About Us

We work collaboratively with our clients to build strong, sustainable relationships. Our team is committed to delivering consistent high standards of service, and we understand the importance of accessibility. Working with us, you'll enjoy open communication, meaning well scoped, properly resourced and effectively managed matters.

Learn More

Latest Case

Assisting on whole of government technology agreements November 2, 2017

Maddocks advised the Commonwealth Government’s Digital Transformation Agency (DTA) on its whole of government purchasing agreement with SAP. The DTA was set up in 2015 to assist government departments and agencies with digital transformation and … Continued

Latest News

Maddocks receives Employer of Choice for Equal Opportunity citation for 14th consecutive year February 21, 2018

Wednesday 21 February 2018 Maddocks has once again been recognised by the Workplace Gender Equality Agency for its initiatives in achieving gender equality. Maddocks received an Employer of Choice for Equal Opportunity citation today from … Continued

Latest Article

ACCC’s 2018 enforcement priorities – what you need to know February 20, 2018

Background If 2017 was the year that the ACCC emphasised consumer and small business protection (including an effective focus on achieving higher penalties), 2018 is set to be the year of cartels and the continued … Continued

Chairs and boards come under greater pressure to understand tax liabilities

22 August 2011: The chairs and boards of big businesses have been put on notice that they could face serious consequences if they fail to fully understand their company’s tax liabilities with the introduction of the ATO’s new Reportable Tax Position Schedule.

Following the controversial Centro Federal Court ruling earlier this year it is now clear board directors must fully understand all the decisions they make even if the issue is outside their area of expertise

Chris Kinsella, a partner in Maddocks Tax Controversy group, says there has never been greater scrutiny by the ATO, shareholders and the courts on Board decisions and their oversight role.

“With the introduction of RTP schedules from July this year, board members will now be under greater pressure to be fully aware of the impact of their organisation’s tax risks and liabilities on share prices and tax obligations.

“Failure by board members to understand this detail and allow RTP schedules to be returned to the ATO  without proper  disclosure could  see their businesses exposed to potentially severe  sanctions and the directors potentially exposed  to personal litigation,” Mr Kinsella said.

The new RTP schedule requires  businesses to disclose  forensic detail on a company’s potential tax exposures to the ATO and will accelerate the need for boards and senior management to ascertain the risks associated with uncertain tax positions.

The ATO has indicated that the RTP schedule will initially only be directed to taxpayers seen by the ATO  as ‘higher risk’ or as ‘key taxpayers’.

Mr Kinsella said the ATO’s focus on corporate tax risk and tax risk governance will force companies and their directors to identify soft spots in tax positions.

“The Commissioner’s move toward a more imposing approach to compliance and the introduction of the RTP Schedule is a red flag on the landscape of Australian tax law.

“From now on businesses and their Boards need to be prepared to address and justify an uncertain tax position at an early stage.”

22 August 2011: The chairs and boards of big businesses have been put on notice that they could face serious consequences if they fail to fully understand their company’s tax liabilities with the introduction of the ATO’s new Reportable Tax Position Schedule.

Following the controversial Centro Federal Court ruling earlier this year it is now clear board directors must fully understand all the decisions they make even if the issue is outside their area of expertise

Chris Kinsella, a partner in Maddocks Tax Controversy group, says there has never been greater scrutiny by the ATO, shareholders and the courts on Board decisions and their oversight role.

“With the introduction of RTP schedules from July this year, board members will now be under greater pressure to be fully aware of the impact of their organisation’s tax risks and liabilities on share prices and tax obligations.

“Failure by board members to understand this detail and allow RTP schedules to be returned to the ATO  without proper  disclosure could  see their businesses exposed to potentially severe  sanctions and the directors potentially exposed  to personal litigation,” Mr Kinsella said.

The new RTP schedule requires  businesses to disclose  forensic detail on a company’s potential tax exposures to the ATO and will accelerate the need for boards and senior management to ascertain the risks associated with uncertain tax positions.

The ATO has indicated that the RTP schedule will initially only be directed to taxpayers seen by the ATO  as ‘higher risk’ or as ‘key taxpayers’.

Mr Kinsella said the ATO’s focus on corporate tax risk and tax risk governance will force companies and their directors to identify soft spots in tax positions.

“The Commissioner’s move toward a more imposing approach to compliance and the introduction of the RTP Schedule is a red flag on the landscape of Australian tax law.

“From now on businesses and their Boards need to be prepared to address and justify an uncertain tax position at an early stage.”