Thiele and Commissioner of Taxation (Taxation)

This matter concerned an application by Mr Thiele against a decision by the Commissioner of Taxation regarding eligibility for the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Cash Flow Boost) (BCF Act). Mr Thiele had carried on a business in partnership during the 2018-19 income year but transitioned to operating the business as a sole trader from 1 February 2020. The dispute centred on whether Mr Thiele met a specific eligibility criterion under the BCF Act.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether an amount was included in Mr Thiele's assessable income for the 2018-19 income year in relation to him carrying on a business. The Commissioner contended that Mr Thiele did not satisfy this limb of the eligibility requirements because the relevant "entity" for the purposes of the BCF Act was Mr Thiele himself, and it was the partnership, not Mr Thiele as a sole trader, that carried on the business in 2018-19. Conversely, Mr Thiele argued that his share of the partnership's assessable income, which was reflected in his personal tax return for 2018-19, constituted an amount included in his assessable income in relation to the business he carried on in partnership.

The Tribunal considered that the Commissioner's submission that Mr Thiele did not "come into existence" until he was registered on the Australian Business Register was without merit, as this did not align with the ordinary meaning of an individual's existence. However, the Tribunal accepted the Commissioner's submission that the BCF Act distinguishes between an individual and a partnership, with a partnership being treated as an "entity" for eligibility testing. Crucially, the Tribunal found that for the 2018-19 income year, the business was carried on by the partnership, and therefore, no amount was included in Mr Thiele's assessable income in relation to *him* carrying on a business in that capacity.

The Tribunal affirmed the Commissioner's decision.