Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Full Day's HansardDownload Full Day's Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Wednesday, 20 May 1936

Senator DUNCAN-HUGHES (South Australia) . - This is a new clause; there is nothing in the old act which corresponds to it.

Senator A J McLACHLAN (SOUTH AUSTRALIA) - It is drafted in the light of the High Court decision in, the Payne case.

Senator DUNCAN-HUGHES - This is obviously an arguable matter, and in the memorandumwe are informed that the full High Court, by the prevailing judgment of the Chief Justice - I take it that the court was equally divided and, that being so, the decision of the Chief Justice, as , the Senior Judge, prevailed - has held that the Commissioner of Taxation was right in converting to Australian currency the income of a taxpayer received in England in sterling. This particular taxpayer has now appealed to the Privy Council. In view of the fact that this case is sub judice, will the passing of this clause affect the rights of Payne if his appeal succeeds?

Senator A J McLACHLAN (SOUTH AUSTRALIA) - This provision will not operate retrospectively.

Senator DUNCAN-HUGHES - I understand that Payne's case will go straight on and be determined on its merits ; but what about an individual who has not received in Australia any money accruing to him overseas? Is he to be taxed on profit arising from the rate of exchange as though his overseas income had actually been converted into Australian currency?

Suggest corrections