Private ruling: Accommodation and meals
Published: October 2014
Ruling period: Year ended 30 June 2015
Date scheme commenced: 1 July 2014

Ruling: Q1: Are you entitled to a deduction for accommodation in City B? | 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 allows a deduction for all outgoings to the extent to which they are incurred in gaining or producing assessable income, or are necessarily incurred in carrying on a business for that purpose. However, a deduction is not allowable for outgoings that are of a capital, private or domestic nature. Generally, accommodation and meal expenses are private in nature and are not deductible. Where a taxpayer is away for an extended period of time, the associated costs including accommodation and meals remain private in nature and are not deductible. Even though the expenditure had a causal connection with the earning of income, the expenditure is inherently of a private or domestic nature and therefore no deduction is allowable. However, in Lunney v. FC of T (1958) 100 CLR 478 the Full High Court laid down the principle that for a deduction to be allowable it is not enough for the expenditure to be an essential prerequisite to the derivation of assessable income. In that case it was held that the 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 issue of expenses incurred in relation to accommodation near the work place while maintaining a family residence in another location was considered in FC of T v. Toms 89 ATC 4373; (1989) 20 ATR 466 ( Toms' Case ). In Toms' Case , the taxpayer was a forest worker who during the working week lived in a caravan in a bush camp 108 kilometres from his family home in Grafton. He claimed it was too far to travel each day to his work in the forest, so that it was necessary to establish a caravan at the camp. He would return home on weekends. He claimed the costs of maintaining his caravan and other living expenses such as the cost of heating and lighting. The Federal Court considered that the caravan was rendered necessary as much by the taxpayer's choice of the place of his residence in Grafton as by his choice of employment in the forest, and its purpose was to enable him to retain his residence at Grafton although employed in the forest. It was held that the expenses incurred in relation to the temporary accommodation near the workplace while maintaining a family residence in another location were dictated not by his work but by private considerations, and therefore were not deductible. You incur expenses for accommodation and meals in City B As in Toms' Case , the expenses are a prerequisite to the earning of assessable income. They are incurred in order to enable you to earn income but are not incurred in the course of gaining or producing that income. A deduction is therefore not allowable for your accommodation or meal expenses.

Relevant facts: You live in City A and work in City B. | You have rented accommodation in City B. | You incur expenses for accommodation and food.