Download files
Abstract
This thesis examines the adequacy and effectiveness of the avenues of relief available to Australian taxpayers aggrieved by an Australian Taxation Office (‘ATO’) operational act or omission where monetary compensation is the desired remedy.
The exclusive focus in this thesis on those legal rights triggered in cases of operational act or omission causing taxpayer loss is novel. Similarly, none of the existing literature specifically examines the ability of existing taxpayer remedies to provide monetary compensation to taxpayers aggrieved by ATO operational act or omission. This thesis explains the importance of filling this void in the existing literature and examining taxpayer rights with these two factual parameters specifically and exclusively in mind.
The central contention is that the existing avenues of compensatory relief are both ineffective and inadequate. The results of the assessment in this thesis of the effectiveness and adequacy of each of the existing avenues of compensatory relief available to Australian taxpayers aggrieved by ATO operational act or omission confirm this contention. The results show that judges presently determine taxpayer claims in a manner that is not consistent, predictable or built upon a solid foundation of precedent and legislative direction. Instead, untested public policy concerns are determinative.
Accordingly, this thesis considers law reform alternatives to correct these deficiencies. Ultimately, this thesis recommends the enactment of a limited, no-fault statutory damages remedy for Australian taxpayers seeking monetary compensation for loss caused by ATO operational act or omission. A model no-fault statutory damages remedy is constructed and presented.