Nick Sherry (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Banking and Financial Services) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Acting Deputy President. I move opposition amendment (1) on sheet 4892:

(1)    Schedule 2, page 39, (after line 10), at the end of Part 2, insert:

Part 2A—Other business related costs

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997

50A Subsection 26-52(4)

Repeal the subsection, substitute:

        (4)    An amount is not a bribe to a foreign public official if:

             (a)    it is incurred for the sole or dominant purpose of expediting or securing the performance of a routine government action of a minor nature; and

             (b)    the value of the benefit was of a minor nature; and

             (c)    as soon as practicable after the loss or outgoing was incurred, the person made a record of the loss or outgoing and the record complies with subsection 70.4(3) of the Criminal Code Act 1995.

On the face of it, there are very minor wording differences, as I pointed out in my speech in the second reading debate. We have based the amendment on the observations and critique of the OECD and the antibribery convention of 1997, seeking to ensure that the Senate adds an amendment that aligns the tax law with the Criminal Code. There was a fair amount of discussion about this in principle, before I dared to mutter that name ‘AWB’ at the estimates hearing and the minister suddenly went into high alert at those magic syllables. But we had a fairly significant discussion on it before we got to AWB. I think it was the mention of the number 300 million that got the minister interested in my line of questioning.

We know—and it was an interesting exchange—that the tax office has not had to deal with any taxpayer under the current provisions. That was clear from the tax office’s evidence. There is some doubt as to the tax office’s powers. We seek to remove that doubt so that no-one can get away with claiming as legitimate deductions what effectively, even though not known at the time, were bribes. We do not want the ATO to have absolutely any doubt about its capacity to ensure the collection of tax owing where a false claim has been made relating to something which was effectively a bribe. That is a very serious matter, and we do not want any doubt over the tax office’s powers in respect of its ability to collect the tax owing and apply the penalties to what are effectively bribes.