Thank you for all of your help. The service was outstanding - all of my questions were answered promptly, everything ran smoothly

M. Elliot
  1. Article
  2. Related Articles
  3. Related Practice Areas

Taxation Law - Tax Havens and Information Sharing Agreements - Project Wickenby

Date: August 18, 2010

Authors: LAC Lawyers

It is commonly known that there are many legal and legitimate transactions that Australian residents participate in which are located in offshore tax havens. Such transactions and arrangements are designed to take advantage of the tax benefits available in the relevant offshore jurisdictions. 

Tax havens are those jurisdictions which provide a legal and financial framework which (relative to a jurisdiction of reference) is more favorable in facilitating arrangements and/or transactions designed or intended to minimise tax exposure. 

There is the risk that such an arrangement will be taken too far and rather than attempting to merely minimise tax exposure, will err on the side of tax avoidance and even tax evasion. 

To prevent the illegal evasion of the Australian revenue, the Australian Commissioner of taxation has an ever expanding number of bilateral information sharing agreements in place with many jurisdictions world-wide. These agreements allow for the flow of information to the ATO about the financial affairs of any particular taxpayer under investigation. 

The ATO is then empowered to convey the information which it receives from offshore jurisdictions with partner agencies within Australia such as the Australian Federal Police and the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions. This power is enhanced by the application of section 3G of the Taxation Administration Act 1953.

Project Wickenby

Project Wickenby is one of the results of such information sharing agreements. The individuals and promoters identified as a result of Project Wickenby have had the full force of the law applied to them. Project Wickenby is still underway and as more and more information sharing agreements are entered into between Australia and the tax haven jurisdictions, more and more individuals, promoters and/or taxpayer entities whom have been involved in tax fraud or tax evasion schemes are coming to light. 

Project Wickenby has already led to a number of arrests and charges and undoubtedly, will lead to many a conviction in due course. Even where the individual being investigated is located outside Australia, the Commissioner for Taxation may apply to an appropriate court in the jurisdiction where the taxpayer is located and seek to obtain an extradition order against that individual. 

In fact, in August 2010, the Royal Court of Jersey rejected an important aspect of a Mr Philip de Figueiredo’s appeal against the Jersey Attorney-General’s decision to allow for his extradition back to Australia in order that he may face charges of fraud and tax evasion in relation to the revenue. Although the appeal continues, the approach taken by the Royal Court represents a shift from the traditional hesitance of tax haven jurisdictions to assist offshore authorities and agencies such as the Australian Taxation Office in investigating individuals suspected of partaking in tax fraud or evasion. 

This case highlights the willingness of regulators towards harmonisation of international tax and legal systems to ensure a higher level of tax compliance is achieved world-over. This willingness is also undoubtedly driven by the united worldwide attempt to prevent money laundering and terrorism financing operations.

In an era of ever increasing transparency between the so called ‘tax haven’ jurisdictions and Australia, in terms of the sharing of information, it is critical that the offshore concealment of income and capital gains which are derived from offshore and onshore activities, arrangements seeking to circumvent the controlled foreign company, foreign investment fund and transferor trust regimes and deemed present entitlement rules are very closely examined, on a voluntary basis, by the investing taxpayer to ensure compliance with the Australian tax laws. 

A disclosure to the Australian Taxation Office on a voluntary basis is likely to provide you with a much more favourable outcome if you have failed to disclose income or gains which come to light of the ATO and can issue a Notice of Assessment under section 264 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 and examine your affairs, under oath. To refuse to do so can amount to contempt of court amongst other things.

Professional Advice

Taxpayers, including individuals often come to us once a Notice of Assessment has been issued by the ATO, the tax payer under investigation is likely to find themselves subject to an audit by the Commissioner of Taxation and the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecution and end up paying penalties and interest in addition to the undeclared primary tax component. A gaol sentence is not uncommon, although obtaining proper legal advice in a timely fashion may prevent this. 

If you are involved in any transactions, arrangements or schemes in tax havens or any offshore jurisdictions, we strongly recommend that you seek professional legal advice from LAC Lawyers before matters get out of control and your prospects are irreprebly damaged. 

This article is intended only to provide a summary of the subject matter covered. It does not purport to be comprehensive or to render legal advice. No reader should act on the basis of any matter contained in this article without first obtaining specific professional advice.

Contact us now for Fast, Accurate and Timely legal advice

  1. Article
  2. Related Articles
  3. Related Practice Areas