Private ruling: Work-related motor vehicle expenses
Date of advice: 24 October 2016
Published: January 2017
Ruling period: Year ending 30 June 20XX | Year ending 30 June 20YY | Year ending 30 June 20XY | Year ending 30 June 20ZZ
Date scheme commenced: 27 February 20XX

Ruling: Q1: Are you entitled to claim work-related motor vehicle expenses between home and work when you are required to carry bulky equipment required for your employment? | A1: Yes

Relevant facts and circumstances: You are employed as a X. You are employed under a roster consisting of various day and night shifts as well as an on-call component. You may be assigned to any of X ports throughout XX. You do not report to a base of operations before undertaking your assignments. You are required to carry numerous of equipment items for each X assignment: The equipment is carried in a container and weighs approximately X kg. As you do not report to a base prior to commencing your engagement, it is not possible to store these items in a single place, so you must transport them yourself between your home and the port where you are assigned.

Relevant legislative provisions: Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 8-1.

Reasons for decision: Summary: Section 8-1 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) allows a deduction for all losses and outgoings to the extent to which they are incurred in gaining or producing assessable income except where the outgoings are of a capital, private or domestic nature, or relate to the earning of exempt income. A deduction is generally not allowable for the cost of transport by an employee between home and his normal workplace as it is generally considered to be a private expense. The cost of travelling between home and work is generally incurred to put the employee in a position to perform duties of employment, rather than in performance of those duties. However, a deduction may be allowable for the cost of travel between home and work for an employee who is required to transport bulky equipment. Paragraphs 63 and 64 of Taxation Ruling TR 95/34 explain that a deduction may be allowed in these circumstances where: ● the cost can be attributed to the transportation of bulky equipment rather than to private travel between home and work, ● it is essential to transport the equipment to and from work and it is not done as a matter of convenience or personal choice, ● there are no secure facilities available for storage of the equipment at the work place. The question of what constitutes 'bulky' equipment must be considered according to the individual circumstances in each case. In FC of T v. Vogt 75 ATC 4073, 5 ATR 274 ( Vogt's Case ), the taxpayer was a professional musician who used his vehicle to transport bulky musical instruments and associated equipment from his home to his places of employment. It was found in Vogt's Case that the taxpayer was entitled to a deduction for home to work travel expenses as he was using his vehicle for work related purposes to transport bulky equipment. In Crestani v. FC of T 98 ATC 2219; (1998) 40 ATR 1037 (Crestani's Case) , Senior Member J Block was of the opinion that the term 'bulky' should not be construed to refer only to an article of large size, such as the musical instrument subject to the decision in the Vogt's Case , but more aptly construed as similar to 'cumbersome' in the sense that it is not portable. In Crestani's Case , the tribunal was of the opinion a toolbox was 'bulky'; it was not easy to lift and could not be carried for any distance. The toolbox measured 57 cm x 28 cm x 25 cm (that is, having a volume of about 0.04 cubic metres) and weighed 27 kg. The toolbox was considered as 'bulky', in the sense of 'cumbersome', and the transport cost was 'attributable' to the transportation of such bulky equipment rather than private travel between home and work. The employer did not provide a secure storage area for the toolbox and the use of public transport was not a viable option. In your case, the container you transport your equipment in is similar to the toolbox that was the subject of Crestani's Case, and therefore compares favourably in terms of being 'bulky' and 'cumbersome' when tested against Crestani's Case . Also, similar to Crestani's Case , it was not viable for your employer to provide a secure storage area for these items as you can be assigned to a number of different locations. In view of the facts provided, you are entitled to a deduction for expenses incurred in travelling to and from work when you are carrying the bulky equipment.