Private ruling: Residency of Australia for taxation purposes
Date of advice: 13 November 2020
Published: January 2021
Ruling period: Year ended 30 June 2019
Date scheme commenced: 1 July 2017

Ruling: Q1: Are you a resident of Australia for taxation purposes from early 20XX to late 20XX? | A1: Yes. | Q2: Are you a resident of Australia for taxation purposes from the date you were granted non-immigrant visa? | A2: No.

Relevant facts and circumstances: You were born in Australia. You are a citizen of Australia. You are not a permanent resident of any other country. You went to Country Z early 20XX. You were on short term tourist visas from the time you left until you were granted non-immigrant visa in late 20XX. Initially you stayed in hotels and short-term accommodation in Country Z and various other countries you visited. You intend on extending the visa for a further XX months. You and your Country Z girlfriend were married in mid 20XX. You are now both expecting a child. You live with your wife in her house in Country Z. You intend on being in Country Z for a further XX months. You support yourself with your Australian investments. You are able to return to your job in Australia when you return to Australia to live. You intend on making a visit to Australia in early 20XY to visit family and renew your Australian driver's license. You have not returned to Australia since you left in April 20XX. You took clothing, laptop, a bike and some bike tools to Country Z with you. The rest of your belongings are in storage in Australia. You have family in Australia. You are not eligible to contribute to the PSS or the CSS Commonwealth super funds.

Relevant legislative provisions: Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 subsection 6(1) | Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 section 6-5 | Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 section 6-5(3)

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, in regard to 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 test 3. the 183-day test 4. the superannuation test 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 considered to 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 particular country is a question of fact and degree and not of law. In deciding this question, the courts have consistently referred to and taken into account 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. To determine whether or not you are residing in Australia for taxation purposes, it is necessary for us to examine each of these factors in the context of your circumstances. You left Australia in early 20XX to go to Country Z. You initially stayed in hotels and short-term accommodation. You were on a tourist visa until late 20XX at which point you were granted a non-immigrant visa for XX months after you were married to a Country Z national. You are now expecting a child with your spouse. Based on the information provided to the Commissioner, you were a resident of Australia from early 20XX to late 20XX when you married and were granted a non-immigrant visa and are able to remain in Country Z for XX months. You are a non-resident of Australia from the date the non-immigrant visa was granted. | 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. You are a citizen of Australia. Your domicile of origin is Australia because you were born here. | 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 particular place in Australia. You remain a resident of Australia while on the tourist visas and living in short term accommodation. The Commissioner is satisfied that you have a permanent place of abode outside Australia from the date your non-immigrant visa was granted to you and you continued living with your wife in her house in Country Z. | Detailed Reasoning - 3. The 183-day test: Where a person is present in Australia for 183 days during a year of income the person will be a resident unless the Commissioner is satisfied that the person's usual place of abode is outside Australia and the person does not intend to take up residence in Australia. You have not been back to Australia since leaving in early 20XX. You are not a resident of Australia under this test. | Detailed Reasoning - 4. The superannuation test: An individual is still considered to be a resident if that person is eligible to contribute to the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme (CSS) or the Public Service Superannuation Scheme (PSS), or that person is the spouse or child under 16 of such a person. In your case, you are not a member of the CSS or the PSS or a spouse of such a person, or a child under 16 of such a person. You are not a resident of Australia under this test. | Detailed Reasoning - Your residency status: You are a resident of Australia for taxation purposes from early 20XX to late 20XX. You are a non-resident of Australia from the date your non-immigrant visa was granted in late 20XX and you were able to remain in Country Z for XX months.