New Australian not for profit regulator coming

[Free to shine]

Articles are appearing already:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news...-1226051504620

http://www.smh.com.au/national/chari...506-1ec2u.html

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...07/3210401.htm

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-...nd-takes-away/

[degraded being]

".....However, it is understood the government aims to make the changes
retrospective....."
From the Sydney Morning Herald article. Does that mean they are going to find areas where groups
like ummmm...well, just say for example Scientology, have been making non charity money for years and years and years and work out the tax for all that time and tell the scientologists to pay up?

[Jump]

They could mean they will review how the existing bodies are exempted, but not immediately. They will start with new nfp and charity bodies first.

But hopefully where there is significant shenanigans . . .

[Mark A. Baker]

".....However, it is understood the government aims to make the changes
retrospective....."
From the Sydney Morning Herald article. Does that mean they are going to find areas where groups
like ummmm...well, just say for example Scientology, have been making non charity money for years and years and years and work out the tax for all that time and tell the scientologists to pay up?

A. that would be 'retroactive'

B. IANAL, especially in australia, but that would almost certainly be contrary to law, i.e. ex post facto taxation. Doesn't work well in practice.

C. the articles state the legislation takes effect as of July 1st


Mark A. Baker

[Jump]

A. that would be 'retroactive'

B. IANAL, especially in australia, but that would almost certainly be contrary to law, i.e. ex post facto taxation. Doesn't work well in practice.

C. the articles state the legislation takes effect as of July 1st


Mark A. Baker

I dont think they can ask for the backtaxes - unless there is criminality involved. (existing precedent exists). They can take the exemptions away though

[Royal Prince Xenu]

A. that would be 'retroactive'

B. IANAL, especially in australia, but that would almost certainly be contrary to law, i.e. ex post facto taxation. Doesn't work well in practice.

C. the articles state the legislation takes effect as of July 1st


Mark A. Baker

You're right. You're not a Lawyer, and neither am I. The Australian Tax Office has previously been successful in getting some of its "rulings" applied retro-actively.

[Feral]

You're right. You're not a Lawyer, and neither am I. The Australian Tax Office has previously been successful in getting some of its "rulings" applied retro-actively.

This is true.

ML

Feral

[Infinite]

..

. . . Scientology 1970 is being planned on a religious organisation basis throughout the world. This will not upset in any way the usual activities of any organisation. It is entirely a matter for accountants and solicitors. I have evidently failed in designating HASI Ltd. as a non-profit organisation and cannot transfer HASI Inc. assets to any but a non-profit corporation . . .

HCOPL - RELIGION - 29 OCTOBER 1962

..

. . . just about fifty years to the day since this organised criminal conspiracy to defraud got started.

[Emma]

Just in case people missed this (which might be the case as ESMB was down when the news broke).

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news...-1226051504620

Budget gives to charities and takes away

CHARITIES will get a $500 million boost through moves to cut red tape but the federal budget will also close a tax loophole for those that run non-charitable businesses.

The government will provide $53.8 million over four years to establish an independent "one-stop shop" to regulate the not-for-profit sector, News Ltd and Fairfax report.


The Australian charities and not-for-profits commission will start on July 1 next year.


The current system of regulation is estimated to cost Australia's 600,000 not-for-profit and community organisations more than $500 million annually, News Ltd said.


But Tuesday's budget will also tighten tax concessions for charities that run businesses unrelated to their charitable work.

It will mean that from July 1, they will have to pay income tax on the profits they retain in any newly created businesses that do not go back into their charity work.


The move won't affect op shops or small-scale fundraisers such as lamington drives.

What does this mean for Scientology? We'll have to wait & see if they somehow get around this. I'm sure they are already thinking up ways to fool the regulators, but the cat is out of the bag now. Public & Government awareness at how this cult operates has never been higher.

It will be fun to watch how they react.

[Outethicsofficer]

Just in case people missed this (which might be the case as ESMB was down when the news broke).

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news...-1226051504620



What does this mean for Scientology? We'll have to wait & see if they somehow get around this. I'm sure they are already thinking up ways to fool the regulators, but the cat is out of the bag now. Public & Government awareness at how this cult operates has never been higher.

It will be fun to watch how they react.

If this was all they had to worry about then they would count themselves as being in heaven...

James