The Fraud Triangle and Tax Evasion: Whose Genes Are They, Anyway?

Review of Tax Practitioners Board - Ian Klug

Tax practitioners owe $90m in outstanding debt, TPB ready to pounce

Secretary and chief executive of the TPB, Michael O’Neill, said while most tax practitioners recognise the important of complying with the law and maintaining ethical standards, the Board remained concerned about some practitioners who failed to meet their own tax obligations and participated in high-risk behaviours.

“We’re now focused on those higher-risk practitioners who’ve failed to comply with over 1200 lodgement cases and others with $90 million in outstanding debts to the ATO,” he said.

Such ‘high-risk practitioners’ are those who inflate work related expenses, support the black economy, or who are involved in deliberate fraud and evasion activity, according to the CEO.

“We will also investigate unregistered service providers and bring matters before the courts.”

The TPB flagged it would initiate around 30 investigations in an effort to sanction those practitioners who fail to comply with their legal and ethical responsibilities.

TPB focuses on higher-risk practitioners

.
 Taxation commissioner Chris Jordan is suddenly in a perilous situation. Both political parties are concerned that he has brought charges against whistleblower and national hero Richard Boyle that carry a maximum jail sentence of 161 years.

Taxman puts hero in the crosshairs By ROBERT GOTTLIEBSEN

Leandra Lederman (Indiana), The Fraud Triangle and Tax Evasion:

The “fraud triangle” is the preeminent framework for analyzing fraud in the accounting literature. It is a theory of why some people commit fraud, developed out of studies of individuals, including inmates convicted of criminal trust violations. The three components of the fraud triangle are generally considered to be (1) an incentive or pressure (usually financial), (2) opportunity, and (3) rationalization.

 

Jan Vleggeert & Henk Vording (Leiden), How The Netherlands Became a Tax Haven for Multinationals:

The Netherlands tax environment for multinational foreign directive investment (FDI) has been characterized as ‘a tax haven’ or, perhaps more accurately, as a ‘conduit financial centre’. Anyway, with a share of 25% in the worldwide market for tax-driven FDI diversion, the Dutch tax planning industry has become a prominent target of recent OECD and EU anti-avoidance measures. Adaptations in many of the relevant Dutch tax rules are by now under way.

Lesson From The Tax Court: No Human Review Needed For Automated Penalties?

By Bryan Camp

 Share

Section 6751(b)(1) prohibits the IRS from assessing any penalty against a taxpayer “unless the initial determination of such assessment is personally approved (in writing) by the immediate supervisor of the individual making such determination...”  The Tax Court will not sustain a penalty unless the IRS produces evidence that the required personal approval has taken place before the IRS first notifies the taxpayer (typically in either a 30-day letter or the NOD) about the penalty.  Section 6751(b)(2) provides an exception to the personal approval requirement for“any...penalty automatically calculated through electronic means.” 

ATO to waive unpaid superannuation penalties in wake of 'botched' amnesty - Sydney Morning Herald

Online betting giants are pumping millions into the battle for the minds and wallets of Australian punters, with a singular aim: making you reach for your phone.

Tax fraud accused want proceedings halted over funding, evidence fears

The alleged key players of one of Australia’s most notorious tax fraud cases want the criminal proceedings against them halted over fears they cannot fund their defence, with a magistrate hearing that printing the brief of evidence would cost up to $100,000 alone.

The Downing Centre Local Court heard on Tuesday it would take one person working 10 hours a day, five days a week, 444 weeks to read the prosecution brief against the alleged conspirators behind the Plutus Payroll syndicate accused of defrauding the Australian Tax Office by more than $130 million.

Plutus Payroll 

ATO fraud case 'mired in delays, arguments' 

You make decisions quicker and based on less information than you think

You probably believe you take a ton of research into account before you make a big choice … but you probably don’t.

Four Cs that turn good leadership into great leadership

Michael Pratt, Secretary of NSW Treasury

Four self-development principles learned from the career experiences of the 27th Secretary of NSW Treasury.

Human Services a template for domestic violence support: Payne
STAFF SUPPORT: Senator Payne called on all federal secretaries to adopt the 'Enough' strategy after giving a speech on women in leadership to Canberra public servants this morning at Parliament House.

Consumers, not companies, are the priority of data governance
DATA GOVERNANCE: Consumer Policy Research Centre CEO Lauren Solomon calls for the best minds from a range of sectors to determine the path Australia will take in an AI and machine-learning world.

To build trust in data, empowering consumers and citizens is key
MARIA KATSONIS: Data privacy and protection is a hot issue with no signs of abating. In the second of a four-part series, we explore how building trust means empowering consumers and citizens.

APS Review to publish ‘detailed suggestions’

Measure user experiences to streamline policies, products and services
PARTNER EVENT: You need to understand current user experience to improve its future. Get tips for performance measurement at the User Centric Service Design for Government Summit 2019.

Whose Genes Are They, Anyway? 

Penn State University [via Pete Weiss] “You’ve seen the ads from companies that promise to tell you, based on your DNA, where your ancestors came from. You’re eager to trace your family’s roots, so you order a test kit, send in your sample, and await the results. Your involvement with the company may end there, but two Penn State researchers say that for your DNA sequence—your genome—the journey has just begun. What you may not realize is that when you get your DNA sequenced, in most cases you don’t own the sequence in a legal sense. The company that sequenced it does, or at least, in our current legal framework, it can act as if it does: It can sell or give your data to other organizations, which often are not bound by the agreement you signed with the sequencing company. Even if you pay for just the basic service that will allow you to sketch your ethnic background, the company may sequence your entire genome—and then pass that information along to others.The problem is that when dealing with your genetics, it’s never just about you, says Gray. “The DNA for your blood relatives is very similar to yours, so when you put your data in the system, you’re not only exposing yourself, you’re also exposing your progeny, your parents, uncles and aunts, and other people in your family, who did not sign a waiver. Your child may have a rare disease, but your brother’s family may not want the data to be available. How does the family make that decision?”

Reinvention as a tool for relevance
FREE PARTNER EBOOK: Citizens are continually looking for government action and outcomes. This report takes a close look at the delivery of government services at a local and state level in Australia and New Zealand.

GDPR: who's responsibility is it?
European information law professor discusses the future of data transferability and the dual responsibility that providers and consumers play in protecting people's information. (Partner link)

To bleep or not to bleep?

If President Donald Trump swears during a public appearance, should news organizations censor that swear word or let the audience hear/read it?That was part of an interesting roundtable discussion during Sunday morning’s “Reliable Sources” on CNN. During his marathon speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) on Saturday, Trump said the Russian probe is “bulls***.”
“Reliable Sources” host Brian Stelter noted that many of the Sunday morning news shows bleeped out the word, so he asked guest Olivia Nuzzi of New York Magazine if that was the right call.

“When the president curses, I think it’s really important for us not to bleep it, not to use stars or other symbols when we write about it in print,’’ said Nuzzi, a Washington correspondent for the magazine. “I think it’s important that we don’t treat viewers or readers like children, and that we let them see and hear the president for who he really is.”

Whether or not to show Trump uncensored depends on what the president says, and context must be considered. But as a general rule, I would lean toward being conservative and bleeping out the word. If a media organization can bleep out or cover up the word and still let its audience know exactly what the president said, that organization is still doing its job without offending anyone. For example, in this item, I used symbols to cover up what the president said, yet you still know what the offensive word was.

Some might argue that when we bleep out a word, we’re softening it and, therefore, we’re protecting the person who said it. I don’t see it that way. The words are still coming through. Ultimately, news organizations need to report the news, but in a way that is as accessible as possible to an audience that is young and old, liberal and conservative. If it can tell an accurate story without turning off its audience, it is fulfilling its obligations.

Stelter made the best point of all when he said, “It’s definitely complicated. I can see both sides, but it’s a problem newsrooms shouldn’t have to have, right? Because the president should act presidential — we wouldn’t have to worry about whether children can watch our broadcasts.”

How3D printing is reshaping global production
Raconteur, 27 February 2019. Long supply chains and a dependence on frictionless trade leaves manufacturers at risk to rising protectionism and slowing global growth. But a surprising form of technological defence could be available to them in 3D printing. There are five key ways in which 3D printing could upend the economics of traditional manufacturing, while spurring innovation and cutting pollution.
Artificial Intelligence, Authoritarianism and the Future of Political Systems
Oxford University, 26 February 2019. The article examines how the advent of large-scale social and behavioural automation would change how human societies will be organized and managed. It notes that societies online and offline, mostly against their will and awareness, are increasingly experiencing the effects of large-scale automation.

Are Cryptocurrencies Truly ‘Trustless’?
UNSW Business School, February 2019. The dominant narrative of cryptocurrencies presents them as decentralized, immutable, and “trustless” arrangements. This paper emphasizes the human element of trust in cryptocurrencies, by highlighting activities including “hard forks” making changes to protocols, managing cryptocurrency exchanges, and seeking recourse for traditional governance institutions including courts of law.

Paladin director refuses to comment on Australian Govt contracts - ABC



Blowing the whistle on the Australian Taxation Office could land this man in jail - ABC