Synchron victorious on commissions, fees and payroll tax

14 June 2016
| By Mike |
image
image
expand image

Life/risk-focused dealer group, Synchron is claiming a payroll tax victory with respect to arguing against the inclusion of commissions and other fees collected on behalf of advisers.

Synchron director, Don Trapnell, has claimed the victory with respect to a long-running argument with the Victorian State Government's State Revenue Office (SRO), which had assessed that the dealer group was liable to pay payroll tax in relation to the commissions and fees it collects on behalf of some of its advisers.

He said the SRO's assessment was that authorised representatives who do not employ two or more people were considered employees or relevant contractors for payroll tax purposes — something which had significant implications for Synchron and for licensees across the industry.

The assessment meant that potentially all licensees would be liable to pay around five per cent payroll tax on the gross revenue of these authorised representatives, backdated seven years.

"It would have meant a huge tax bill for licensees and had the potential to send smaller licensees broke," Trapnell claimed.

Synchron argued that its legal obligation to collect fees and commissions on behalf of authorised representatives, coupled with the fact that Australian financial services licensees are also legally required to provide other functions such as compliance, education and training, meant these authorised representatives were not employees or relevant contractors for payroll tax purposes.

The breakthrough in the case came for Synchron when, following the submission of key documentation to the Victorian Supreme Court, the SRO formally acknowledged the dealer group's position.

A letter from the Revenue Office to Synchron's legal representatives stated: "The Commissioner has determined on the basis of the evidence presented by your client that your client is correct, to contend that the arrangements between your client and its authorised representatives are not relevant contracts for the purposes of section 32 1(B) of the Payroll Tax Act 2007".

Read more about:

AUTHOR

 

Recommended for you

 

MARKET INSIGHTS

sub-bg sidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

Squeaky'21

My view is that after 2026 there will be quite a bit less than 10,000 'advisers' (investment advisers) and less than 100...

1 week 1 day ago
Jason Warlond

Dugald makes a great point that not everyone's definition of green is the same and gives a good example. Funds have bee...

1 week 1 day ago
Jasmin Jakupovic

How did they get the AFSL in the first place? Given the green light by ASIC. This is terrible example of ASIC's incompet...

1 week 2 days ago

AustralianSuper and Australian Retirement Trust have posted the financial results for the 2022–23 financial year for their combined 5.3 million members....

9 months 2 weeks ago

A $34 billion fund has come out on top with a 13.3 per cent return in the last 12 months, beating out mega funds like Australian Retirement Trust and Aware Super. ...

9 months ago

The verdict in the class action case against AMP Financial Planning has been delivered in the Federal Court by Justice Moshinsky....

9 months 2 weeks ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND