Jones acquiesces on TASA Code

ANALYSIS

It was a measure of the proximity of the next Federal Election, the delicate balance in the Senate and the power of strategic lobbying that the so-called Joint Bodies extracted a key win from the Government on the Tax Agent Services (Code of Professional Conduct) Determination.

While, for years, financial advisers have bemoaned their lack of significant influence in Canberra, the Joint Bodies’ lobbying efforts around the TASA Code regulations were proof of what can be extracted from a Government which is seeking to operate in a finely-balanced Parliament.

It is worth acknowledging the muscle and reach provided by the Joint Bodies which is made up of CPA Australia, Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand, Australian Bookkeepers Association, the Financial Advice Association of Australia, the Institute of Public Accountants, the Institute of Financial Professionals Australia, the SMSF Association, the Institute of Certified Bookkeepers, the National Tax and Accountants Association and the Stockbrokers and Investment Advisers Association.

Quite simply, the Joint Bodies can claim representation of the broad sweep of the accounting and advice professions with combined memberships well north of 500,000 and with many of them having well-established lobbying capability and influence.

In truth, the handling of consultations around the TASA Code Determination was poor both on the part of the minister’s office and on the part of the team within Treasury who were charged with the changes.

For a start, the timing of the initial Treasury consultation was problematic because it traversed the traditional Christmas/New Year shutdown period, opening on 10 December 2023 and closing on 21 January, this year.

Further, right from the get-go the submissions received by Treasury made clear that the accounting and tax adviser professions had significant issues with the changes, not least what ultimately became known as the ‘dob-in’ provisions.

Among the comments made by the joint bodies was that the existing Code ‘comprises primarily positive duties, whereas the new Code items are predominantly negative duties”.

“There appears to be no discernible policy reason for altering the legislative scheme in these significant ways for a part of the Code. The Code’s core purpose seems to be dislocated and undermined by this approach. This results in an impairment of the coherence of the Code, which makes it very difficult to read and reconcile as a whole,” the joint bodies said back in January.

Despite almost unanimous concern about the direction of the Government’s changes, the Government and Treasury offered few concessions until the Joint Bodies took their grievances their grievances to the Federal opposition and the cross-bench.

In the end, it became clear that the Minister listened when he realised a disallowance was likely in the Senate thanks of the Federal Opposition and cross-benchers, including ACT Senator, David Pocock.

In the end, CA-ANZ was able to announce that Jones had “issued a signed copy of an amending legislative instrument” to be tabled in the Parliament.

CA-ANZ Group Executive, Advocacy, Simon Grant’s statement said that it was an outcome born of sustained advocacy against overreach.

“We are pleased to see that after significant negotiation, section 45 is now completely revised. It lists specific matters for disclosure and is more closely aligned to the policy intent of the provisions and, importantly, investigations and mental health will not have to be disclosed,” his statement said

“Section 15(2), known as the ‘dob in’ provision, has also been significantly revised. We believe the amended version – which raises the threshold to serious matters and is aligned to members’ existing obligations under the NOCLAR requirements in APES 110 (the Code of Ethics) issued by the Accounting Professional and Ethical Standards Board – is a pragmatic outcome.

“As part of the negotiations we obtained a deferral of the start date until 1 July 2025 for practices with fewer than 100 employees.

“Good policy sometimes involves robust public debate, and we thank the Assistant Treasurer and Treasury for listening to us and taking action,” Grant said.

“We also acknowledge the support of Senator Dean Smith, the Hon. Luke Howarth MP, and Independent Senator David Pocock. Their disallowance motions hastened discussions with the government.

“We would also like to thank the Senate crossbenchers who listened to our concerns and stood with CA ANZ, the professional bodies and tax and BAS agents to secure the commitment to these important changes.

“We look forward to working with the Government and the Tax Practitioners Board to ensure it is applied as intended and that our members have the guidance and understanding they require to fulfil their obligations under the now amended legislation.”