Private ruling: FBT - living away from home allowance
Date of advice: 20 June 2025
Published: 8 September 2025
Ruling period: Fringe benefits tax year ended 31 March 20XX | Fringe benefits tax year ended 31 March 20XX | Fringe benefits tax year ended 31 March 20XX | Fringe benefits tax year ended 31 March 20XX
Date scheme commenced: 1 April 20XX

Ruling: Q1: Is the provision of the per diem allowance by 'Australia Co' to its Short-term Assignment Employees (SAEs) to cover food and incidentals a Living-away-from-home allowance (LAFHA) benefit pursuant to subsection 30(1) of the Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 (FBTAA) where the SAEs are on assignment for a period of 3 months? | A1: Yes. | Q2: If the per diem allowance is not subject to section 30 of the FBTAA and the allowance is equivalent or less than, the reasonable amounts for travel allowance expenses under the relevant Taxation Determination in relation to income tax and reasonable travel and overtime meal allowance expense amounts for an income tax year, would Australia Co be subject to Pay As You Go Withholding (PAYGW) and need to report the per diems allowance on the SAEs' Income Statement via a Single Touch Payroll (STP) pay event? | A2: The per diem allowance is subject to section 30 of the FBTAA and as such is exempt from PAYGW under subsection 12-1(2) of Schedule 1 to the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (TAA). | Q3: Is the provision of accommodation by Australia Co to SAEs a fringe benefit as defined in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA? | A3: No, where the requirements for an exemption under subsection 47(5) of the FBTAA are met, the benefit will be exempt and therefore excluded from being a fringe benefit. Yes, where the requirements for an exemption under subsection 47(5) of the FBTAA cannot be met, the benefit provided will be an external period residual fringe benefit. | Q4: If the answer to Question 3 is yes, does the 'otherwise deductible rule' (ODR) in section 52 of the FBTAA apply to reduce the taxable value of the accommodation to nil? | A4: The ODR is not applicable (N/A), where the requirements for an exemption under subsection 47(5) of the FBTAA are met and the benefit is excluded from being a fringe benefit. No, where the requirements under subsection 47(5) of the FBTAA are not met and the benefit is an external period residual benefit, the otherwise deductible rule does not apply. | Q5: Is the provision by Australia Co to SAEs of return flights, to the domestic project location at commencement of the assignment/project and back to their home location at the end of their assignment/project, a fringe benefit as defined in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA? | A5: No, the flights are exempt benefits under section 58F of the FBTAA and therefore, excluded from being fringe benefits. | Q6: If the answer to Question 5 is yes, does the 'otherwise deductible rule' in section 52 of the FBTAA apply to reduce the taxable value of the return flights to nil? | A6: Not applicable. | Q7: Where travel expenditure, being the per diem allowance, the accommodation and the Return Flights incurred by a SAE is reimbursed, such that an expense payment benefit arises (rather than a residual benefit), would the Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT) principles discussed at Questions 1-6 equally apply? | A7: The reimbursement payments that 'replace' the per diems allowance would be a fringe benefit. The reimbursement payments in relation to accommodation, where the exemption requirements are met, would be exempt under section 21 of the FBTAA instead of subsection 47(5). The reimbursement payments in relation to the Return Flights to and from the assignment (subject to the substantiation requirements being met), would be excluded benefits. The 'otherwise deductible rule' would not apply to the above payments for travel expenditure. The above reimbursement payments for travel expenditure would be exempt from PAYGW under subsection 12-1(3) of Schedule 1 to the TAA instead of subsection 12-1(2).

Relevant facts and circumstances: The Employer and its member firms provide services. The Employer and its member firms are separate legal entities. All Australian employees of the Employer are legally employed by 'Australia Co'. The employees of the Employer and its member firms can be deployed to other member firms, under an 'arrangement'. Australian projects require staff with specialised training, experience, and skills. Australian project employees may sometimes be sourced from another Australian Firm. Australian projects therefore typically require relevant employees to travel from their home base to the project location for the duration of the project. Where an Australia Co employee is expected to be at an Australian project location for up to XX months, they will fall under Australia Co's Travelling X Policy. Category X - Short-term Assignment Employees (SAEs) Australia Co is SAEs' employer as defined in section 136 of the FBTAA. A SAE is an employee of an Australia Co that is expected to be at an Australian domestic project location for 3 months. Under the Travelling X Policy, all SAEs: • are subject to the terms and conditions of their employment with their Australia Co home office, which includes a requirement to travel for the purposes of employment if needed; • are subject to the ultimate control of their Australia Co home office; • accrue leave and other employment benefits with their Australia Co home office; and • are subject to the performance review procedures of their Australia Co home office. While the SAEs are on the project they will: • be provided with accommodation by Australia Co. The Travelling X policy provided by Australia Co indicates that where an employee stays at a location for X or more nights in a row a serviced apartment should be booked ...; Australia Co also provides that a SAE in some circumstances will share accommodation with another SAE in a X-bedroom-X-bathroom serviced apartment • be paid a per diem allowance to cover food and incidentals while they are on the project, or otherwise seek reimbursement for actual expenditure; • be provided with flights to the project location at commencement of their assignment/project and back to their home location at the end of their assignment/project; • will work at the same assignment/project location for a period of 3 months; • not generally be accompanied by their family. However, travel policy provided by Australia Co indicates that spouse and dependents may travel with employees ... if approval is obtained; • be subject to Australia Co's code of conduct and Travelling X Policy. Assumptions For the purposes of the private ruling, the Commissioner makes the following assumptions: • The amount of the per diem allowance will be equivalent to or less than the reasonable amount specified in the relevant Taxation Determination for the relevant year. • If a travel diary must be provided to Australia Co by the employee by a declaration date, that travel diary will be provided by the SAEs. • In accordance with section 20A and 47A Australia Co will make a no-private-use declaration in respect of transport benefits provided to the SAEs. • The SAEs will not make a contribution to the cost of the accommodation. • If the accommodation is not an exclusive employee residual benefit as defined in section 136 of the FBTAA, the SAEs will provide to Australia Co, before the declaration date, declarations in a form approved by the Commissioner in relation to the provision of the accommodation. • SAEs will maintain their usual place of residence and living arrangement in their home location and will provide Australia Co, before the declaration date, declarations in a form approved by the Commissioner in accordance with section 31F of the FBTAA. • Accommodation arrangements considered as part of the ruling relate to the SAEs' first 12 months that the duties of their employment require them to live away from their normal residence at their assigned project location.

Relevant legislative provisions: Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 section 20 | Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 section 21 | Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 section 23 | Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 section 24 | Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 section 30 | Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 section 45 | Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 subsection 47(5) | Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 section 51 | Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 section 52 | Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 section 58F | Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 section 61A | Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 section 136 | Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 section 143 | Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 section 143A | Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 section 143B | Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 section 143C | Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 section 6-5 | Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 section 8-1 | Taxation Administration Act 1953 section 12-1 of Schedule 1 | Taxation Administration Act 1953 section 12-35 of Schedule 1

Reasons for decision: Summary: The provision of the per diem allowance to cover food and incidentals is a LAFHA benefit. | Detailed Reasoning - Detailed reasoning: A 'fringe benefit' is defined in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA, which requires, inter alia, the following conditions to be satisfied: 1. A benefit is provided at any time during the year of tax. 2. The benefit is provided to an employee or an associate of the employee. 3. The benefit is provided by: (i) their employer; or (ii) an associate of the employer; or (iii) a third party other than the employer or an associate under an arrangement between the employer or associate of the employer and the third party; or (iv) a third party other than the employer or an associate of the employer, if the employer or an associate of the employer: (A) participates in or facilitates the provision or receipt of the benefit; or (B) participates in, facilitates or promotes a scheme or plan involving the provision of the benefit; and the employer or associate knows, or ought reasonably to know, that the employer or associate is doing so; 4. The benefit is provided in respect of the employment of the employee. 5. The benefit is not one that is specifically excluded as per paragraphs (f) to (s) of the definition of a fringe benefit in subsection 136(1). | Detailed Reasoning - Is a benefit provided?: Subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA provides a broad definition of a 'benefit' as: any right (including a right in relation to, and an interest in, real or personal property), privilege, service or facility and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, includes a right, benefit, privilege, service or facility that is, or is to be, provided under: (a) an arrangement for or in relation to: (i) the performance of work (including work of a professional nature), whether with or without the provision of property; (ii) the provision of, or of the use of facilities for, entertainment, recreation, or instructions; or (iii) the conferring of rights, benefits or privileges for which remuneration is payable in the form of a royalty, tribute, levy or similar exaction; (b) a contract of insurance; or The definition of 'provide' and 'provider' in subsection 136(1) of FBTAA are as follows: | Detailed Reasoning - provide:: (a) in relation to a benefit - includes allow, confer, give, grant or perform; and (b) ... provider, in relation to a benefit, means the person who provides the benefit. Australia Co provides SAEs with a benefit of a per diem allowance. Therefore, this condition is satisfied. | Detailed Reasoning - Is a benefit provided to an employee or an associate of an employee?: An employee is defined in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA to include a current, future and former employee. Subsection 136(1) defines a 'current employee' to mean a person who receives, or is entitled to receive, salary or wages. 'Salary or wages', as defined in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA, means payments from which an amount must be withheld under section 12-35 of Schedule 1 to the Taxation Administration Act 1953 . SAEs are employees of Australia Co therefore this condition is satisfied. | Detailed Reasoning - Is it provided in respect of employment?: 'Employee' is defined in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA as a current, former, or future employee. In this case, SAEs are employees of Australia Co. There is no evidence that the SAEs and Australia Co are dealing with each other in any other capacity than employees and employer. Therefore, it is considered that the provision of per diems allowance to SAEs is sufficiently and materially connected [1] to their employment, and as such, would be considered to be 'in respect of' their employment. Therefore, this condition is satisfied. | Detailed Reasoning - Is the per diem allowance a living-away-from-home allowance and whether the benefit is excluded from the definition of a fringe benefit?: Subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA defines a LAFHA benefit as a benefit referred to in section 30 of the FBTAA. Subsection 30(1) of the FBTAA sets out the circumstances in which an allowance paid by an employer to an employee will qualify as a LAFHA benefit to an employee and states: Where: (a) At a particular time, in respect of the employment of an employee of an employer, the employer pays an allowance to the employee; and (b) It would be concluded that the whole or a part of the allowance is in the nature of compensation to the employee for: (i) Additional expenses (not being deductible expenses) incurred by the employee during a period; or (ii) Additional expenses (not being deductible expenses) incurred by the employee, and other additional disadvantages to which the employee is subject, during a period; by reason that the duties of that employment require the employee to live away from his or her normal residence; the payment of the whole, or of the part, as the case may be, of the allowance constitutes a benefit provided by the employer to the employee at that time. As previously discussed, the first condition of subsection 30(1) of the FBTAA is satisfied. The second condition of subsection 30(1) of the FBTAA requires that the allowance is paid for additional expenses that are not deductible. If the payment to the SAEs is a travel allowance this condition is not satisfied. A travel allowance is paid to cover additional expenses that are 'deductible expenses under section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997'. It falls within the definition of 'salary and wages' and is therefore, excluded from being a fringe benefit. | Detailed Reasoning - LAFHA versus Travel Allowance: A payment is a LAFHA if it is reasonable to conclude from all the surrounding circumstances that some or all of the allowance is in the nature of compensation to the employee for additional expenses incurred, or additional expenses incurred and other disadvantages suffered, because the employee is required to live away from his or her usual place of residence in order to perform the duties of employment. Additional expenses do not include expenses for which the employee would be entitled to an income tax deduction. The whole or such part of the allowance that satisfies these tests is a LAFHA fringe benefit, the taxable value of which is calculated in accordance with the rules contained in section 31 of the FBTAA. Taxation Ruling 2021/4 Income tax and fringe benefits tax: employees: accommodation and food and drink expenses travel allowances, and living-away-from-home allowances (TR 2021/4) provides guidelines on travel allowances and LAFHA. Paragraph 130 of TR 2021/4 states, the main difference between a travel allowance and a LAFHA is that a: i. travel allowance can only be paid to cover deductible accommodation and food and drink expenses and incidental expenses incurred by an employee when they are travelling on work ii. LAFHA is paid to provide compensation to an employee for the additional living expenses incurred by an employee because their duties of employment require them live at location away from their usual residence. Paragraph 133 of TR 2021/4 further provides, to determine whether an allowance is a travel allowance or a LAFHA, it is first necessary to determine what expenditure the allowance is designed to cover or compensate the employee for and whether those expenses are deductible under section 8-1 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997). | Detailed Reasoning - Usual residence: The term 'normal residence' is defined in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA as the employee's usual place of residence, when the employee's usual place of residence is in Australia. The FBTAA does not provide a definition of the term 'usual place of residence'. However, subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA defines 'place of residence' to mean: a. a place at which the person resides; or b. a place at which the person has sleeping accommodation; whether on a permanent or temporary basis and whether or not a shared basis. In the absence of a legislative reference, it is relevant to refer to the ordinary meaning of the word 'usual'. The Macquarie Dictionary defines 'usual' to mean 'habitual or customary ...'. It is accepted that, in the current circumstances, an employee's permanent and settled principal place of residence is the employee's usual place of residence. | Detailed Reasoning - Relevant factors - travelling on work versus living expenses: To be deductible under section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997, the expense must have a sufficiently close connection to the performance of the employment duties and activities through which the employee earns income. [2] It will not be enough to show some general link or causal connection between the expenditure and the production of income. Paragraph 24 of TR 2021/4 provides, if any of the following factors apply, the employee will not be travelling on work and the accommodation and food and drink expenses incurred will be living expenses and therefore not deductible: i. the expenses are incurred because the employee's personal circumstances are such that they live far away from where they gain or produce their assessable income. (personal circumstances - see paragraphs 25 to 37 of this Ruling); ii. the employee incurs the expenses because they are living at a location (living at a location - see paragraphs 38 to 78 of this Ruling); iii. the employee incurs the expenses as a result of relocating from their usual residence (relocation - see paragraphs 79 to 86 of this Ruling). | Detailed Reasoning - Personal circumstances: An employee cannot deduct accommodation and food and drink expenses they have incurred where, due to their personal circumstances, they live far away from where they gain or produce their assessable income. [3] In this case, it is SAEs' work requirements and not their personal circumstances that require them to stay away from their usual residence. It is not only the fact they must stay overnight away from their usual residence to earn their assessable income, it is their 'income-producing activities' or 'work activities' which require them to do so. | Detailed Reasoning - Relocation: Where an employee has relocated for work, the costs of accommodation and food and drink will be living expenses; regardless of whether moving to the new location is required by the employer or the work. There is no suggestion that any SAEs have relocated based on the information provided by Australia Co. It is assumed that SAEs will maintain their usual residence in their home locations during the period of their domestic assignment and return to that home at the end of their assignment. | Detailed Reasoning - Living at a location: Paragraph 42 provides, the following factors would support a characterisation of an employee as living at a location away from their usual residence: • there is a change in the employee's regular place of work • the length of the overall period the employee will be away from their usual residence is a relatively long one • the nature of the accommodation is such that it becomes their usual residence • whether the employee is, or can be, accompanied by family or visited by family and friends. All the above factors should be considered, and no single factor is necessarily decisive. The weight given to each factor will vary depending on the employee's individual circumstances and is not a mathematical process. Reaching a conclusion as to whether an employee is living at a location away from their usual residence is a matter of judgment which requires a holistic assessment based on a consideration of all the factors. | Detailed Reasoning - Change in regular place of work: Most employees have a regular place of work, being a usual or normal place where the employee starts and finishes their work duties with a particular employer [4] . In most cases, identifying an employee's regular place of work is clear. In circumstances where it is not clear, it may be necessary to consider in more depth the contract of employment, customary practice, the nature of the work duties, where these duties commence and at what point in time the employee is under the direction and control of their employer in order to determine where the employee's regular place of work is. [5] Where there is a change in the employee's regular place of work and the employee incurs accommodation and food and drink expenses to be closer to their new regular place of work, the employee will be living at that new location away from their usual residence. In these circumstances, the expenses incurred are living expenses and are not deductible. In situations where it is difficult to conclude whether a second or subsequent place of work is also a regular place of work, an actual or anticipated duration of three months or more at the location would usually be sufficient for the location to amount to a regular place of work. However, consideration should also be given to matters including: • the nature of the employment. A briefer period may be sufficient in the context of a short-term contract rather than ongoing employment, • the frequency at which the employee attends the workplace. Attending a location once a fortnight for four months would not usually be sufficient to establish a location as a regular place of work, • whether any element of choice on the part of the employee is influential such as the choice of where to live, and • whether the travel to a new workplace occur when the employee is on work time, or substantively under the direction or control of the employer. This would tend to support the characterisation of the travel to the location as being part of the employment rather than a prerequisite to travel to another regular place of work [6] . In this case, the SAEs are required to attend their assigned offices at domestic assignment/project locations, regularly for a continuous period of 3 months. It is therefore considered that an additional regular place of work arises. As a result, the SAEs would incur accommodation and food and drink expenses due to being close to their new regular place of work. | Detailed Reasoning - Length of period away from their residence: The 'length of period away' means the overall period of time the employee spends living at a particular location for work. Where an employee is living at one location for work for an extended period, that period is not broken by short trips they take from that location, for example travelling back to their usual residence on weekends or when travelling on work from that location. Generally, the longer an employee spends away from their usual residence for work, the more likely the employee is living at the location. SAEs are expected to live at a domestic assignment/project location for XX calendar days or more in total in an FBT year. They will be at the same work location for more than XX calendar days at a time continuously which suggests that the SAEs are living away from their residence. [7] | Detailed Reasoning - The nature of the accommodation: The nature of an employee's accommodation is relevant but does not determine whether the employee is living at a location away from their usual residence. Generally, where an employee works away from home for a considerable period and, for that period, stays in accommodation generally used for longer term accommodation (such as a house, unit or apartment or caravan), this would support a view that they are living at a location away from their usual residence. In this instance Australia Co has advised that the accommodation will be in a serviced apartment, which may be shared between X SAEs. Having regard to this, the nature of the accommodation tends towards a conclusion the SAEs are living away from home. | Detailed Reasoning - Whether the employee is or can be accompanied by family or visited by family or friends: An employee who is living at a location away from their usual residence can generally be accompanied or visited by their family and friends. In this case Australia Co has advised that SAEs would not generally be accompanied by their family. There is also no indication that family or friends are 'not allowed' to accompany or visit. Therefore, this factor may tend towards a conclusion the SAEs are travelling on work. | Detailed Reasoning - Conclusion on whether the SAEs are living at the location: Having had regard to the analysis above, SAEs' regular place of work has changed, and they are living away from their usual residence. It is considered that the circumstances are similar to that in Example 7 of TR 2021/4 , because they: (a) stay for a relatively long period, being at least 90 days; (b) continue to be employees of Australia Co while working on assignment/project; (c) do not bring their family with them; (d) will stay in apartment-style accommodation. Therefore, in the circumstances it is considered the SAEs are living away from their usual residence due to: (a) there being a change in the SAEs' regular place of work from their home office location to an assignment/project location; (b) the length of time the SAEs will be away from their usual residences at their home locations; (c) the fact that they will stay in apartment-style accommodation while they are working on assignment/project. | Detailed Reasoning - Conclusion on whether the SAEs' 'additional expenses' are deductible expenses: Having regard to the analysis above, while SAEs' work necessarily requires them to undertake the travel, the additional expenses would not be deductible expenses because they are living away from their usual residence, and thus the expenses are living expenses and not deductible. | Detailed Reasoning - Is the benefit excluded from the definition of a fringe benefit?: A benefit which comes within paragraphs (f) to (s) of the definition of a 'fringe benefit' in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA is excluded from being a fringe benefit. Paragraph (g) of the definition of 'fringe benefit' excludes 'a benefit that is an exempt benefit'. There is no evidence to suggest the benefit is an exempt benefit. | Detailed Reasoning - Conclusion on whether the employees are provided with a 'LAFHA fringe benefit': The benefit of the per diem allowance is provided to the SAEs in respect of their employment. It is in the nature of compensation for additional expenses they might incur, by reason that the duties of their employment require them to live away from their normal residence while they are on assignment. SAEs' additional expenses are not deductible expenses. Therefore, the per diem allowance paid to them by Australia Co is a living-away-from-home allowance fringe benefit under section 30 of the FBTAA. The LAFHA may be concessionally taxed undern section 31 of the FBTAA if all of the requirements are satisfied. These are: (a) the employee maintains a home in Australia, (b) the allowance relates to the first 12 months of LAFH, (c) accommodation and food expenses are substantiated, and (d) a declaration that (a) and (b) are satisfied and given to the employer. If an SAE does not meet the above circumstances to qualify for concessional taxation treatment the whole of the allowance is subject to FBT. [8] | Detailed Reasoning - Question 2: If the per diem allowance is not subject to section 30 of the FBTAA and the allowance is equivalent or less than, the reasonable amounts for travel allowance expenses under the relevant Taxation Determination in relation to income tax and reasonable travel and overtime meal allowance expense amounts for an income tax year, would Australia Co be subject to Pay As You Go Withholding (PAYGW) and need to report the per diems allowance on the SAEs' Income Statement via a Single Touch Payroll (STP) pay event? | Detailed Reasoning - Conclusion: The per diem allowance is a LAFHA fringe benefit pursuant to section 30 of the FBTAA as concluded under Question 1. As such it is not subject to PAYGW under subsection 12-1(2) of Schedule 1 to the TAA. | Detailed Reasoning - Question 3: Is the provision of accommodation by Australia Co to SAEs a fringe benefit as defined in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA? | Summary: Where the requirements for an exemption under subsection 47(5) of the FBTAA are met, the benefit will be exempt and therefore excluded from being a fringe benefit. Where the requirements for an exemption under subsection 47(5) of the FBTAA cannot be met, the benefit provided will be an external period residual fringe benefit. | Detailed Reasoning - Is a benefit provided?: Australia Co pays for SAEs' accommodation directly which constitutes a 'benefit'. Therefore, this condition in the definition of a 'fringe benefit' in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA is satisfied. | Detailed Reasoning - Is the benefit provided to an employee or an associate of an employee?: As discussed earlier the SAEs are employees of Australia Co as defined under subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA. Is the benefit provided by the employer, or an associate of the employer or a third party in a situation that comes within either paragraph (e) or (ea) of the 'fringe benefit' definition? The benefit, being the provision of accommodation to the SAEs is provided by Australia Co. As such this condition in the definition of 'fringe benefit' in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA is satisfied for the reasons as outlined above under Question 1. | Detailed Reasoning - Is the provision of accommodation a Housing Benefit?: A housing benefit arises under section 25 of the FBTAA, where an employee or an associate is granted a lease or licence to occupy employer provided premises as their usual place of residence. The Commissioner considers that generally an employee is living away from their usual place of residence when the employee would have continued to live in a particular place, but for having to change residence in order to work temporarily for the employer at another locality; and they expect to return to that place when the temporary period is over. [9] Therefore, in this instance as the SAEs maintain their usual place of residence, being their customary or habitual place of residence in Australia, the benefit cannot be a housing benefit. The benefit provided is therefore considered to be a residual fringe benefit under section 45 of the FBTAA as it does not fit within the other specific categories contained in Divisions 2 to 11 of the FBTAA. | Detailed Reasoning - Is the benefit excluded from the definition of a fringe benefit?: A benefit which comes within paragraphs (f) to (s) of the definition of a 'fringe benefit' in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA is excluded from being a fringe benefit. Paragraph (g) of the definition of 'fringe benefit' excludes 'a benefit that is an exempt benefit'. Subsection 47(5) of the FBTAA provides that accommodation provided by an employer to an employee can be an exempt benefit where: (a) a residual benefit consisting of the subsistence, during a year of tax, of a lease or licence in respect of a unit of accommodation is provided to an employee of an employer in respect of his or her employment; and (b) the unit of accommodation is for the accommodation of eligible family members and is provided solely because the duties of that employment require the employee to live away from his or her normal residence; and (ba) the employee satisfies: (i) sections 31C (about maintaining an Australian home) and 31D (about the first 12 months); or (ii) section 31E (about fly-in fly-out and drive-in drive-out requirements); and (c) the accommodation is not provided while the employee is undertaking travel in the course of performing the duties of that employment (d) any of the following conditions is satisfied: (i) subsection (7) applies in relation to the provision of transport for the employee in connection with travel in the period in the year of tax when the lease or licence subsisted, being travel between the employee's usual place of residence and the employee's usual place of employment; (ii) if the employee satisfies sections 31C and 31D - the employee gives to the employer, before the declaration date, a declaration, in a form approved by the Commissioner, purporting to set out the matters in subparagraphs 31F(1)(a)(i) to (iii); (iii) if the employee satisfies section 31E - the employee gives to the employer, before the declaration date, a declaration, in a form approved by the Commissioner, purporting to set out the matters in subparagraphs 31F(1)(b)(i) to (iii); | Detailed Reasoning - Paragraph 47(5)(a): As discussed above, as the SAEs maintain their usual place of residence the benefit cannot be a housing benefit and the benefit provided is therefore a residual fringe benefit under section 45 of the FBTAA as it does not fit within the other specific categories contained in Divisions 2 to 11 of the FBTAA. A 'unit of accommodation' includes a house, flat, home unit, caravan or other mobile home, hotel, hostel, motel, guesthouse, bunkhouse, ship, vessel or floating structure. [10] The provision of the accommodation, being a serviced apartment is a residual benefit. It is a lease or licence in respect of a unit of accommodation provided to SAEs in respect of their employment, thus satisfying this condition. | Detailed Reasoning - Paragraph 47(5)(b): Based on section 136 of the FBTAA, where it is in relation to an employee whose duties of employment require the employee to live away, for a period, from his or her normal residence, include the employee, the term 'eligible family members' include the employee. The employment contract specifies that it is a requirement of their employment that employees work in other locations around Australia and oversees. [11] It is therefore considered that the accommodation is provided solely because the duties of their employment require the SAEs to live away from their normal residence. | Detailed Reasoning - Paragraph 47(5)(ba): Paragraph 47(5)(ba) states that the employee must satisfy section 31C and 31D, or section 31E of the FBTAA. In this case, section 31C and 31D are the relevant sections to address. In relation to section 31C, Australia Co has advised that some SAEs have, in Australia, near their substantive position a unit of accommodation that they have an ownership interest in and continues to be available for their immediate use. It is reasonable to expect that these SAEs will resume living at that place when their assignment/project ends. In relation to section 31D, it is assumed that the accommodation arrangements relate to a SAEs' first 12 months that the duties of their employment require them to live away from their respective normal residence at the relevant project location. This paragraph is therefore considered satisfied in relation to the SAEs that have a unit of accommodation in Australia that they have an ownership interest in, and that continues to be available for their immediate use while on assignment. For the SAEs that do not have an ownership interest in a unit of accommodation, for example employees who live with a parent or guardian, this condition is not satisfied and as a result the exemption under subsection 47(5) of the FBTAA would not apply. | Detailed Reasoning - Paragraph 47(5)(c): As addressed under Question 1 the SAEs are considered to be living away from home as opposed to travelling in the course of their employment duties. Paragraph 47(5)(c) is therefore satisfied. | Detailed Reasoning - Paragraph 47(5)(d): Paragraph 47(5)(d)(iii) requires the declaration to be given to the employer before the declaration date. 'Declaration date' is defined in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA to mean: ... the date of lodgement of the return of the fringe benefits taxable amount of the employer of the year of tax, or such later date as the Commissioner allows. (a) If the accommodation is not an exclusive employee residual benefit as defined in section 136 of the FBTAA, the employees will provide to Australia Co, before the declaration date, declarations in a form approved by the Commissioner in relation to the provision of the accommodation. Australia Co has advised that, if required, SAEs will provide Australia Co, before the declaration date, declarations in a form approved by the Commissioner in relation to the provision of accommodation. Therefore paragraph 47(5)(d) will be satisfied. | Detailed Reasoning - Where the requirements under section 47(5) of the FBTAA are satisfied: Where: (a) the relevant declarations are obtained [12] (b) the provision of accommodation relates to the first 12 months, and (c) the requirements under section 31C of the FBTAA are met the provision of accommodation is excluded from being a fringe benefit as it will be an exempt benefit under subsection 47(5) of the FBTAA. | Detailed Reasoning - Where requirements under section 47(5) of the FBTAA are not satisfied: For the employees who do not meet the requirements under section 31C of the FBTAA and therefore, do not satisfy the conditions of an exemption under section 47(5) of the FBTAA, a residual fringe benefit will arise. Residual fringe benefits can be separated under four different categories under subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA as: (1) in-house non-period residual fringe benefits; (2) in-house period residual fringe benefits; (3) external non-period residual fringe benefits; (4) external period residual fringe benefits. Broadly, an 'in-house residual fringe benefit' is a residual benefit provided by an employer or associate of the employer as part of their business activities. An 'external residual fringe benefit' is a benefit that is not an in-house residual fringe benefit. The distinction between a 'period' and a 'non-period' residual fringe benefit depends on the definition of 'period residual fringe benefit' in subsection 136(1) and section 149 of the FBTAA. A 'period residual fringe benefit' is defined as a residual fringe benefit that is provided during a period. Under subsection 149(1), a benefit is taken to be provided during a period if, and only if, it is provided and subsists during a period of more than one day and is not deemed to be provided at a particular time or on a particular day. The effect of this is that, generally, where a residual fringe benefit is provided and subsists for more than one day, it is a period residual fringe benefit. In this case, Australia Co provides accommodation, comprising serviced apartments, to SAEs. Australia Co does not provide accommodation to members of the public, and the benefit is provided for a period exceeding one day. There is no evidence the SAEs and Australia Co are dealing with each other in any other capacity than as employees. Therefore, the provision of accommodation to these SAEs is an external period residual benefit. There is no evidence to suggest the benefit is an exempt residual benefit. It is considered that the other requirements of a fringe benefit are satisfied and that the benefit is a residual fringe benefit. | Detailed Reasoning - Question 4: If the answer to Question 3 is yes, does the 'otherwise deductible rule' (ODR) in section 52 of the FBTAA apply to reduce the taxable value of the accommodation to nil? | Detailed Reasoning - SAEs that meet the requirements under section 31C of the FBTAA: For SAEs that meet the requirements under section 31C of the FBTAA the benefit is exempt and therefore the otherwise deductible rule is not applicable. | Detailed Reasoning - SAEs that do not meet the requirement under section 31C of the FBTAA: The taxable value of the external period residual fringe benefit calculated in accordance with section 51 of the FBTAA is reduced where the 'otherwise deductible rule' in subsection 52(1) applies. The 'otherwise deductible rule' operates to reduce the taxable value of a residual fringe benefit where the employee would have been entitled to a once-only deduction under section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997, (or where a specific provision of the tax laws applies to provide the deduction for the expense), had the employee personally incurred and paid the unreimbursed expense. As concluded in Question 1, the SAEs' per diem allowance would not be deductible under section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997 because their expenses would not be incurred in the course of gaining or producing their assessable income, and the expenditure is of a private or domestic nature because SAEs are living away from their usual residence. For the same reasons, their accommodation expense would not be deductible. Therefore, the taxable value of the fringe benefits cannot be reduced. | Detailed Reasoning - Question 5: Is the provision by Australia Co to SAEs of return flights, to the domestic project location at commencement of the assignment/project and back to their home location at the end of their assignment/project, a fringe benefit as defined in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA? | Summary: The Return Flights are exempt benefits under section 58F of the FBTAA and are therefore, excluded from being fringe benefits. | Detailed Reasoning - Detailed reasoning: It is considered that the provision by Australia Co to SAEs of return flights is a residual benefit, because they do not fall into the category of benefits set out in Subdivisions A of Divisions 2 to 11 of the FBTAA. | Detailed Reasoning - Is the benefit provided an exempt benefit and therefore excluded from being a fringe benefit?: A benefit that is an exempt benefit in relation to the year of tax is not a 'fringe benefit'. The provision of a car, expense payment, property or residual benefit which is in respect of 'relocation transport' is an exempt benefit under section 58F of the FBTAA. The meaning of 'relocation transport' is contained in section 143A of the FBTAA. Relocation transport is transport that enables an employee to relocate to a new residence in circumstances where they are required to live away from home in order to perform employment-related duties, or are similarly required to relocate their usual place of residence. Each requirement from paragraphs (a) to (g) of section 143A need to be satisfied for the Return Flights to be relocation benefits. (a) a specified type of benefit is provided to an employee (or their associate) in respect of the employment of the employee which is in respect of or in connection with the provision of transport It is considered that Australia Co is providing SAEs with a residual benefit, as such, it is a benefit of the type specified in paragraph 143A(a). | Detailed Reasoning - (b) The transport, meals or accommodation is for a family member: Subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA defines 'family member' to mean 'the employee', 'the spouse of the employee', and 'a child of the employee'. Australia Co provides the Return Flights to the employee (being the SAEs), therefore satisfying the requirements in paragraph 134A(b) of the FBTAA. (c) The transport is required solely because the employee is or was required to live away from their usual place of residence in order to perform the duties of that employment The conditions in paragraph 134A(c) require the transport is required solely because: (i) the employee is required to live away from his or her usual place of residence in order to perform the duties of that employment; (ii) the employee, having lived away from his or her usual place of residence in order to perform the duties of that employment, is required to return to his or usual place of residence: (A) in order to perform those duties; or (B) because the employee has ceased to perform those duties; or (iii) the employee is required to change his or her usual place of residence in order to perform the duties of that employment. As addressed under Question 1, SAEs are living away from their usual residence. Therefore, the condition in subparagraph 143A(c)(i) is met in relation to the first flight to the domestic assignment/project location provided to SAEs (and other family members if relevant). This flight is solely provided because the employee is required to live away from their usual place of residence in order to perform the duties of their employment with Australia Co. Similarly, the condition in subparagraph 143A(c)(ii) is also satisfied in relation to the SAEs' last flight back to their homes at the end of their assignments. This is because the SAEs, having lived away from their usual place of residence in order to perform the duties of that employment, would return to their usual place of residence once they have ceased to perform those duties at the assignment/project locations. | Detailed Reasoning - (d) The transport is provided to enable a family member to take up residence: The conditions in paragraph 143A(d) are met in relation to the: (a) the first flight to the SAEs' domestic assignment/project location, as it enables the employee to take up residence near their new assignment location while living away from their usual place of residence per subparagraph 143A(d)(i) and (b) the last flight back to usual place of residence at the end of the assignment as it enables the employee to return to their usual place of residence, per subparagraph 143A(d)(ii). This condition would not be met in the instance where an SAE elects for the last flight to be to a location other than where their usual place of residence is. In such a case, the transport would not be provided to enable the employee to take up residence at their usual place of residence. | Detailed Reasoning - (e) If the transport is for the spouse, or a child, of the employee: The condition in paragraph 143A(e) requires that the transport provided to a spouse or child of the employee, is not provided to enable the spouse or child, to accompany the employee while the employee or the spouse or child is undertaking travel in the course of performing the duties of their employment. In the case of the spouse or child, this is duties of employment with the same employer or as an employee of the employee. Australia Co has advised that the SAEs are not generally be accompanied by their family therefore it is considered that this condition is not relevant. (f) If the transport is for the employee - the transport is not provided while the employee is undertaking travel in the course of performing the duties of that employment Taxation Ruling 2021/1 Income tax: when are deductions allowed for employee's transport expenses? (TR 2021/1) provides guidance on whether travel expenses incurred by an employee are 'in the course of' gaining or producing assessable income. TR 2021/1 explains that 'other ways' that this has been expressed in the context of transport expenses, is that the employee is travelling 'on work' [13] , the travel is part of the employment, or the travel is an incident of the employment." [14] As per paragraph 84 of TR 2021/1, where an employee is living at a location away from their usual residence (usually on a temporary basis) for work but retains a connection to their previous home (for example, family remains behind), transport between their new work location and their previous home would not be deductible. This is the case even if the agreement with their employer involves the employer agreeing to provide or fund such transport. As addressed under Question 1, it is considered that the SAEs are living at a location away from their usual residence and therefore the travel between their home and their subsequent regular place of work is not in the course of gaining or producing their assessable income. It is considered that in these circumstances the SAEs are not travelling while performing the duties of their employment with Australia Co and therefore, the condition in paragraph 143(A)(f) is met. ( g) The benefit is not provided under a non-arm's length arrangement There is no suggestion on the information provided that the Return Flights are provided under a non-arm's length arrangement therefore the condition in paragraph 134A(g) is met. It is considered that the Return Flights satisfy the conditions therefore are section 143A relocation transport benefits. | Detailed Reasoning - Conclusion on the application of section 58F: Having regard to the requirements in sections 143A and 58F of the FBTAA, it is considered that the Return Flights provided by Australia Co to SAEs between their home locations and domestic assignment/project locations are in respect of 'relocation transport' and are therefore, exempt benefits under section 58F. As such they are excluded from being fringe benefits. It is assumed that the necessary evidence as specified under paragraph 58F(c)(ii) is provided to the employer before the FBT return for the year must be lodged. | Detailed Reasoning - Question 6: If the answer to Question 5 is yes, does the 'otherwise deductible rule' in section 52 of the FBTAA apply to reduce the taxable value of the return flights to nil? | Summary: Where the requirements under section 58F are satisfied, the benefit is excluded from being a fringe benefit. Therefore, the 'otherwise deductible rule' is not applicable. | Detailed Reasoning - Question 7: Where travel expenditure, being the per diem allowance, the accommodation and the Return Flights incurred by a SAE is reimbursed, such that an expense payment benefit arises (rather than a residual benefit), would the Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT) principles discussed at Questions 1-6 equally apply? | Summary: The principles would equally apply if the benefits were provided as expense payment benefits. | Detailed Reasoning - The per diems: The per diems are to be provided to cover additional expenses that the employees might incur, where the duties of their employment require them to live away from their normal residence, while they are on assignment. Where the per diems were paid as an allowance, it was concluded in Question 1 that they were a LAFHA under section 30 of the FBTAA. As the SAEs are living away from home, their additional expenses are considered to be non-deductible expenses. Where the per diems are provided as an expense payment benefit, no exemption would be available and an expense payment fringe benefit would arise. The taxable value of an expense payment benefit may be reduced using the ODR, under section 24 of the FBTAA. But as concluded above, the SAEs' expenses would not be incurred in the course of gaining or producing their assessable income, and the expenditure is of a private or domestic nature because the SAEs are living away from their usual residence. The SAEs would therefore, not be entitled to a deduction and the taxable value cannot be reduced. | Detailed Reasoning - The accommodation: Where the accommodation is provided as an expense payment benefit, the subsection 47(5) exemption is not applicable as this only applies to residual benefits. Expenditure on accommodation provided to an employee who is required to live away from their normal residence in order to perform employment duties can be an exempt benefit under section 21. The conditions in subsection 21(d) include similar requirements to subsection 47(5). These include that the employee must satisfy section 31C and 31D, or section 31E of the FBTAA. These requirements relate to: • maintaining a home in Australia and being required to live away from home that relates only to all or part of the first 12 months; or • working on a fly-in fly-out or drive-in drive-out basis. When an employee does not satisfy the requirements as in section 31C and 31D, or section 31E of the FBTAA an expense payment fringe benefit arises in respect of the accommodation. | Detailed Reasoning - The Return Flights: As noted in Question 5, an expense payment benefit which is in respect of 'relocation transport' can also be an exempt benefit under section 58F. The Return Flights benefits will be provided as a consequence of the employee having to relocate and are therefore, section 143A relocation transport benefits. Having regard to the requirements in sections 143A and 58F of the FBTAA, it is considered that the Return Flights provided by Australia Co to SAEs between their domestic assignment/project location and their home location are in respect of 'relocation transport' and are therefore, exempt benefits under section 58F. As such they are excluded from being a fringe benefit. It is assumed that the necessary evidence as specified under paragraph 58F(c)(ii) is provided to the employer before the FBT return for the year must be lodged. | Detailed Reasoning - Can the 'otherwise deductible rule' in section 24 of the FBTAA apply to reduce the taxable value of the expense payment benefits?: The travel expenditure is not considered to be incurred in the course of gaining or producing the assessable income of the SAEs as it is of a private or domestic nature. Therefore, the employees would not be entitled to a deduction under section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997. As a result, the taxable values of any expense payment fringe benefits that arise cannot be reduced using the 'otherwise deductible rule' in section 24 of the FBTAA. [1] J & G Knowles & Associates v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation [2000] FCA 196, [26]. [2] Paragraph 16 TR 2021/4 [3] Paragraph 25 TR2021/4 [4] Paragraph 25 TR 2021/1 Income tax: when are deductions allowed for employees' transport expenses [5] Paragraph 26 Ibid. [6] Paragraph 32 Ibid. [7] Paragraph 13 Practical Compliance Guideline PCG 2021/3 Determining if allowances or benefits provided to an employee relate to travelling on work or living at a location - ATO compliance approach [8] Section 31B of the FBTAA [9] Fringe benefits tax: a guide for employers Chapter 11. [10] Subsection 136(1) FBTAA [11] Clause 2.1 Employment contract [12] Subsection 47(5)(d)(ii) of the FBTAA [13] John Holland Group Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2015] FCAFC 82 ( John Holland ) at [45], per Edmonds J. [14] TR 2021/1 [12.]

Is the provision of the per diem allowance by Australia Co (Australia Co) to its Short-term Assignment Employees (SAEs) to cover food and incidentals a Living-away-from-home allowance (LAFHA) benefit pursuant to subsection 30(1) of the Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 (FBTAA) where the SAEs are on assignment for a period of X months?