据观察，澳大利亚税务局(ATO)考虑了多种因素来决定个人的居住状态，例如，返回澳大利亚的目的和意图，商业/就业和家庭关系，资产的位置和维护，以及生活和社会安排(ATO .gov.au, 2016)。看看基特的意图假设他在澳大利亚呆了四年，买了自己的房子，和家人住在一起，他的工作是永久的，他的生活方式表明基特是澳大利亚的永久居民。与家人一起生活被认为与一个人想要永久或长期留在一个国家的意愿相一致，而基特的生活方式也说明了这一点。他一直和家人住在一起，有自己的房子，这证明他需要考虑作为澳大利亚居民的税收目的。现在的结论是，基特的工资、房屋收入、养老金和其他在澳大利亚产生的收入都将被征税。现在的问题仍然是对他在智利的其他投资组合征税。
assignment 代写 ：澳大利亚永久居住权的案例研究
According to this, if Kit has a permanent residency of Chile which he has acquired after being a resident of Australia, then he is considered as a non-resident. Hence, in that case he will only be taxed on his salary, house income, and any other income that is generated as an act done in Australia and his other investment portfolio in Chile will not be taxed. If he has come to Australia after being a permanent resident of Chile, he will have to dwell for more than six months in a single location in Australia to be eligible to be termed as a Australian resident and being taxed for his income generated in Australia.
It is observed that the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) considers multiple factors for determining the residency status of an individual, such as, the purpose and intention of staying back in Australia, business/employment and family ties, location and maintenance of assets, and living and social arrangements (Ato.gov.au, 2016). Looking at the intention of Kit assuming his four year stay in Australia, purchase of his own house, his living with his family, his employment which is permanent, and his lifestyle indicates that Kit is a permanent resident of the country. Living with a family is considered to be aligned with the intention that one wants to stay permanently or for a lengthy duration in a country, and Kit’s lifestyle speaks the same. He has been living with his family and has his own house, which are proofs that he needs to be considered as an Australian resident for tax purposes. The intention being cleared it is now concluded that Kit will always be taxed for his salary, house income, annuities, and other incomes generated in Australia. The question now remains about the taxation of his other investment portfolio in Chile.
For being termed as a resident of Australia, Kit will have to pass the ‘resides’ test, 183 day test, domicile and permanent place of abode tests, and superannuation and commonwealth test. As he has his own house in Australia, his family lives in Australia and his salary is also paid in Australia, he has an intention of staying in Australia. He is working in an Indonesian coast and gets one month off every third month. During this month, he either lives with his family in Australia or goes to Chile to meet his parents. His intention could change to settle in Chile, so he being absent for most of the year from Australia disproves his resides test.
He is also not living for more than 183 days in Australia and only has about 120 days of holidays which he splits between Australia and Chile. Hence he also fails the 183 day test. He seems to display an intention that he wants to stay in Australia by buying a house and his family living in Australia permanently. Thus, his passing the domicile tests is ambiguous because he is outside and only his family lives alone in Australia for most of the year. If Kit is part of the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme (CSS) then he is considered as an Australian resident. If Kit is not part of the CSS scheme but his wife is a member of the scheme, then Kit automatically is declared as an Australian resident (Ato.gov.au, 2016).
Looking at all the above tests, Kit does not satisfy all tests except the superannuation test under ambiguous condition, and the ‘resides’ test under ambiguous conditions since his actions displays his intention for residing permanently in Australia. Because the situation is ambiguous Kit will only be taxed for his income generated in Australia and not for his other investment portfolio that is in Chile.