agents portal so as to allow the Respondent to be able to monitor the Applicant’s compliance with (b) above.

.............[sgd].............................................

Senior Member                  

TAX AGENTS CODE OF CONDUCT - breach of TASA Code of Professional Conduct –tax agent registration terminated – Applicant experienced personal and health problems – appropriate sanction – comparison with registration and regulation of legal practitioners

Legislation
Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014 (Vic) ss 299, 120
Tax Agent Services Act 2009 (Cth) ss 30-20(1)(a), 30-20(1), 60-125(2), 30-30, 40-25, 30-10(1), 30-10(3), 30-10(7), 30-15, 60-95, 60-125, 30-25

Cases
Chamberlain v Australian Capital Territory Law Society (1993) 118 ALR 54
Harris and Tax Practitioners Board [2014] AATA 430
In the Matter of the Legal Practitioners Act 1898 to 1936 and In the Matter of Clem Alexander Parbury [1989] NSWCA 132
Legal Practitioners Conduct Board v Nicholson [2006] SASC 21
Legal Services Commissioner v Mirabella [2014] VCAT 339
Prothonotary v Del Castillo [2001] NSWCA 75 Quinn v Law Institute of Victoria Ltd [2007] VSCA 122
SRBP and Tax Practitioners Board [2015] AATA 292

SRBP and Tax Practitioners Board [2015] AATA 302

REASONS FOR DECISION

F D O'Loughlin, Senior Member

30 June 2016

  1. The Applicant seeks the Tribunal’s review of the Respondent’s decisions:

    (a)pursuant to ss 60-125(2) and 30-30 of the TAS Act,[1] to cancel her Tax Agent registration for breaches of the Code;[2] and

    (b)pursuant to s 40-25 of the TAS Act, to impose a two year period in which she will not be eligible to apply for a registration.

    [1]Tax Agent Services Act 2009 (Cth).

    [2]TAS Act,…

Continue reading Harris & Tax Practitioners Board

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Harris & Tax Practitioners Board [2016] AATA 456
Case
[2014] AATA 430
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an appeal by the Applicant, a registered tax agent, against a decision by the Tax Practitioners Board to cancel her registration. The dispute arose from the Applicant's conduct, which the Board found to be in breach of professional standards. The appeal was heard by Senior Member F D O'Loughlin of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine the appropriate sanction for the Applicant, considering the protective function of the regulatory regime, the impact of her personal and health issues, and the availability of graduated sanctions. The central legal issue was how to balance the need to maintain public interest and professional standards with the recognition of the Applicant's mitigating circumstances and the potential for her to continue practicing with appropriate limitations.

The Tribunal reasoned that while maintaining standards is crucial, the public interest can be served by ensuring the offender has recovered and by applying a graduated system of sanctions. The Applicant's significant health and personal issues, which contributed to her predicament, were to be afforded sensible moderation. Given that the Applicant was no longer as afflicted by these issues, that there was no evidence of broader practice difficulties beyond specific ATO refund matters, and that protective orders could prevent recurrence, the Tribunal found that cancellation of registration was too severe. Instead, the Tribunal varied the decision, imposing a written caution, restricting the Applicant from offering refund services and receiving client money for three years, requiring her to complete remedial education in trust accounting and professional conduct, and mandating ongoing monitoring of her bank accounts and tax agent portal for three years.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Protecting the public interest by maintaining standards requires recognition that the public interest function of a regulatory regime can be regarded as served if the decision maker is satisfied that the offender has recovered.[16] [16]Legal Practitioners Conduct Board v Nicholson [2006] SASC 21, 30 per Doyle CJ, with whom Perry J at 40 and White J at 41 agreed, and the authorities there referred to.DECISION In circumstances where:(a)the current system has a protective function;(b)significant health and personal issues are not to be ignored and sufferers are to be afforded sensible moderation of otherwise applicable sanctions;(c)a graduated system of sanction is available, and intended to be applied, so that the sanction applied can be both appropriate in the circumstances and not a ruinous imposition affecting tax agents’ livelihoods;(d)there is no evidence that the Applicant has difficulties in her practice beyond dealing with ATO refunds;(e)the Applicant is no longer as afflicted by her personal and health issues as she was at the relevant time; and(f)registration as a tax agent can be allowed with limits on the scope of particular activities and other protective styled orders can be made so as to prevent recurrence of the problems that led to the present application and thereby achieve the objectives of the new system and maintain standards,on a fine balance recognising the severe difficulties that have contributed to the Applicant’s predicament, an appropriate sanction that addresses these matters, protects the public interest and standards of tax agents and reflects an appropriate balance, is to vary the decision under review as set out below. In place of the cancellation of the Applicant’s registration as a tax agent the Tribunal directs that:(a)pursuant to s 30-15 of the TAS Act the Applicant be given a written caution;(b)pursuant to s 30-20(1) of the TAS Act, the Applicant’s registration be restricted such that for three years she is not to offer any form of fee from refund service to her clients and is not to be involved in any activity as part of her tax agent practice that includes the receipt of money belonging to her clients; (c)pursuant to s 30-20(1)(a) of the TAS Act, before 30 June 2017 the Applicant is to undertake and satisfactorily complete remedial education in a course approved by the Respondent concerning trust accounting that includes the nature and content of trustees duties and obligations concerning trust moneys and the course Ethics, Tax Agent Services Act (TASA) 2009 and the Code of Professional Conduct offered by The Tax Institute or equivalent course approved by the Respondent; and(d)pursuant to s 30-20(1) of the TAS Act, for the next three years the Applicant is to provide to the Respondent details of any and all bank accounts she operates and access to her tax agents portal so as to allow the Respondent to be able to monitor the Applicant’s compliance with (b) above. As noted at the end of the hearing in this matter, it is now a matter of public record that the Lawyers (both Counsel and Solicitors) acting for the Applicant in this matter have done so on a pro bono basis.[17] Apart from the direct benefit the Applicant has derived from that assistance, it is appropriate to record the Tribunal’s appreciation for the efforts of the Applicant’s lawyers in a matter that probably transpired to be more involved than expected when they committed to the assistance they have provided. The Tribunal has been a significant beneficiary of the pro bono work done. It is also appropriate to record the Respondent’s sentiment in joining in the appreciation expressed to the Applicant’s lawyers.[17]SRBP and Tax Practitioners Board [2015] AATA 292; SRBP and Tax Practitioners Board [2015] AATA 302.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.