Private ruling: Home to work travel
Published: August 2012
Ruling period: 1 July 2008 to 30 June 2012 | 1 July 2008 to 30 June 2013 | 1 July 2008 to 30 June 2014 | 1 July 2008 to 30 June 2015
Date scheme commenced: 1 July 2011

Ruling: Q1: Are you entitled to a deduction for home to work travel by car or aeroplane? | A1: No.


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) deals with general deductions and allows a deduction for all losses or outgoings to the extent to which they are incurred in gaining or producing assessable income, except to the extent that they are outgoings of a capital, private or domestic nature. Generally the expenses of travel to and from work are not deductible. This is either because such expenditure is private in nature, or because it is not an expense incurred in gaining or producing assessable income. The case of Lunney & Hayley v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1958) 100 CLR 478; (1958) 7 AITR 166; (1958) 11 ATD 404 settled the principle that travel to and from work is ordinarily not deductible. The Full High Court held that costs incurred by a taxpayer in travelling to the place where they work are expenses incurred in order to enable them to earn income but are not expenses incurred in the course of earning that income. The travel is considered to be of an essentially private or domestic nature. However, the Commissioner accepts that expenses incurred by employees in travelling to and from work are deductible in certain circumstances. One of the exceptions to the general view is where the employee is required to transport bulky equipment necessary for employment. Paragraphs 63 and 64 of Taxation Ruling TR 95/34 explain that a deduction may be allowed in 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, and · there are no secure facilities available for storage of the bulky equipment at the work place. The question of what constitutes bulky equipment must be considered according to the individual circumstances in each case. To establish if the equipment you carry is bulky, consideration must be given to its size and weight. In Crestani v. FC of T 98 ATC 2219; (1998) 40 ATR 1037 (Crestani's Case) , a toolbox which measured 57 x 28 x 25 centimetres and weighed 27 kilograms 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, you are required to carry equipment weighing less than 15 kg. Based on your individual circumstances, it is not considered that the equipment is sufficiently cumbersome or heavy to be considered bulky. Therefore, you are not entitled to a deduction for travel expenses between home and work, either by car or aeroplane.

Please check this edited version to be sure that there are no details remaining that you think may allow you to be identified. If you have any concerns about this ruling you wish to discuss, you will find our contact details in the fact sheet. | You are required to carry work equipment in two small briefcase size cases. The weight of the items is less than 15 kg. | There is no secure place at work to store the cases.