ATO Civil Strategies to Disrupt Business
A frequent grievance among small business owners is the disruptive tactics and strategies employed by ATO staff.
A typical feature of this strategy involves carrying out regular business audits, compelling business owners to allocate their time to dealing with ATO questions concerning audits that often seem trivial and unwarranted. This ongoing process can be burdensome and oppressive, as it requires attention to matters that may not contribute to the overall growth or efficiency of the business, diverting focus from more pressing operational needs.
The relentless onslaught of time-consuming audits leads to inaccurate evaluations and unwarranted debt notices and statutory demands. Some individuals have reported facing up to 10 business audits and assessments monthly. One taxpayer endured 197 audits over five years.
Australian citizens face limited constitutional rights when contesting ongoing assessments from the ATO. Once the ATO issues a false assessment and subsequent debt notice, it necessitates hiring legal and accounting services, which is costly and time-consuming, depleting the business’s time and resources.
The ATO frequently exercises its garnishing powers to access taxpayers’ funds, often freezing their accounts and leaving them unable to hire legal representation, rendering them defenceless in court.
The ATO has been leveraging its institutional authority to suppress dissent and dismiss appeals, enforcing arbitrary decisions made by staff who are intoxicated by their own power. They show little willingness to collaborate with taxpayers to resolve disputes.
ATO Criminal Strategies to Disrupt Businesses
Another concern is the manipulation of the criminal court system to seize control of a director and their business. When charges are brought, ATO supervisors and officials decline involvement, citing the ongoing court proceedings.
The conduct appears to be similar in every case:
- Make an allegation against a taxpayer.
- Gain control of the taxpayers’ liquid assets by garnishing their bank accounts.
- Threaten a lower-level staff member with prosecution unless they provide evidence and stand with the ATO.
- Prosecute the taxpayer with minimal evidence relying on the fact that they are unable to defend themselves in court as they have no access to funds with which to hire a lawyer, alternatively draw out the criminal prosecution for years until the accused runs out of money.
- Obtain a judgement far in excess of the actual legitimate debt, and ability to pay.
- Bankrupt the taxpayer and blacken their name to prevent any comebacks.
The strategy employed against taxpayers involves isolating them, stripping away their resources for defence, and reaching out to their business associates, contacts, and friends with claims that the taxpayer is a “fraud” to tarnish their reputation. The principle of being innocent until proven guilty is ignored, and for the taxpayer, it is already too late. The damage is done.
In Australia there are few epithets more pejorative than “Bankrupt Alleged Tax Fraud”. Elements of the ATO have weaponised their legislative advantage to destroy taxpayers’ ability to respond to injustice.
ATO Disruption Strategy
- take action against multiple elements of a suspected criminal enterprise at the same time;
- overload the capacity and capability of the suspected criminal enterprise;
- disrupt their income flows and asset ownership to disable and adversely affect the enterprise’s ability to continue in the activities that they are suspected are criminal.
This Disruption Strategy can be incredibly useful when applied to the right criminal enterprises. However, if the ATO get it wrong, and they use this Disruption Strategy against legitimate businesses, by applying the “criminal hammer” to a legitimate ‘legal nail’, the lives and businesses are unjustifiably destroyed. In practical terms the ATO has the intention of destroying the business.
Before implementing this Disruption Strategy, the ATO must collect sufficient credible evidence. Without it, the impact on individuals and businesses can be severely damaging both to their reputation and financial stability.
As reported, ATO criminal investigators misuse this Disruption Strategy on taxpayers with the hope they will collect the evidence to support the alleged offence. Instead of collect the evidence then apply the Disruption Strategy.
The abuse of this authority occurs when the ATO employs misuses this strategy against individuals without sufficient reliable and credible evidence. The ATO misuses this strategy to disable the target so that they are left defenceless against a prosecution with limitless resources. In other words, they cannot defend themselves. The ATO with their limitless resources relying on the public purse can then say “HEY, WE WERE RIGHT“!
When this goes terribly wrong, results in the collapse of businesses, personal bankruptcies and suicide as reported from some of the victims published on this website.
The abuse and misuse of the Disruption Strategy can lead to innocent taxpayers entering a plea of convenience doing deals with the ATO and CDPP because the taxpayer cannot fund the ongoing legal fees to defend the charges.
Cognitive and Confirmatory Bias
If you believe you are unable to restore your reputation with the ATO due to institutional bias, you might be facing challenges from cognitive and confirmatory biases. An official record against a taxpayer can often be misleading, yet people tend to accept it as truth due to anchoring bias. Once something is recorded officially, it influences the perception of every ATO employee.
A common complaint as reported, ATO officers lack sufficient formal qualifications to conduct their duties in audit and R&D assessments, resulting in repeat and continued litany of errors. The “bias” and “litany of errors” becomes the record.
Similarly, when a case is referred to the AFP or CDPP, the ATO’s statements are often affected by this bias, and this is carried forward to other government agencies.
According to reports , the ATO conceals evidence that contradicts the official record to ‘defend themselves and uphold the litany of errors‘. As experienced, CDPP prosecutors have also been known to conceal exculpatory evidence due to bias, which means accused are unable to obtain a fair trial.
What about our Rights?
Right now taxpayers have no rights. Commonwealth government senior executives are all aware of the abuse, misuse of power and corruption, however have chosen to do absolutely nothing. Victims have written letters of complaints, without response.
Safeguarding taxpayer rights is crucial for maintaining trust and confidence, essential for efficient tax administration, especially within a self-assessment system. While institutions might find it convenient to overstep these rights, such actions ultimately undermine the trust-based social contract that supports governance.
However, the Tax Act[1] is now interpreted by the courts to say once an assessment is issued, it is conclusive evidence of a debt. Tax assessments can be flawed however, the ATO use the courts to cripple taxpayers into entering invalid debt arrangements simply because they cannot afford to pay lawyers. There is very little to stop the ATO in debt recovery while the “debt” is being disputed. (Budazic case: In Budazic a Victorian judge set aside a Statutory Demand and the ATO appealed on the basis that the court can’t look behind an assessment and did not have the power to set it aside.)
The Australian Constitution guarantees protection against acquisition of property on unjust terms (Section 51 (xxxi)). This basic right has been systematically abused by the ATO to disempower taxpayers and loot the savings of ordinary Australians.
ATO Senior Executives
ATO victims have recorded many complaints being made to senior level executives, ATO Deputy Commissioners, Assistant Commissioners and the Commissioner of Taxation, all falling on deaf ears.
Complaints have been made by the ATO victims on this website to:
- Former Commissioner of Taxation, Chris Jordan;
- Current Commissioner of Taxation, Rob Heferen
- Second Commissioner, Jeremy Hirschhorn
- Second Commissioner for Law Design and Practice, Kirsten Fish
- Chief Service Delivery Officer, Melinda Smith
- Assistant Commissioner, Janine Clark
Janine Clark serves in the ATO as part of the “Independent Internal Function, Fraud Prevention, and Internal Investigations.” Although her taxpayer-funded role is to ensure accountability among ATO officers, Ms Clark has reportedly overlooked complaints and failed to conduct comprehensive independent investigations into staff misconduct, enabling the abuse in public office. We are waiting on Ms Clark to respond to taxpayer complaints.
Commonwealth Attorney-General
ATO victims have also made direct complaints to the Commonwealth Attorney-General Mr Mark Dreyfus who is the minister of state and chief law officer of the Commonwealth of Australia charged with overseeing federal legal affairs.
In June 2022, Mr Dreyfus was appointed to this significant role by Labour Government Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. Before this appointment, he was a practicing barrister. Disappointingly, Mr Dreyfus has neglected his duty to hold the ATO and CDPP accountable as required under his portfolio in public office and capacity. Under his leadership, these organisations have persisted in misusing their authority.
A substantial and essential transformation is needed within the government structure, alongside establishing robust leadership in the upcoming election. Public servants must be held accountable for the damage caused to Australians.
Legislative changes are necessary to safeguard taxpayers, restrict the ATO’s powers, and ensure their accountability. However, these changes alone are insufficient. Strong leadership is essential to ensure that government agency employees adhere to legal and professional responsibilities in public office.
References
- Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth)