Private ruling: Residency
Date of advice: 15 December 2020
Published: February 2021
Ruling period: Year ended 30 June 20XX
Date scheme commenced: 1 July 20XX

Ruling: Q1: Are you a resident of Australia for income tax purposes? | A1: Yes. | Q2: Are you required to declare your income derived in Country Y in your Australian tax return? | A2: Yes.

Relevant facts and circumstances: You were born in Australia. You are a citizen of Australia. You left Australia in the 20XX income year on an Ancestry visa to work in Country Y. Up until you left Australia you worked for a company in Australia. You relocated to Country Y to work for a company in Country Y. Your employment was permanent and had no end date. Your visa was valid until XXX 20XX. You could stay in country Y indefinitely after 5 years. You co-rented an apartment in country Y with 2 other people who you met in country Y. You purchased a bed and drawers for your room in the share house. You did not own any property in Australia. You lived with your mother prior to leaving for country Y. You suspended your health insurance in Australia prior to going to Country Y. You suspended your car insurance in Australia prior to going to Country Y. You sold your managed fund investment in Australia prior to going to Country Y. You returned to Australia on XXXX 2020 due to Covid-19. Your position in Country Y was made redundant. You commenced living with your parent upon your return. You are not eligible to contribute to the PSS or the CSS Commonwealth Government super funds.

Relevant legislative provisions: Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Subsection 995-1(1) | Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 Subsection 6(1)

Reasons for decision: Summary: Section 6-5 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) provides that where you are a resident of Australia for taxation purposes, your assessable income includes income gained from all sources, whether in or out of Australia. However, if you are a foreign resident, your assessable income includes only income derived from an Australian source (subsection 6-5(3) of the ITAA 1997). The terms resident and resident of Australia, regarding an individual, are defined in subsection 6(1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (ITAA 1936). The definition provides four tests to ascertain whether a taxpayer is a resident of Australia. These tests are: 1. the resides test 2. the domicile tests 3. the 183-day test 4. the superannuation tests The primary test for deciding the residency status of an individual is whether the individual resides in Australia according to the ordinary meaning of the word resides. However, where an individual does not reside in Australia according to ordinary concepts, they may still be a resident of Australia for tax purposes if they meet the conditions of one of the other three tests. | Detailed Reasoning - 1. The resides test: The resides test considers whether an individual is residing in Australia according to the ordinary meaning of the word 'reside'. As the word 'reside' is not defined in Australian taxation law, it takes its ordinary meaning for the purposes of subsection 6(1) of the ITAA 1936. The ordinary meaning of the word 'reside', according to the Macquarie Dictionary , 2001, rev. 3 rd edition, The Macquarie Library Pty Ltd, NSW, is 'to dwell permanently or for a considerable time; having one's abode for a time', and according to the Compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary (1987), is 'to dwell permanently, or for a considerable time, to have one's settled or usual abode, to live in or at a particular place'. In considering the definition of 'reside', the High Court of Australia, in Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Miller (1946) 73 CLR 93 at page 99-100, per Latham CJ, noted the term 'reside' should be given a wide meaning for the purposes of section 6(1) of the ITAA 1936. Similarly, in Subrahmanyam v Commissioner of Taxation 2002 ATC 2303, Deputy President Forgie said at paragraphs 43 and 44 that the widest meaning should be attributed to the word 'reside'. The question of whether an individual 'resides' in a country is a question of fact and degree and not of law. In deciding this question, the courts have consistently referred to and considered the following factors as being relevant: (i) physical presence in Australia; (ii) nationality; (iii) history of residence and movements; (iv) habits and 'mode of life'; (v) frequency, regularity and duration of visits to Australia; (vi) purpose of visits to or absences from Australia; (vii) family and business ties with Australia compared to the foreign country concerned; and (viii) maintenance of a place of abode. The weight given to each factor varies with individual circumstances and no single factor is necessarily decisive. In Shand v Federal Commissioner of Taxation 2003 ATC 2080, the Tribunal stated (at 35): Questions of residence, domicile, permanent place of abode, have frequently been found by the courts and tribunals to be difficult to assess on a factual level and not easy to define in concrete legal terms. You went to country Y in XXXX 2019. You were in Country Y for X months. You lived in a share house in Country Y. Based on the facts you have provided to us you did not break your connection with Australia for the period you were in Country Y. You were not away from Australia for a significant amount of time and the Commissioner is therefore of the opinion that you were a resident of Australia for taxation purposes for the period you were in country Y. Whilst it is not necessary to meet more than one test to determine residency for tax purposes (we have already established that you are a resident under the resides test), we will also include a discussion of the 'domicile and permanent place of abode' test as an alternative argument. | Detailed Reasoning - 2. The domicile test: If a person's domicile is Australia, they will be an Australian resident unless the Commissioner is satisfied, they have a permanent place of abode outside of Australia. In order to show that a new domicile of choice in a country outside of Australia has been adopted, the person must be able to prove an intention to make his or her home indefinitely in that country. The concept of Domicile was discussed in the Marriage of Emson (1980) 5 Fam LR 662: A person may abandon his domicile of origin and acquire a domicile of choice but in order to establish a change of domicile there must be clear evidence of an intention to abandon the domicile of origin and to make a new permanent home in the country to which the person has removed. In my view a person cannot be said to acquire a new domicile until there has been a firm intention of establishing a permanent residence in another country and also the confirmation of that intention by actual residence in that country. Declarations as to intention are rightly regarded in determining the question of a change of domicile, but they must be examined by considering the person to whom, the purposes for which, and the circumstances in which they are made and they must further be fortified and carried into effect by conduct and action consistent with the declared expression: Ross v Ross [1930] AC 1 at 6-7 per Lord Buckmaster... Where the court finds that at a relevant point of time there is a conflict between the actual conduct of the party concerned and the verbal expression of his intention doubtless the court will in most cases prefer the act to the word - as an ancient proverb puts it: "what you do speaks so loudly that I cannot hear what you say." Further, in Fremlin v Fremlin (1913) 16 CLR 212; [1913] HCA 25 ( Fremlin v Fremlin ) Per Barton J: In Winans v. Attorney-General, Lord Halsbury L.C. said:-"Now the law is plain, that where a domicile of origin is proved it lies upon the person who asserts a change of domicile to establish it, and it is necessary to prove that the person who is alleged to have changed his domicile had a fixed and determined purpose to make the place of his new domicile his permanent home." In the much older case of Udny v. Udny Lord Westbury said: -"Domicile of choice is a conclusion or inference which the law derives from the fact of a man fixing voluntarily his sole or chief residence in a particular place, with an intention of continuing to reside there for an unlimited time. This is a description of the circumstances which create or constitute a domicile, and not a definition of the term. There must be a residence freely chosen, and not prescribed or dictated by any external necessity, such as the duties of office, the demands of creditors, or the relief from illness; and it must be residence fixed not for a limited period or particular purpose, but general and indefinite in its future contemplation. It is true that residence originally temporary, or intended for a limited period, may afterwards become general and unlimited, and in such a case so soon as the change of purpose, or animus manendi, can be inferred the fact of domicile is established." Lord Curriehill in the case of Donaldson v. M'Clure says: -"To abandon one domicile for another means something far more than a mere change of residence. It imports an intention not only to relinquish those peculiar rights, privileges and immunities which the law and constitution of the domicile confer on the denizens of the country in their domestic relations, in their business transactions, in their political and municipal status, and in the daily affairs of common life, but also the laws by which the succession to property is regulated after death. The abandonment or change of a domicile is therefore a proceeding of a very serious nature, and an intention to make such an abandonment requires to be proved by satisfactory evidence." Lord Halsbury, in Marchioness of Huntly v. Gaskell, expressed strong approval of Lord Curriehill's judgment, quoting this passage. Your domicile of origin is Australia. Your domicile did not change during the period you were in country Y. | Detailed Reasoning - Permanent place of abode: The expression permanent place of abode refers to a person's residence, where they live with their family and sleep at night. In essence, a person's place of abode is that persons dwelling place or the physical surroundings in which a person lives. A permanent place of abode does not have to be everlasting or forever. It does not mean an abode in which the person intends to live for the rest of his or her life. It should be contrasted with a temporary or transitory place of abode outside of Australia. Taxation Ruling IT 2650 Income Tax: Residency - permanent place of abode outside Australia (IT 2650) outlines some of the factors considered relevant in determining a person's place of abode. These are summarised at paragraph 23 in the ruling as: • the intended and actual length of the individuals stay in the overseas country (a period of two years or more in a country would generally be regarded as a substantial period) • any intention either to return to Australia at some definite point in time or to travel to another country • the establishment of a home outside of Australia • the abandonment of any residence of place of abode the individual may have had in Australia • the duration and continuity of the individual's presence in the overseas country, and • the durability of association that the individual has with a place in Australia. You went to Country Y for work purposes. You lived in a share house with two other people who you initially did not know in Country Y. You were in Country Y for X months. The Commissioner is not satisfied that you have a permanent place of abode outside Australia due to the above reasons. You are a resident under this test. | Detailed Reasoning - Your residency status: As you were a resident of Australia for the 20XX income year, you must disclose all income derived both in Australia and overseas in your Australian tax return.