The ATO has issued a stern warning as they crackdown on the sharing economy...

Sophie Elsworth, Personal finance writer - News Corp Australia Network 

THE taxman will target thousands of Uber drivers and Airbnb hosts earning undeclared extra income from the so called ‘sharing economy’ this tax time.

The Australian Taxation Office said it was “concerned” people making income from sites such as Uber, Airbnb and Airtasker were unaware they have to declare these amounts on their tax return.

A stern warning has been issued to offenders: you will get caught if you don’t declare money made from these revenue streams.

The warning comes after the ATO recently collated information from banks to find out who was making money from working as a ride-sharing driver (i.e. Uber driver.)

This prompted them to write to 20,000 drivers in May alerting them of their tax obligations that they must follow.

The ATO’s assistant commissioner Graham Whyte said it would be using sophisticated technology including data matching, data mining and analytics to scrutinise every tax return filed for the 2015/16 financial year.
“If you earn a fee from task sharing for odd jobs or providing a service and it counts as assessable income you just need to include the income in your individual tax return,’’ he said.

 “The law hasn’t changed or has the definition of income, and while the economy is changing with this certainly the rules are the same.”

He said this included earning income from doing things like task sharing, transporting passengers through ride-sourcing or renting out a room or house — they are all forms of assessable income.

But Mr Whyte said this was different to if a person provides goods or an activity through a sharing economy website or platform and it’s done as a hobby or recreational activity — this amount may not be assessable income.

H & R Block’s Director of Tax Communications Mark Chapman said while it was important Australians declared any income made through the sharing economy, on the flipside these people could also declare appropriate tax deductions to coincide with this.

H & R Block director of tax communications Mark Chapman said it was important to seek help if you’re not sure what to claim and declare at tax time.

“The ATO have gone to a lot of these sharing economy services, they’ll know if you’re on Airtasker, or are on Airbnb or you’re an Uber driver,’’ he said.

“Not declaring the income is a disaster when the ATO is data matching and they will typically come after you.”

The ATO will also this tax time be focusing on travel expenses for employees and making sure people return any rental income.

For more information, visit www.ato.gov.au/sharingeconomy

July 18, 2016 12:01am     Victor Cominos
    

sophie.elsworth@news.com.au

Originally published as ATO crackdown on sharing economy

This story has been brought to you by the Emerald Chamber of Commerce Inc.
(Ph: 07 4982 3444)

 

Eagle Boys and Pizza Hut merger on the table in private equity buy-up deal

 

Eloise Keating / Wednesday, August 10 2016

 

Pizza chains Eagle Boys and Pizza Hut could be merged to form Australia’s second-largest pizza chain, if a reported deal for private equity outfit Allegro Funds comes to fruition.

 

Together Eagle Boys and Pizza Hut are estimated to hold up to 35% of the market for takeaway pizza in Australia, with a combined store footprint of 384 outlets. Australia’s largest pizza chain Domino’s operates more than 600 outlets in Australia and New Zealand.

 

According to a report from Fairfax, Sydney-based private equity firm Allegro Funds is in “advanced talks” to buy the Eagle Boys chain from the company’s voluntary administrators SV Partners, and to buy the Pizza Hut Australian business from parent company YUM! Brands.

 

Allegro, which owns Carpet Court, Great Southern Rail and bus maker Custom, is reportedly one of two private equity firms to show interest in the pizza chains over recent months, with the firm moving closer to securing a deal following the appointment of David Stimpson and Terrence Rose as administrators to Eagle Boys in mid-July.

 

Thirteen company-owned Eagle Boys have closed in the time since, while the Eagle Boys head office reportedly owes $30 million to creditors.

 

Stimpson and Rose have also been appointed as voluntary administrators to EB Pizza India Pty Ltd, EB India Holdings Pty Ltd and EB Pizza Fiji Pty Ltd.

 

Fairfax reports it is uncertain if Allegro would seek to continue to operate the brands separately or rebrand Eagle Boys stores to Pizza Hut outlets, if a deal is finalised.

 

Graeme Houston, general manager of Pizza Hut Australia, told SmartCompany Pizza Hut’s “policy is not to comment on market speculation”.

 

SmartCompany contacted Allegro Funds and Eagle Boys’ administrators SV Partners but did not receive a response prior to publication.

 

What a merger could mean for franchisees

 

Jason Gehrke, director of the Franchise Advisory Centre told SmartCompany a sale of a franchise network does not automatically mean the buyer will negotiate new franchise agreements with existing franchisees.

 

“Most franchise agreements include a provision that allows the franchisor to reassign the agreements without recourse,” Gehrke says.

 

“This allows the franchisor to sell the business and not necessarily have to have the consent of franchisees.”

 

Gehrke says in the event of a sale, the buyer of the franchise network would take on existing franchise agreements but may “subsequently seek to vary the agreements or replace them with new agreements as they determine what the future network will look like”.

 

In circumstances where one franchised business buys out another similar business, or two franchise networks merge, Gehrke says there is commonly an overlap in the location of outlets.

 

“Where there’s an overlap, in some cases, outlets may close or may be released from their [franchise] agreement and allowed to trade independently,” he says.

The question of branding is also an important one in these circumstances, says Gehrke.

 

“Any buyer who acquires a brand has the question of whether they continue with that brand or whether they absorb it into the other, primary brand,” he says.

 

“If they absorb it, the new outlets in time would need to be rebranded. The question of who pays for it, either franchisees or franchisor, may determine how successful that rebranding is.

 

“If the franchisor pays, it will likely happen quickly and be done comprehensively. If the franchisees are to pay, it’s quite likely there will be a significantly extended implementation timeframe … and internal resistance.”     Victor Cominos

This story has been brought to you by the Emerald Chamber of Commerce Inc.
(Ph: 07 4982 3444)

How parcel delivery startup Sendle is putting small businesses at the heart of what it does

 

Denham Sadler / Monday, August 15 2016

 

Sydney-based startup Sendle has raised $5 million as it looks to further expand its reach across Australia and compete with the small business delivery “monopoly”.

The funding round was led by Full Circle Venture Capital and also saw Black Sheep Capital, rampersand and Giant Leap participate.

It follows from a $3 million round that the startup raised last year and Sendle founder and chief executive James Chin Moody says this time round it was all about proven traction.

“The big difference is that we’ve got a very significant business now with proven traction in the market,” Moody tells StartupSmart.

“That gave us confidence to say, ‘here is the engine’, and raise the money.

“We’re absolutely delighted with our new investors. They’re not only aligned with our purpose but with our values as well.”

Moody says Sendle has enjoyed 20% month-on-month growth across the last year, and the capital injection will be used to continue this rapid expansion and further develop the startup’s tech platform.

“What we’re doing is really building a business that’s going to last,” he says.

“Australia deserves more competition, particularly around small business parcel delivery.

“We’ll be using the investment we’ve received to improve a lot of our core infrastructure to make sure we can continue to grow at 20% per month.”
 
A singular focus

The delivery space has become increasingly saturated recently, but Moody says he doesn’t view the likes of Shippit as direct competitors and prefers to set his sights on the biggest player: Australia Post.

“I think that we’re the ones that really focus on small business,” he says.

“Our users can send one thing and that’s very different from the point-to-point couriers. There are a few out there and they’re really designed for metro deliveries. Most of our deliveries are not in the same city, we’re sending parcels all over Australia.

“Other folks in this space are working on the last mile, the parcel pickup places. We see Sendle as the one that’s 100% focused on the needs of small business.

“Our biggest competitor is the post office, and they’ve largely got a monopoly in this space.”
Sendle now facilitates $100 million in small business commerce annually and he says this provides the driving purpose for the startup.

“Our purpose is to make small business delivery reliable, simple and affordable,” Moody says.

“We’re successful when our customers are successful. We love all these small businesses, they’re all using Sendle and the best thing is that we’re saving them both time and money.

“We’re creating an 100% solution for that group. The time has gone when you can be 80% good for everyone. We’re trying to make things to absolutely delight our small business customers.”

Focusing your energy

He says this singular focus on a specific goal and market is one of the keys to Sendle’s success and a central challenge for other founders.

“The hardest thing about running a startup is knowing where to focus your energy,” Moody says.

“If you’re lucky enough to be in a market like ours with lots of opportunities and a monopoly provider there are a huge number of things you could be doing. The hardest thing is working out where to focus.”

And trying to focus all several different aspects of a business could lead to its downfall, Moody says.

“For startups the one thing you don’t have is time,” he says.

“If you aren’t focused you end up spending a little bit of time on everything when you really need a 100% solution for 20% of the market rather than a 20% solution for 100% of the market.

“You need to be saying no as much as you’re saying yes.

“We’ve wholeheartedly said yes to providing a beautiful delivery solution for small businesses.”

This article was first published by StartupSmart.
Victor Cominos

This story has been brought to you by the Emerald Chamber of Commerce Inc.
(Ph: 07 4982 3444)

 

 

 

Here is a story from the archives.....

 



Written by Ron Entsch and Victor Cominos

 

The History of Bush Pilots Airways

 

and

 

Air
Queensland

 

Hence Ansett, through Ansett Transport Industries, acquired eighteen per cent ownership of Air Queensland, and Alan Yates, Ansett’s deputy general manager, was appointed to the board.

 

This news was not well received in some quarters. The Emerald Chamber of Commerce expressed its views in a letter dated 5 September 1984:

 

At a meeting of this Chamber yesterday, members expressed their concern on the announcement that Ansett Airways has purchased 18.3 per cent share in your airline.

 

Its reason for concern relates to history—from the time Queensland Airlines, which served this town for many years with a DC3 aircraft, was purchased by Ansett Airways.

 

After that the service deteriorated in smaller aircraft and less convenient schedules, and many changes of operators.

 

Until Bush Pilots Airways started operating here in 1978, the services offered in the Central Highlands were very indifferent.

 

The introduction of the Metros and direct services to Brisbane, although appreciated by many, were not appreciated by everyone; however, the service now operating is appreciated.

 

Members of the Chamber are concerned that history may repeat itself if the strength of Air Queensland is lost in serving our area, so your assurances that you consider this area worthy of your support would be appreciated.

 

In his response to the Chamber, Sir Sydney said, “May I very emphatically say that we in Air Queensland will never allow history to repeat itself whilst we continue to have your full support and that of the people of the Central Highlands”.

 

Despite those well-intentioned comments, the Chamber was to learn, six months later, that Air Queensland was under the control of TAA, not Ansett.

 

The President of the Emerald Chamber of Commerce Mr. Victor Cominos clearly remembers the incident and the concerns of the members in 1984.

 

Particularly as they had seen the air services to Emerald deteriorate since Ansett had taken over Queensland Airlines Pty Ltd.

 

Mr. Cominos said, “When in 1966 Queensland Airlines Pty Ltd was absorbed into Ansett-ANA (Ansett Transport Industries) it was the beginning of the decline of local air services.”

 

“I can remember the diligent services provided by the local agents of Queensland Airlines Pty Ltd, for many years Keith Esmond of Dalgety & Co followed by Bill McKendry of McKendry’s News & Travel Agency sold the tickets and they also provided the ground services at the Emerald Airport,” said Mr. Cominos.

 

Epilog: Long before Queensland Airlines Pty. Ltd. had begun servicing Emerald the company had begun life in Brisbane as Aircrafts Pty Ltd.  The company formed in 1927 changed its name from Aircrafts Pty Ltd to Queensland Airlines Pty Ltd on 18th October 1949 and continued to deliver newspapers and passengers to towns north and west of the capital. That year saw services being provided to Brisbane - Maryborough - Bundaberg - Rockhampton - Clermont, Brisbane - Kingaroy - Monto - Thangool - Rockhampton. Emerald had yet to be added to the route.

This story has been brought to you by the Emerald Chamber of Commerce Inc.
(Ph: 07 4982 3444)

Queensland woman wins $10,000 in Facebook defamation case against ex-husband

Drew Creighton - June 20 2016

A Queensland woman whose ex-husband posted a vicious attack about her on Facebook has won $10,000 in court.

Bowen woman June Marion Kelly was seeking $150,000 in damages after a post was published on Facebook by her former husband David Levick, stating that she, among other things, "commits criminal offences".

A South African man has been sued for defamation over a Facebook post.

A South African man has been sued for defamation over a Facebook post.

"June turned out to be a thieving, lying, money crazed bitch who screwed me out of nearly 3 million rand – may she rot in Hell," Mr Levick wrote in a post on his Facebook page in November 2014.

Magistrate Simon Young said Mr Levick's post happened in the context of years of a bitter divorce and property settlement in South Africa with Ms Kelly.

Ms Kelly's issue with the post was it stated she was a "thief" and suffered from a mental disorder.

Mr Levick tried to defend his case, disputing his liability for the words and whether the case was even in the court's jurisdiction.

He argued the post was meant to be private but was inadvertently published to the public.

Citing a long-standing ruling, Mr Young deemed it not a sufficient defence. "… Liability depends upon mere communication of the defamatory matter to a third person. The communication may be quite unintentional …" the ruling read.

Mr Levick then tried to argue there was no evidence the post had been "downloaded" in Queensland as he had published it from South Africa.

This was also not accepted as Mr Levick introduced the idea after the pleadings and was ruled in favour of Ms Kelly.

In his final defence Mr Levick raised whether the words implied what Ms Kelly had taken from it and whether it was even directed at her in the first place.

The magistrate said it was clear the post was directed at June Kelly.

Mr Levick had also published an apology to Ms Kelly regarding the post at a later date on Facebook, leaving no question as to whom the post was intended.

When it came to the decision on how much to award Ms Kelly, Mr Young consulted previous cases including one in which a builder was awarded $50,000 for having his reputation damaged in his community.

"Damages for injured feelings are often the largest single (but not only) consideration in awarding damages," Mr Young said, awarding Ms Kelly $10,000 with interest to the date of the judgment at the rate of 4 per cent, totalling $10,784.74.  Victor Cominos

This story has been brought to you by the Emerald Chamber of Commerce Inc.
(Ph: 07 4982 3444)

Rural Property Law:
Primary Producers Benefit from Legislative Changes
 

Posted July 1, 2016

Legislation passed by both the Queensland and federal governments offers some important benefits for primary producers, according to leading legal firm Creevey Russell Lawyers.

 

Creevey Russell Principal Dan Creevey said changes introduced by federal parliament have allowed for a significant increase in farm management deposits, which help to protect farm income and cash flow during lean years.

 

“The farm management deposit scheme is a risk mitigation scheme which allows for primary producers to make tax deductible deposits – usually during the prosperous years – and then redraw them during the less prosperous times,” Mr Creevey said.

 

“From July 1, 2016, the maximum amount that can be held in a farm management deposit account has increased from $400,000 to $800,000. The deposit must be held for at least 12 months, and the income is taxable when the money is withdrawn from the scheme.

 

“In addition, if producers are affected by a rainfall deficiency for six consecutive months, and the deposits have been held for at least six months, they can access those deposits without losing the claimed tax deduction.”

 

Mr Creevey said another bonus for primary producers was the Queensland parliament voting to relax primary production duties from July 1, 2016.

 

“Amendments brought in by the Duties and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2016 have removed the need for the transfer of property to be by way of gift, if the property is used to carry on particular family businesses of primary production,” he said.

 

“Therefore, if the land or business assets are subject to a mortgage, the mortgage no longer needs to be discharged in order to obtain the duty exemption.

 

“We see this as a relaxation of a rule that has prevented many families from attending to proper business succession and estate planning.”

 

Creevey Russell has wide experience in advising primary producers, especially in relation to business succession and estate planning and understands the needs and desires of its rural clients.

 

The President of the Emerald Chamber of Commerce, Victor Cominos said that it was important that estate planning was implemented. "Sometimes it takes many years to properly structure appropriate vehicles to own and operate a family business". 

This story has been brought to you by the Emerald Chamber of Commerce Inc.
(Ph: 07 4982 3444)