Tax noncompliance is a range of activities that are unfavorable to a government's tax system. This may include tax avoidance, which is tax reduction by legal means, and tax evasion which is the illegal non-payment of tax liabilities. The use of the term "noncompliance" is used differently by different authors. Its most general use describes non-compliant behaviors with respect to different institutional rules resulting in what Edgar L. Feige calls unobserved economies. Non-compliance with fiscal rules of taxation gives rise to unreported income and a tax gap that Feige estimates to be in the neighborhood of $500 billion annually for the United States.
Tax avoidance is the legal usage of the tax regime in a single territory to one's own advantage to reduce the amount of tax that is payable by means that are within the law. A tax shelter is one type of tax avoidance, and tax havens are jurisdictions that facilitate reduced taxes. Tax avoidance should not be confused with tax evasion, which is illegal. Both tax evasion and tax avoidance can be viewed as forms of tax noncompliance, as they describe a range of activities that intend to subvert a state's tax system.
Double taxation is the levying of tax by two or more jurisdictions on the same income, asset, or financial transaction.
Although the actual definitions vary between jurisdictions, in general, a direct tax is a tax imposed upon a person or property as distinct from a tax imposed upon a transaction, which is described as an indirect tax. There is a distinction between direct and indirect taxes depending on whether the tax payer is the actual taxpayer or if the amount of tax is supported by a third party, usually a client. The term may be used in economic and political analyses, but does not itself have any legal implications except in the United States of America, where the term has special constitutional significance because of two provisions in the U.S. Constitution that any direct taxes imposed by the national government be apportioned among the states on the basis of population; and in the European Union, where direct taxation remains the sole responsibility of member states.
The Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth) is an Act of the Parliament of Australia. It is one of the main statutes under which income tax is calculated. The Act is gradually being rewritten into the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997, and new matters are generally now added to the 1997 Act.
Taxes in New Zealand are collected at a national level by the Inland Revenue Department (IRD) on behalf of the New Zealand Government. National taxes are levied on personal and business income, and on the supply of goods and services. Capital gains tax applies in limited situations, such as the sale of some rental properties within 10 years of purchase. Some "gains" such as profits on the sale of patent rights are deemed to be income – income tax does apply to property transactions in certain circumstances, particularly speculation. There are currently no land taxes, but local property taxes (rates) are managed and collected by local authorities. Some goods and services carry a specific tax, referred to as an excise or a duty, such as alcohol excise or gaming duty. These are collected by a range of government agencies such as the New Zealand Customs Service. There is no social security (payroll) tax.
Gregory v. Helvering, 293 U.S. 465 (1935), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court concerned with U.S. income tax law. The case is cited as part of the basis for two legal doctrines: the business purpose doctrine and the doctrine of substance over form. The business purpose doctrine is essentially that if a transaction has no substantial business purpose other than the avoidance or reduction of Federal tax, the tax law will not regard the transaction. The doctrine of substance over form is essentially that for Federal tax purposes, a taxpayer is bound by the economic substance of a transaction if the economic substance varies from its legal form.
Cherry picking tax avoidance was a form of tax avoidance used in Australia in the 1970s and early 1980s. Company contributions to a superannuation fund were claimed as tax deductions, but the money immediately went back to the company.
Mullens v Federal Commissioner of Taxation, was a 1976 High Court of Australia tax case concerning arrangements where stockbrokers Mullens & Co accessed tax deductions for monies subscribed to a petroleum exploration company. The Australian Taxation Office held the scheme was tax avoidance, but the court found for the taxpayer.
The Commission of Inquiry into Certain Matters Relating to Taxation, popularly known as the Winebox Inquiry, was an inquiry undertaken in New Zealand to investigate claims of corruption and incompetence in the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and Inland Revenue Department (IRD).
Old Colony Trust Co. v. Commissioner, 279 U.S. 716 (1929), was an income tax case before the Supreme Court of the United States.
Slutzkin v Federal Commissioner of Taxation, was a High Court of Australia case concerning the tax position of company owners who sold to a dividend stripping operation. The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) claimed the proceeds should be treated as dividends, but the Court held they were a capital sum like an ordinary investment asset sale.
Under Article 108 of the Basic Law of Hong Kong, the taxation system in Hong Kong is independent of, and different from, the taxation system in mainland China. In addition, under Article 106 of the Hong Kong Basic Law, Hong Kong has independent public finance, and no tax revenue is handed over to the Central Government in China. The taxation system in Hong Kong is generally considered to be one of the simplest, most transparent and straightforward systems in the world. Taxes are collected through the Inland Revenue Department (IRD).
Lucas v. Earl, 281 U.S. 111 (1930), is a United States Supreme Court case concerning U.S. Federal income taxation, about a man who reported only half of his earnings for years 1920 and 1921. Guy C. Earl and his wife had entered into a contract that would potentially save a lot of tax. The contract specified that earnings were owned by the couple as joint tenants. It is unlikely that it was tax-motivated, since there was no income tax in 1901 when they executed the contract. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. delivered the Court’s opinion which generally stands for the proposition that income from services is taxed to the party who performed the services. The case is used to support the proposition that the substance of the transaction, rather than the form, is controlling for tax purposes.
Commissioner v. Banks, 543 U.S. 426 (2005), together with Commissioner v. Banaitis, was a case decided before the Supreme Court of the United States, dealing with the issue of whether the portion of a money judgment or settlement paid to a taxpayer's attorney under a contingent-fee agreement is income to the taxpayer for federal income tax purposes. The Supreme Court held when a taxpayer's recovery constitutes income, the taxpayer's income includes the portion of the recovery paid to the attorney as a contingent fee. Employment cases are an exception to this Supreme Court ruling because of the Civil Rights Tax Relief in the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004. The Civil Rights Tax Relief amended Internal Revenue Code § 62(a)(20) to permit taxpayers to subtract certain attorney's fees and costs from gross income in arriving at adjusted gross income. Taxpayers can subtract attorney's fees and costs paid "in connection with any action involving a claim of unlawful discrimination."
Surrogatum is a thing put in the place of another or a substitute. The Surrogatum Principle pertains to a Canadian income tax principle involving a person who suffers harm caused by another and may seek compensation for (a) loss of income, (b) expenses incurred, (c) property destroyed, or (d) personal injury, as well as punitive damages, under the surrogatum principle, the tax consequences of a damage or settlement payment depend on the tax treatment of the item for which the payment is intended to substitute.
Tax protesters in the United States advance a number of constitutional arguments asserting that the imposition, assessment and collection of the federal income tax violates the United States Constitution. These kinds of arguments, though related to, are distinguished from statutory and administrative arguments, which presuppose the constitutionality of the income tax, as well as from general conspiracy arguments, which are based upon the proposition that the three branches of the federal government are involved together in a deliberate, on-going campaign of deception for the purpose of defrauding individuals or entities of their wealth or profits. Although constitutional challenges to U.S. tax laws are frequently directed towards the validity and effect of the Sixteenth Amendment, assertions that the income tax violates various other provisions of the Constitution have been made as well.
Budget Note 66 (BN66) is the mechanism by which the UK government introduced clause 55 of the Finance Bill 2008, which would later become Section 58 of the Finance Act 2008. This specifically targeted tax planning and tax avoidance schemes that made use of offshore trusts and double taxation treaties to reduce the tax paid by the scheme's users which had previously been legal. This arrangement was originally used by property developers but was then heavily marketed to the freelance community after the introduction of intermediaries legislation known as IR35, because it appeared to offer more certainty concerning tax liabilities than would be the case if running a limited company.
Copthorne Holdings Ltd v Canada, 2011 SCC 63, [2011] 3 SCR 721, is a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the applicability of the General Anti-Avoidance Rule ("GAAR") in the interpretation of the Income Tax Act (Canada). ("ITA")
A loan-out corporation, also known as a loan-out company, or personal service corporation, is a form of US business entity in which the creator is an 'employee' whose services are loaned out by the corporate body. The creator of the corporation is typically the sole shareholder, and thus the corporation is used as a means to reduce their personal liability, protect their assets and exploit taxation advantages. Loan-Out corporations are especially prominent in the entertainment and professional sports industries, as the creator's services are typically performed on individual contract basis, and receive large, irregular sums of income throughout the year.
