HOLMES
INSTITUTE
FACULTY OF
HIGHER
EDUCATION
Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines
Trimester T1 2020
Unit Code HI6028
Unit Title Taxation Theory, Practice & Law
Assessment Type Assignment
Assessment Title Individual Assignment
Purpose of the assessment (with
ULO Mapping) Students are required to follow the instructions by your lecturer to confirm any relevant information. You also need to follow any relevant announcement on Blackboard to confirm the due date and time of the assignment.
The individual assignment will assess students on the following learning outcomes:
1. Demonstrate an understanding of the Australian income tax system, the concept of deductions, CGT, general anti-avoidance provisions and income tax administration. (ULO 1).
2. Identify and critically analyse taxation issues. (ULO 2).
3. Interpret the relevant taxation legislations and case law. (ULO 3).
4. Apply taxation principles to real life problems. (ULO 4).
Weight This assignment task accounts for 25 % of total marks in this unit.
Total Marks This assignment task accounts for 25 marks of total marks in this unit.
Word limit Max 2000 words (acceptable to be 10% above or below this word limit).
Due Date Refer to the Unit Outline, as Normal & Block Modes have different due dates.
Submission Guidelines Instructions: Please read carefully to avoid mistakes.
• Answer all questions.
• This assignment along with a completed Assignment Cover Page is to be submitted on Blackboard by the due date in soft-copy only.
• The self-check links are no longer available as a separate link in each unit’s assessment. Students are now limited to attempt any given assignment submission a maximum of three times. After every attempt you will receive a SafeAssign originality report with Blackboard Learning Management System. This will provide detailed information about the matches found between your submitted works and existing sources.
• The assignment is to be submitted in accordance with assessment policy stated in the Unit Outline and Student Handbook.
• It is the responsibility of the student submitting the work to ensure that the work is in fact his/her own work. Incorporating another’s work or ideas into one’s own work without appropriate acknowledgement is an academic offence.
• The assignment must be in MS Word format, no spacing, 12-pt Arial font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings and page numbers.
• Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using Harvard referencing style. You also must refer to relevant legislation and/or case law in your answer. Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using Harvard referencing style.
• Note: Assessment task is set around the work that you have done in class. You are not expected to go outside the content of the unit but you are expected to explore it.
Individual Assignment Specifications
Purpose:
This assignment aims at assessing students on the Learning Outcome (LO) from 1 to 4 as mentioned above.
Assignment Structure should be as the follows:
QUESTION 1: DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CAPITAL AND REVENUE EXPENDITURE Weighting
Identification of material facts (issues) regarding John’s prepaid rent. 2 %
Identification and analysis of legal issues / legal question and relevant taxation law in regards to casino’s rental (e.g. ITAA 1936 and ITAA 1997). 2 %
Thorough yet succinct application of tax law (e.g. ITAA 1936 and ITAA 1997) to material facts in John’s case. 2 %
Detailed and accurate identification of the lump sum rental payment are reached. 3 %
Correct information and taxation law have been used and properly cited. A detailed analysis has been performed. 3 %
Ability to show excellent understanding of the cases and/or section of legislation, its context and application of taxation law. 3 %
QUESTION 1 TOTAL MARKS: 15 %
QUESTION 2: TRAVELLING BETWEEN TWO PLACES OF WORK Weighting
Identification of material facts regarding the deductibility of Alex’s travelling expenses discussed in the assignment question. 1 %
Identification and analysis of legal issues / legal question and relevant taxation law. 2 %
Thorough yet succinct application of ITAA 1997 to material facts. 2 %
Detailed and accurate conclusions are reached from the scenario discussion. 1 %
Correct information and taxation law have been used and properly cited. A detailed analysis has been performed. 2 %
Students are able to demonstrate understanding of the cases and/or section of legislation, its context and application of taxation law. 2 %
QUESTION 2 TOTAL MARKS: 10 %
Assignments’ Instructions and Requirements
QUESTION 1- (15 MARKS)
John has applied and been approved a licence to operate a casino in Melbourne, which later on he named it The Casino East. John has received 10-year licence from Victorian Government to operate the casino. He also received approval for Casino’s building for a long period of time (90 years). John was instructed by the relevant Government agency to pay $180 million for the approved casino’s licence and $80 million as prepaid rent covering the first 10 years of casino’s rental. John has negotiated to pay $400,000 rental per year for the remaining 80 years of the lease.
With reference to relevant legislation and case law discuss whether casinos prepaid rent is considered a revenue expense or a capital expense.
QUESTION 2 - (10 MARKS)
Alex Kingsford is a mechanical engineer working for ABC Engineering in Melbourne. Alex owns a property in Dandenong, Victorian where he and his family are residing. He also runs a homebased food catering business, preparing food for local residents and school canteens. Catering business is well-structured. Alex works 15 days a month and earns a substantial income from the catering services business. He is travelling from ABC Engineering workshop to his homebased business by car or sometimes Uber. When he lodged his tax return in July 2019, he has requested a deduction for a substantial amount of travelling expenses between the ABC Engineering workshop and home-based food business.
Alex is now seeking your advice. With reference to relevant legislation and case law discuss whether Alex’s travelling expenses between the ABC Engineering workshop and his homebased catering business is an allowable deduction.
Assignment Structure should be as the following (students’ responses involves calculations, and students must refer to the relevant legislation and/or cases whenever required according to the questions).
Marking criteria
Marking criteria Weighting
Question 1
Identification of material facts (issues) regarding John’s prepaid rent. 2 marks
Identification and analysis of legal issues / legal question and relevant taxation law in regards to casino’s rental (e.g. ITAA 1936 and ITAA 1997). 2 marks
Thorough yet succinct application of tax law (e.g. ITAA 1936 and ITAA 1997) to material facts in John’s case. 2 marks
Detailed and accurate identification of the lump sum rental payment are reached. 3 marks
Correct information and taxation law have been used and properly cited. A detailed analysis has been performed. 3 marks
Ability to show excellent understanding of the cases and/or section of legislation, its context and application of taxation law. 3 marks
QUESTION 1 TOTAL MARKS: 15 marks
Question 2
Identification of material facts regarding the deductibility of Alex’s travelling expenses discussed in the assignment question. 1 mark
Identification and analysis of legal issues / legal question and relevant taxation law. 2 marks
Thorough yet succinct application of ITAA 1997 to material facts. 2 marks
Detailed and accurate conclusions are reached from the scenario discussion. 1 mark
Correct information and taxation law have been used and properly cited. A detailed analysis has been performed. 2 marks
Students are able to demonstrate understanding of the cases and/or section of legislation, its context and application of taxation law. 2 marks
QUESTION 2 TOTAL MARKS: 10 marks
Marking Rubric
Criteria Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory
Demonstrated ability to identify issues relating to taxation law: Knowledge and understanding of the casinos prepaid rent. Comprehensive
identification of key issues. Frequent links drawn across topics or to extraneous materials. Student property generates questions and problems around a case. Very good
identification and discussion of issues. Several links drawn across topics or to extraneous materials. Majority of relevant issues identities and discussed. Some links drawn across topics or to extraneous materials.
Some relevant issues overlooked or misunderstood. Few links made drawn across topics or to extraneous materials. Failure to identify and discuss relevant issues. No links made drawn across topics or to extraneous materials.
Ability to synthesise material in order to raise issues or construct a persuasive argument. Ability to engage in a reflective discourse: Synthesis analysis and argument. Thorough analysis and synthesis of issues. Persuasively argued throughout, contrary arguments anticipated. Excellent critical evaluation of other metrical and appropriate response. Detailed conclusion is reached from the discussion. Very good analysis, argument welldeveloped and supported, some critical evaluation of other material and appropriate response. Conclusion is reached from the discussion. Some analysis of issues:
argument may be underdeveloped or unpersuasive. Limited critical evaluation and response to other material. Conclusion is reached but do not supports the analysis. Mainly descriptive with little analysis of issues basic argument is unclear or use undeveloped or not well supported. Limited reference to other material. The response shows some understanding of the case, its context and application of tax law. Insufficient analysis argument is lacking or unsound, failure to use relevant materials, or use of materials may indicate confusion or misunderstanding. No response to other material. No conclusion is given.
Writing presentation and referencing Clear and logical organisation; precise and concise writing. Minimal errors in expression, grammar, spelling or punctuation. Excellent and complete referencing. Grammar and
spelling are correct. Very good structure and organisation. Generally well- written. Occasional minor flaws in
expression, grammar,
spelling or punctuation. Correct and complete referencing. Generally coherent structure a with occasional deficiencies; reasonably well written. Some flaws in expression, grammar,
spelling or punctuation. Some defects in structure and organisation; writing may be
difficult to follow in parts. Flaws in expression, grammar, spelling or punctuation; a number of missing, incomplete or incorrect footnote citations.
Referencing omissions. Structure and organisation incoherent or lacking; poorly written, difficult to follow. Frequent or repeated flaws in expression, grammar, spelling or punctuation; inadequate citation of sources. Errors in referencing.