South Australian Employers' Chamber of Commerce and Industry Incorporated v Commissioner of State Taxation

[2019] SASCFC 125

South Australia Full Court

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Taxes and Duties
2. › Payroll Tax
3. › Exemptions
4. › Non-profit organisations
5. › Charitable purpose exemption
6. › Whether dominant purpose charitable
7. › Payroll Tax Act 2009 (SA), s 48(1)(c)
1. Charities
2. › Charitable purposes
3. › Fourth Pemsel class
4. › Other purposes beneficial to the community
5. › Advancement of trade and commerce
6. › Whether advancing interests of business is synonymous with advancing trade and commerce
7. › Distinction between private benefit to business and public benefit of trade and commerce
1. Charities
2. › Charitable purposes
3. › Methodology of assessment
4. › Whether appropriate to examine activities separately before holistic assessment
5. › Dominant purpose test
1. Evidence
2. › Opinion evidence
3. › Admissibility
4. › Whether opinion evidence of officers of organisation as to its charitable purposes admissible
5. › Whether such evidence relevant to question of law

Quick Take

The advancement of the interests of business is not synonymous with the advancement of trade and commerce for the purposes of the fourth Pemsel class of charitable purposes. An organisation whose dominant purpose is to advance the sectional interests of its business members does not have a charitable purpose, even if some of its activities incidentally advance trade and commerce. A change to an organisation's constitution to enhance the prospects of a tax exemption, without a corresponding change in activities, will not establish a charitable purpose. Where an organisation carries on diverse activities, it is appropriate for a court to examine activities in discrete groups before conducting a holistic assessment of dominant purpose.