Tax Ruling ???

[Beached_As_Brew]

Just want to put this out there to any of the accountants or tax savvy people amongst us.....

If i was hypothetically employed as an operations manager of a charter gig, holding only a PPL, be elligable to claim 100 hours of flight time as a tax deduction in order to gain CPL. Im thinking this may be self education and beneficial to my knowledge of the industry, therefore increasing my productivity and wage....

Does anyone thing i can claim it?????

Thanks, BEacHed

[Keg]

Given the size of the deduction you're going to want to claim then I reckon you're better off forking out a couple of hundred bucks and getting a capital 'O' opinion from a professional tax agent- or even a tax ruling- rather than asking a bunch of pilots. Note too, pilots are often THE worse profession for managing their own money so I'd treat any 'advice' offered with the same respect as we'd give an accountant if we asked them an aviation question. :ok:

[Torres]

Touché Keg!! :ok:

Beached, the answer is a resounding "no" but go pay for your own competent tax advice.

[cunninglinguist]

I'm with Torres, but I would add don't waste your money going to an accountant, for the following reason:
When I went to claim my 320 endo based on the fact that I had the gig and one of the conditions of employment was that I required the 320 endo, also that I signed the employment contract prior to starting the endo, the first accountant I went to would not claim it under any circumstance, inspite of advice from AFAP tax lawyer that it was legit, the 2nd accountant said " no worries, sounds legit ".

My point ? You could get 2 different answers from 2 different accountants and at the end of the day is does not matter what they say, what matters is what the ATO say, and I would bet my left one it will be definitely not.
So if you are not convinced, get a private ruling from the ATO.

[Torres]

I would think cunninglinguist would be entitled to the tax deduction as he: already holds commercial pilot qualifications (and thus earns his living from flying); and earned part of his income during that financial year on the aircraft on which he paid for an endorsement.

But Beached can't claim the cost of his 100 hours PPL flying as that qualification will not earn or enhance his income; and bears no direct relationship to his employment as an operations manager.

Nice try! :ok:

[Beached_As_Brew]

Would it be fair to say, that by attaining my 100 hours, thus enabling me to gain my CPL would directly benefit my knowledge of the practises of commercial flying ??? and wouldnt it then allow me to increase my income by the being able to do the odd charter

[gupta]

Training for the purposes of getting a new job/promotion is not claimable.
Professional development within your current position is.

You do need to seek a Tax Office ruling - if the CPL is not a requirement of the job, but would improve your performance of the job, you're in with a chance.

But get professional advice on that basis before you apply for the definitive ruling.

There's an accountant in Melbourne who is very involved in aviation. PM me & I'll give you his name.

[Keg]

There was a tax ruling a number of years ago for a Flight Engineer who was able to claim for some training (I'm not sure what) on the basis that it made him a better FEO. I read the ruling not long ago so I'm sure you'd be able to find it on the ATO web site.

[mootyman]

Why don't you form a company that provides pilot labour. Make your self the MD and get the company to train you, which will make a loss that you can write off against other incomes?

Just putting it out there have done this before but have not been audited over it yet.

[flametree]

So what if I work for a company that has an airplane, can I as a holder of an ATPL and who have not flown for several years pay for an instrument flight test and the training required to make myself competitive for a position as a pilot coming up?...and claim for it?

[gupta]

Now you are going into the expense of setting up a company, compliance costs and efforts, for what.........? for the benefit of your local accountant who wil have to do the work and charge you.

Personal tax rulings are available - but see an accountant who has expertise in the area.

Mooty
Tis complicated, but if your company has only one client (your previous employer) you are venturing into PERSONAL SERVICES.
DANGER, WILL ROBINSON!!!!

[slice]

Claim whatever you think you can get away with - just be prepared for the big Pineapple if you get audited. People claim all kinds of wild and wacky things based on their personal interpretation of the tax rules!


Bon chance!!!

[gupta]

Sorry Slice that is the road to ruin. The ATO take a very dim view of chancers.

[Teal]

When you claim self-education on your tax return, it has to fall into one of three categories:
There is a direct connection between the self-education and your current work activities because the study maintains or improves a skill or specific knowledge required for your current work activities, or
There is a direct connection between the self-education and your current work activities because you can show that the study leads to, or is likely to lead to, increased income from your current work activities, or
Other circumstances exist where there is a direct connection between your self-eduction and their current work activities.If you have doubt and want certainty, you can apply to the ATO for a written private binding ruling by supplying all the facts, and putting forward your views. (Don't try to get an answer over the phone as the advice you get will be useless). If you receive an adverse ruling it may be possible to address the issues that give rise to the ATO's adverse view, and re-apply, or self-assess the changed circumstances. As suggested in earlier posts, you will get different views from different accountants depending on their risk profile and experiences (if any) with similar situations. If you do go ahead and claim anyway without seeking advice, it would be prudent to spread the costs between at least two financial years to reduce the risk of the ATO inquiries.