Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard   

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Wednesday, 18 February 1987
Page: 310

(Question No. 4700)

Mr Tickner asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 7 October 1986:

(1) How many tax fraud cases have been successfully prosecuted in each year since 1980-81.

(2) What was the amount of money involved in each case.

Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:

(1) Tax fraud cases successfully prosecuted in each year since 1980-81 are as follows:








These figures represent the number of persons pros- ecuted. In some instances two or more persons were involved in the one tax fraud scheme. The cases mainly comprise tax related offences, such as company stripping cases, which were prosecuted under the Crimes Act 1914. They do not include administrative type offences involving failure to comply with requirements under taxation laws, which may or may not be fraud related. Numerous such cases are prosecuted each year, most of which are not prosecuted by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

(2) The amount of money involved in each case was:

Moore and Gamble (1982-83)-$193,000

Denis (1985-86)-$18m

Coghill (1985-86)-$47m

Baker and Leaver (1985-86)-$16m

Rubin, Starke and Risstrom (1985-86)-$128,000

Buntman (1985-86)-no amount alleged on plea

Donnelly and Maher (1985-86), Hurley (1983-84), Faint (1984-85) and Spence (1986-87)-not less than $23m

Young and Freedman (1985-86)-not less than $1.09m

Opitz (1986-87)-$3m

Rumpf (1986-87)-$20m

Beames (1985-86) and Lockyer and McTrusty (1986-87)-$16m

Cerullo (1986-87)-$139,000

Aston, Burnell and Thompson (1986-87) and Streckert (1984-85)-$537,000

Ahern (1986-87)-not less than $1.3m

Huston (1986-87)-not less than $50,000

These figures are the amounts identified and attributed to the offences as proved at the trial or agreed at the plea. It should be noted that in prosecuting major ``bottom of the harbour'' trials it is usually necessary to select representative samples of companies stripped and tax evaded. As a result in some instances these amounts while reflecting the gravity of the offences, fall far short of the total amounts of tax alleged to have been evaded by those involved in the scheme.