Upcoming ATO reporting obligations

The ATO requires employers that issue shares or share options to employees to complete their reporting obligations. The deadlines to comply with the reporting requirements are:

• ESS statements are due to be issued to employees by 14 July 2026
• ATO reports are due for lodgement with the ATO by 14 August 2026

What do the ATO reporting obligations mean for you?

Our innovative solution | CTS ESS Toolkit

Our CTS ESS Toolkit, an ATO-approved and compliant software solution, enables employers to simplify their online annual employee share scheme reporting obligations.

We are one of only a handful of providers to have passed ATO testing and have ATO approval for our specialised software. Using the CTS ESS Toolkit, SW has been successfully working with businesses to meet their ESS lodgement requirements.

The table below outlines the types of companies that are most likely to benefit from using the CTS ESS Toolkit.

Significant global entities (SGE)

SGEs are entities that have an annual global turnover of A$1bn or more. SGEs are subject to increased Failure to Lodge (FTL) penalties for late lodgement of every ATO document or approved form. The SGE penalties are currently $165,000 for each 28 days in which an approved form is lodged after the due date, up to a maximum of $825,000. The lodgement of ESS reporting falls within this definition.

The public officer of the company is responsible for the company’s obligations under the income tax law, including the timely lodgement of approved forms with the ATO. If your company is part of an SGE, we recommend implementing systems to ensure timely lodgement of ESS reports with the ATO.

How SW can help

There is limited time to meet ESS reporting requirements, and the ATO is placing particular emphasis on ensuring corporates comply with timely and accurate reporting obligations.

Now is the time to ensure your business is prepared for the reporting season. We offer a fully outsourced ESS reporting service or a software licensing option.

Please contact Sam Morris or Justin Batticciotto to learn how to comply with the ATO reporting requirements and to discover how our CTS ESS Toolkit can assist.

2026 Federal Budget announcement

Whilst the 2026 Federal Budget does not directly impact the ESS rules, the proposed capital gains tax (CGT) reforms, which would replace the 50% CGT discount with inflation indexation and introduce a minimum 30% tax rate from 1 July 2027, will change the benefit of some ESS plans for employees. As a result, ESS structures, particularly for start-ups, may become less tax advantaged and may require redesign if the proposed changes proceed without any adjustments for start-ups.

Additional services

ESS plan and review

We can conduct a comprehensive review of your ESS framework and plan(s) to support your business in understanding and addressing key areas. As part of this review, we can:

• assess your existing share scheme structure
• confirm whether awards are taxed at grant or deferred
• identify payroll tax implications and risks
• provide clear guidance on ATO and state reporting obligations
• review prior year ESS reporting for errors or gaps
• prepare and lodge amendments and voluntary disclosures
• liaise with the ATO and state revenue offices
• help minimise penalties, interest, and audit risk
• advise on new plan design or changes to existing schemes
• assist with annual reporting and documentation.

Contacts

Sam Morris
E: smorris@sw-au-com

Justin Batticciotto
E: jbatticciotto@sw-au.com

The post Simplify employee share scheme reporting with the CTS ESS Toolkit appeared first on SW Accountants & Advisors.

Join our Property Development specialists online as they unpack these key developments and what they mean in practice.

Developers are facing increasing complexity across funding models, profit allocation arrangements and governance. This webinar will provide a clear, practical overview of the evolving tax and structuring landscape, and what you need to know to manage risk and support future projects.

Topics include:

• Property development structures and emerging ATO focus areas
• PCG developments and governance considerations
• Federal Budget updates impacting the property sector

The webinar will also include an opportunity for discussion and questions with our specialists.

Date

Wednesday 10 June 2026

Location

Online nationally – via Zoom webinar

Time

1pm to 2pm AEST

SW Speakers

Blake Rodgers
Director, Business & Private Client Advisory 

Sejla Kadric
Director, Business & Private Client Advisory 

Matt Birrell
Director, Tax

The post Property Developers update webinar  appeared first on SW Accountants & Advisors.

The recent Federal Budget has created plenty of headlines and plenty of uncertainty.
Before making major decisions based on media commentary, join our webinar series as our specialists Matt Birrell, Chris Dexter, Blake Rodgers, and Dale Sloman unpack the proposed changes and explain what they may mean for you.

Our team is reviewing the detail, monitoring Treasury, ATO and professional body updates, and assessing the practical implications as further information becomes available.

Some key topics include:

• Negative gearing
• Capital Gains Tax
• Trust tax

Series program

Session 1 – Negative gearing

Tuesday, 9 June 2026

Understand the proposed changes to negative gearing and what they may mean for property investors, including key dates, transitional considerations and why it is important not to rush decisions.

Session 2 – Capital Gains Tax (CGT)

Tuesday, 16 June 2026

Explore the proposed CGT reforms, including changes to the 50% discount and proposed minimum tax measures, and what these changes could mean for investments, business assets and future planning.

Session 3 – Trust tax

Tuesday, 23 June 2026

Learn about the proposed trust tax measures, including the proposed 30% minimum tax on discretionary trust distributions and key considerations for existing trust structures.

Event details

Location

Online nationally – via Zoom webinar

Time

12.30pm – 1pm (AEST)

10.30am – 11am (AWST)

Register for the webinars here

Expert speakers

Matt Birrell
Director
SW

Blake Rodgers 
Director
SW

Chris Dexter
Director
SW

Dale Sloman
Associate Director
SW

The post FedBud 2026 follow-up webinar series appeared first on SW Accountants & Advisors.

The session will deliver a deeper insight into the technical and information requirements when preparing accounts, demonstrated how tax components are calculated and common accounting vs. tax differences.

Our fund experts will help you better understand:

• Update on the significant proposed tax changes arising from the recent Federal Budget
• The technical and information requirements when preparing accounts
• Demonstrate how tax components are calculated
• Common accounting vs. tax differences
• The basic accounting and tax knowledge of property trusts
• Key financial reporting requirements for funds
• Common issues for ordinary trusts, MITs and AMITs – including issues that affect property, equity and debt funds
• Update on recent tax and accounting changes
• ASIC and credit fund update

Date

Wednesday, 24 June 2026

Location

Online nationally – via Zoom webinar

Time

1.30pm – 2.30pm (AEST)

SW Speakers

René Muller
Partner, Assurance and Advisory Services
SW 

Luke Fernandes
Director, Tax
SW 

The post Funds Tax & Accounting technical training appeared first on SW Accountants & Advisors.

Australia continues to face a challenging outlook, with inflation remaining elevated, interest rates still weighing on borrowers, and cost-of-living and housing pressures persisting. Alongside global instability and slowing economic growth, many Australians are bracing for a more constrained period ahead and are closely examining what has been announced, and what may be hidden in the detail.

Through our From Hidden to Headline lens, we explore the key takeaways from the 2026 Federal Budget and what’s now coming into view for businesses, industries, and communities across Australia, highlighting potential risks, challenges, emerging trends, and areas of opportunity.

What the Federal Budget means for you

Our Fast Facts provide a snapshot of the key announcements and insights, helping you understand the impacts for your sector.

Take a look at what the Federal Budget means for you in 2026:

Individuals & SMEs

Property & Infrastructure

R&D

Agribusiness

Energy & Resources

Financial Services

Follow us on LinkedIn to receive the latest updates on Federal Budget and other important industry news.

Missed the webinar?

For those who were unable to attend, here is a recap of the webinar, which explored the 2026 Federal Budget through our From Hidden to Headline lens, focusing on what the announcements mean in practice for businesses, industries, and communities across Australia.

The post FedBud 26 overview appeared first on SW Accountants & Advisors.

The story so far

Toowoomba Regional Council applied for a private ruling asking whether Grand Central’s car park — which offers three hours’ free parking, a $20 all-day maximum cap, and multiple free-parking concessions — qualifies as a ‘commercial parking station’ under sections 39A and 136 of the FBTAA. The answer matters because the Council’s premises are location within one kilometre of the centre, which would trigger FBT on free employee parking.

How the case unfolded

Round 1: February 2025 - Logan J (FCA)

‘Commercial’ requires a profit-making purpose. As the Grand Central car park was operated to attract shoppers rather than generate profit, the Council succeeded.

Round 2: April 2026 - McElwaine, Feutrill & Wheatley JJ (FCAFC)

The Full Federal Court rejected that approach, holding that ‘commercial’ simply means engaged in commerce, with no profit motive required. The Commissioner’s appeal was allowed.

What the Full Court held

The majority (McElwaine and Wheatley JJ) held that the statutory text does not confine a ‘permanent commercial car parking facility’ to operations run for profit. Instead, the definition requires physical permanence, availability to the public in the ordinary course of business, and the payment of a fee — nothing more. Parliament cast the net wide to address tax inequity, and that introducing a profit requirement would bring an unverifiable internal management test that the legislation simply does not support.

Feutrill J reached the same result, but by a different route, stating that a ‘commercial parking station’ must be a facility where fees reflect arm’s length market value. On that view, the Explanatory Memorandum examples, including penalty-rate shopper car parks, are not appropriate comparators precisely because their fees do not reflect that market value. However, that is not the same as requiring the operator to be profit-motivated.

The Full Court also noted that the 1994 amendment expressly excluded kerbside parking meters, which are unlikely to be profitable, confirming that profitability was never a precondition in the original text.

What this means for you

The ATO’s interim decision impact statement (DIS), which directed continued reliance on TR 2021/2, has been vindicated. Employers who stopped treating shopping centre, hospital, university, or hotel car parks as ‘commercial parking stations’ following Logan J’s decision should now review their compliance position for:

• the current FBT year (ended 31 March 2026) and consider their car parking FBT position
• the prior FBT year (ended 30 March 2025) and consider whether amended returns are needed.

For employers who did comply with TR 2021/2 throughout, no change is required.

How SW can help

For employers who may now have FBT exposure on car parking because of the Toowoomba decision, SW can assist in assessing your position and ensuring compliance with the ATO’s current interpretation. This includes reviewing historical and current FBT obligations, identifying potential amendments, and advising on practical next steps.

For tailored support with your FBT car parking obligations, our CTSplus FBT team can help you navigate the requirements and manage your compliance obligations with confidence and clarity. To find out more, click here to email our CTS team and a member of our team will be in touch within one business day. You can also visit our CTSplus FBT page to learn more about how we can support your FBT compliance needs.

Contributors

Rahul Sanghani

The post Full Federal Court confirms hospital, university & shopping centre car parks can be ‘commercial’ for FBT purposes appeared first on SW Accountants & Advisors.

Our experts will provide you with topical content of relevance as well as an update on what’s new in financial reporting, including information about the following topics:

• Accounting standard changes  
• International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee update  
• Key focus areas for 30 June reporting  
• ASIC update  
• Other regulatory changes
• Insights from the first sustainability reporting cycle

Financial Reporting update for 30 June 2026

Expert speakers

Tom Mullarkey
Partner
SW

René Muller 
Partner
SW

Jimmy Cao
Associate Director
SW

The post Financial Reporting webinar series appeared first on SW Accountants & Advisors.

Our seminar will be delivered in an interactive format with SW experts Daren Yeoh, Tax Director, Antony Cheung, Associate Director and Ross Kelly, Transfer Pricing Manager. Our speakers will equip you with invaluable insights into the latest developments in corporate and international income tax.

This seminar will explore the following topics:

• Corporate tax updates – An overview of recent and proposed legislative changes, including debt and financing rule changes, non‑resident capital gains tax developments, ATO compliance priorities, recent court decisions, and other emerging issues relevant to corporate groups.
• Transfer pricing update – Key developments in transfer pricing, with a focus on changes to Country‑by‑Country (CbC) reporting requirements and what these mean in practice.
• Pillar Two update – An outline of Pillar Two compliance obligations, including practical considerations for the preparation and lodgement of the GloBE Information Return and the Combined Global and Domestic Minimum Tax Return.

SW Speakers

Daren Yeoh
Partner and Corporate & International Tax Director

Antony Cheung
Associate Director

Ross Kelly
Transfer Pricing Manager

The post Corporate Tax update appeared first on SW Accountants & Advisors.

Background

Mr Morton was a retired farmer who owned land in Tarneit, Victoria, known as ‘Dave’s Block’. The land had been used for farming continuously for many years before it was rezoned from rural to residential use in 2010, making farming increasingly unviable. Mr Morton and his family wanted to get the best value for their land, so they hired a developer to divide it up, prepare it, and sell it as a residential estate.

They signed contracts with the developer, who was given broad control over financing, dividing the land, earthworks, marketing, and selling the land. The developer was responsible for all the costs and activities and was paid a fee based on a percentage of sales. Critically, Mr. Morton insisted that his land not be used as security for any development finance.

The land was subdivided into residential and commercial lots, and settlements occurred between 2019 and 2021. The Commissioner issued amended assessments, treating the sale proceeds as assessable income, on the basis that Mr Morton was either carrying on a property development business or had ventured the land into a profit-making scheme.

Mr Morton disagreed, arguing that the sales represented a one-off gain from selling something he owned, not regular income from business.

Legal issues

The Commissioner argued that the proceeds were assessable income on two alternative grounds under the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997:

• Mr Morton carried on a business of residential development, deeming the land trading stock
• the proceeds arose from a profit-making scheme under section 15-15.

Mr Morton argued that he had done no more than realise a long-held capital asset, by enterprising means.

The decision

The Full Court unanimously dismissed the Commissioner’s appeal, affirming the primary judge’s conclusion that Mr Morton was merely realising a capital asset.

The Court placed weight on the following factors:

No original profit-making purpose

Mr Morton acquired the land from his father in 1980 to farm, not to develop or sell. The decision to subdivide was driven by external forces — rezoning, rising rates and land tax, and the declining viability of farming.

Limited and passive involvement

Mr Morton played little active role in the development. He did not oversee the project, contribute to planning applications, organise finance, or manage construction. He did not even read the monthly reports the developer provided under the agreement.

Developer bore the commercial risk

The developer was solely responsible for all development costs and financing. Mr Morton’s land was not used as security — a condition he had insisted on from the outset. The Court found this to be a highly significant factor distinguishing realisation from business activity.

Developer acted independently, not as Mr Morton’s agent in a general sense

While the development agreement contained agency-type and power of attorney provisions, the Court found these were facilitative only and limited to enabling the developer to fulfil Mr Morton’s legal obligations, such as executing contracts of sale. They did not convert the developer’s activities into activities carried on by Mr Morton himself.

Scale alone is not determinative

The Court affirmed the well-established principle that the magnitude and the sophistication of a realisation alone does not convert it into a business or profit-making scheme.

Importantly, the Court looked beyond the legal form of the development agreement to its commercial substance — particularly who bore risk, who controlled the project, and whose business the development truly was.

Practical implications

The Morton case is a useful reference point for landowners and advisors navigating the capital/revenue boundary where subdivision is involved. It highlights that outcomes in subdivision cases remain highly fact-dependent. In particular, advisors should focus on:

• who bears financial risk, including funding and security arrangements
• the degree of the landowner’s control and involvement
• the commercial substance of the development agreement
• the landowner’s purpose at acquisition and at the time of subdivision.

The decision sits comfortably alongside earlier cases distinguishing mere realisation from development activity. It reinforces that even modern, large-scale subdivisions can remain capital on the right facts, for example where the landowner lacks development expertise, does not assume financial exposure, and does not exercise significant control over the project. The structure and substance of development agreements should be closely scrutinised.

How SW can help

The Morton decision confirms that tax treatment of land subdivision depends heavily on the specific facts and the terms of the development arrangements. Early and careful structuring of these arrangements is essential.

SW can assist by reviewing development agreements, assessing the risk and control profile of proposed arrangements, and advising on the appropriate tax treatment before transactions are committed to. Please contact your SW advisor to discuss further.

Contributors

Rahul Sanghani

Ned Galloway

Nicolas Hodge

The post Full Federal Court confirms capital treatment for subdivided farmland appeared first on SW Accountants & Advisors.

Treasury has released draft legislation that would materially widen the scope of assets subject to Australian capital gains tax by broadening the definition of taxable Australian real property. This would extend beyond land and buildings to a wider range of land‑connected assets, including infrastructure, energy projects, and certain water rights and entitlements.

The proposals include ‘clarifying’ amendments with retrospective effect and would significantly reshape exit economics for foreign investors – particularly in sectors where value is derived from Australian land or natural resources. While a temporary concession is offered for renewable energy investments, the overall policy direction is toward tougher enforcement, a broader CGT base, and reduced structural certainty for inbound capital.

What is being proposed

A broader CGT net focused on energy and infrastructure assets

The reforms retrospectively (from 2006) expand the definition of Taxable Australian Real Property (TARP) beyond traditional land and buildings to capture assets with a close economic connection to Australian land or natural resources. In practical terms, this significantly widens the CGT net over energy and infrastructure assets, including solar farms, wind projects, battery energy storage systems, and associated transmission assets, many of which have historically been treated as outside the foreign resident CGT regime.

The expanded definition also extends, on a prospective basis, to other land‑connected resource interests such as water rights and water access entitlements, particularly where these are integral to the productive use or value of land.

Federal tax law to override state property concepts (retrospective)

The draft legislation confirms that state and territory property law concepts – such as severance rules or statutory characterisations of fixtures, chattels, or resource rights – do not determine whether an asset is real property for federal CGT purposes.

Tightened rules for indirect interests

The principal asset test for indirect interests in companies and trusts is refined, moving from a point in time (CGT event date) to a 365-day test, reducing the ability to manage CGT exposure through timing or balance‑sheet structuring.

Time-limited concession for renewable energy assets

A targeted concession provides a 50% CGT discount for qualifying disposals of renewable energy assets (and certain indirect interests) by foreign residents, available only until 30 June 2030. While it offers transitional relief for solar, wind, and battery projects, the concession is expressly temporary and does not alter the longer‑term expansion of the CGT base.

The concession does not extend to other natural‑resource interests, such as water rights, and does not mitigate any historical exposure arising from the retrospective asset‑definition changes.

Treaty impact

Treasury proposes to amend the International Tax Agreement Act to ensure that the definition of real property and immovable property in Australia’s double tax agreements (DTAs) will be in line with the proposed domestic definition.

Most of Australia’s treaties already permit Australia to tax capital gains derived from real property situated in Australia, including gains from indirect interests in land‑rich entities. The reforms operate by materially expanding the domestic definition of ‘real property’, meaning that a broader range of assets is more likely to fall within those existing treaty taxing rights. As a result, while treaty protection remains available in principle, fewer assets will qualify for it.

Importantly, the retrospective nature of the domestic law changes will impact investors in various jurisdiction differently, depending on the allocation of taxing rights to income not expressly mentioned in DTAs.

Who is most affected

Investments in Australian land‑connected assets may now be subject to Australian CGT, and may, in some cases, have already been subject to CGT even where they were previously treated as outside the regime.

Taxpayers most affected by these proposals include:

• foreign investors in energy and infrastructure assets, including solar, wind, battery energy storage projects, transmission assets, and other land‑connected infrastructure
• investors holding interests in land‑rich companies, trusts, or stapled structures, particularly where value is driven by fixed assets installed on Australian land
• foreign investors relying on state‑law characterisation or treaty assumptions to support CGT outcomes for land‑connected assets
• funds with near‑term exit, refinancing, or portfolio rebalancing events, where CGT now affects pricing and internal rates of return
• investors in agricultural or farmland assets where water rights or water access entitlements are a significant component of asset value, particularly where those rights are economically integrated with land use or productivity.

Timing and transitional snapshot

The proposed statutory definition of ‘real property’ (including assets with a close economic connection to Australian land) is intended to apply retrospectively to CGT events occurring on or after 12 December 2006, except for water rights, which will apply prospectively.

By contrast, the broader net‑widening reforms to the foreign resident CGT regime generally apply prospectively to CGT events occurring from the quarter following when the Bill receives Royal Assent.

The 50% CGT discount for renewable energy assets applies only from commencement until 30 June 2030 of the legislation and does not provide relief for any historical or retrospective exposure.

How SW can help

We can assist you in understanding the proposed reforms and their potential impact on existing and future investments. In particular, we can help you to:

• map assets and investment structures against the expanded definition of taxable Australian real property
• re‑model exit scenarios on the basis of full Australian CGT exposure
• reassess reliance on treaty protections and state‑law concepts in light of the proposed changes
• identify eligibility and timing constraints associated with the renewable energy CGT concession
• engage early in transaction planning and, where appropriate, prepare submissions as part of the consultation process
• incorporate CGT risk more explicitly into acquisition, holding, financing, and exit decisions.

Contributor

Ned Galloway

The post Foreign investors in the firing line: Treasury’s expanded CGT regime appeared first on SW Accountants & Advisors.