Piacitelli and Piacitelli (Child support)

[2024] AATA 2762

Piacitelli and Piacitelli (Child support) [2024] AATA 2762 (17 June 2024)

DIVISION:Social Services & Child Support Division

REVIEW NUMBER:  2024/MC027703

APPLICANT:  Ms Piacitelli

OTHER PARTIES:  Child Support Registrar

Mr Piacitelli

TRIBUNAL:Member S Letch

DECISION DATE:  17 June 2024

DECISION:

The decision under review is set aside and the matter is sent back to the Child Support Registrar for reconsideration in accordance with the direction that the child support assessment be reconsidered on the basis that Ms Piacitelli’s “year to date income amount” for the period 1 July 2022 to 7 December 2022 is $36,718 (not $23,975).

CATCHWORDS

CHILD SUPPORT – particulars of the administrative assessment – adjusted taxable income correctly applied – income estimate – payslip year to date figure no longer accurate – decision under review set aside and substituted

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.

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. This matter concerns a decision by Child Support to calculate Ms Piacitelli’s “year to date” income for the purposes of an “estimate reconciliation” for the period 1 July 2022 to 7 December 2022 as $23,975.

2. It is convenient by way of background to set out some extracts from the objections officer’s decision dated 20 March 2024:

   …

   DECISION UNDER REVIEW

   Type of decision being objected to: Estimate reconciliation.

   Decision being objected to:

   Ms Piacitelli is objecting to our decision on 6 October 2023 to refuse to change her YTD income of $23,975.00 used in her estimate reconciliation for the period 1 July 2022 to 7 December 2022.

   Ms Piacitelli has objected to this decision because she stated that there was an error in the actual income earned for the period 1 July 2022 to 7 December 2022. She stated that the income estimated from her first employer was $12,395.00, and for her other employer, the income for the period 1 September 2022 to 7 December 2022 should have been $24,323.45.

   …

   REASONS FOR THE DECISION

   After the end of the year of income, we will compare the parent's estimated adjusted taxable income (ATI) with their actual ATI for the year. The income estimate is usually reconciled when we receive the parent s tax assessment from the ATO.

   We made a decision to refuse to change her YTD income of $23,975.00 used in her estimate reconciliation for the period 1 July 2022 to 7 December 2022 based on the evidence we had at the time of the decision.

   On objection, Ms Piacitelli stated that there was an error in the actual income earned for the period 1 July 2022 to 7 December 2022. She stated that the income estimated from her first employer was $12,395.00, and for her other employer, the income for the period 1 September 2022 to 7 December 2022 should have been $24,323.45. [Mr Piacitelli] had no evidence to contribute to the objection. However, from these statements alone, we cannot be satisfied of her actual YTD income.

   The only other evidence available was the payslips that Ms Piacitelli sent us. These payslips show that as at 7 December 2022, the day prior to the estimate, her YTD income from her two employers total $23,975.42. This agrees with the YTD income we used in the reconciliation, and we are satisfied that this is the case.

   A review of the estimate reconciliation shows that it was processed correctly, and hence we are satisfied that this is the case.

   Therefore, we make a decision to refuse to change her year to date (YTD) income of $23,975.00 used in her estimate reconciliation for the period 1 July 2022 to 7 December 2022.

   The objection is disallowed.

   …

1. Ms Piacitelli and Mr Piacitelli participated in the Tribunal’s hearing by conference telephone.

2. Ms Piacitelli had two employers during the disputed period; one employer changed its payroll system so that the “year to date” figure on her payslips were no longer accurate. Child Support added “year to date” figure of $12,395 for the pay period ending 27 November 2022 (the first employer) (see folio 41 of the hearing papers) to the figure of $11,580 for the second employer (see folio 42) to arrive at its figure of $23,975. However, the figure for the first employer should have included an amount of $12,743.03 (the year to date figure for the period ending 28 August 2022 (see folio 22 of the hearing papers) which can be seen to have “fallen off” in the next payslip (for the period ending 11 September 2022) at folio 24 when the gross pay for that fortnight was $1,454.14 and the year to date figure was recorded as the same figure. Adding the omitted sum of $12,743.03 brings the total year to date figure to $36,718.03, not $23,975.

3. Mr Piacitelli said he was not in a position to say whether the calculations are right. However, he observed that there seemed to be a very steep reduction in Ms Piacitelli’s income, and that he had always been assessed on his previous year’s income, not current estimated income.  

Application of the law

1. Section 63AC of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (the Act) allows a person to elect a new “year to date income amount” to replace an earlier amount. Section 63AE of the Act gives the Registrar the power to determine a new “year to date income amount” if satisfied an amount is incorrect.

2. The “year to date” figure is a critical figure for the purposes of an estimate reconciliation for the purposes of section 64 of the Act. Here, Ms Piacitelli says that because of the error, some $12,743 has notionally been allocated to the period 8 December 2022 to 30 June 2023, inflating her income for that period for the purposes of the estimate reconciliation and impacting the child support assessment. She says that sum should properly be allocated to the period 1 July 2022 to 7 December 2022, before the estimate election was calculated and made.

3. It seems to me clear enough that a simple calculation error has occurred here. The evidence of the payslips supports Ms Piacitelli’s contention that due to a change in software with one of Ms Piacitelli’s two employers, the “year to date” figure was effectively “reset” from the payslip covering the period 29 August 2022 to 11 September 2022 (folio 24), omitting the sum of $12,743.03. Accordingly, I find that sum should be added to the figure of $23,975 calculated by Child Support.

4. I am comfortably satisfied that the child support assessment should be reconsidered on the basis that Ms Piacitelli’s “year to date income amount” for the period 1 July 2022 to 7 December 2022 is $36,718 (not $23,975).

5. As this is a different conclusion to the objections officer, the decision under review will be set aside.

DECISION

The decision under review is set aside and the matter is sent back to the Child Support Registrar for reconsideration in accordance with the direction that the child support assessment be reconsidered on the basis that Ms Piacitelli’s “year to date income amount” for the period 1 July 2022 to 7 December 2022 is $36,718 (not $23,975).