Peer Review: Combined Phase 1 + 2 Peer Review - Australia
This report for Australia has been published on 27 Jan 2011. You can buy this report, or browse it online below.
Skip directly to the Executive Summary. You may also want to view the tables of determinations and ratings.

Determinations and Recommendations
Jurisdictions should ensure that ownership and identity information for all relevant entities and arrangements is available to their competent authorities. (ToR A.1)
|
||
---|---|---|
Determination | Factors | Recommendations |
The element is in place. | Nominees that are not financial service licensees are not required to maintain ownership and identity information in respect of all persons for whom they act as legal owners. | An obligation should be established for all nominees to maintain relevant ownership information where they act as the legal owners on behalf of any other person. |
Phase 2 Rating | Factors | Recommendations |
Compliant. | ||
Jurisdictions should ensure that reliable accounting records are kept for all relevant entities and arrangements. (ToR A.2)
|
||
Determination | Factors | Recommendations |
The element is in place. | ||
Phase 2 Rating | Factors | Recommendations |
Compliant. | ||
Banking information should be available for all account-holders. (ToR A.3)
|
||
Determination | Factors | Recommendations |
The element is in place. | ||
Phase 2 Rating | Factors | Recommendations |
Compliant. | ||
Competent authorities should have the power to obtain and provide information that is the subject of a request under an exchange of information arrangement from any person within their territorial jurisdiction who is in possession or control of such information (irrespective of any legal obligation on such person to maintain the secrecy of the information). (ToR B.1)
|
||
Determination | Factors | Recommendations |
The element is in place. | ||
Phase 2 Rating | Factors | Recommendations |
Compliant. | ||
The rights and safeguards (e.g. notification, appeal rights) that apply to persons in the requested jurisdiction should be compatible with effective exchange of information. (ToR B.2)
|
||
Determination | Factors | Recommendations |
The element is in place. | ||
Phase 2 Rating | Factors | Recommendations |
Compliant. | ||
Exchange of information mechanisms should provide for effective exchange of information. (ToR C.1)
|
||
Determination | Factors | Recommendations |
The element is in place. | One of Australia’s DTAs does not provide for effective exchange of information. | Australia should renegotiate its agreements as necessary so that they provide for effective exchange of information. |
Phase 2 Rating | Factors | Recommendations |
Compliant. | ||
The jurisdictions' network of information exchange mechanisms should cover all relevant partners. (ToR C.2)
|
||
Determination | Factors | Recommendations |
The element is in place. | ||
Phase 2 Rating | Factors | Recommendations |
Compliant. | ||
The jurisdictions' mechanisms for exchange of information should have adequate provisions to ensure the confidentiality of information received. (ToR C.3)
|
||
Determination | Factors | Recommendations |
The element is in place. | ||
Phase 2 Rating | Factors | Recommendations |
Compliant. | ||
The exchange of information mechanisms should respect the rights and safeguards of taxpayers and third parties. (ToR C.4)
|
||
Determination | Factors | Recommendations |
The element is in place. | ||
Phase 2 Rating | Factors | Recommendations |
Compliant. | The effect of the accountants’ concession on exchange of information in practice should be monitored by the ATO on an ongoing basis. | The EOI Unit should maintain a record of all EOI cases in which the accountants concession is claimed together with an analysis of its effect in each case on the Unit’s ability to provide the information requested. |
The jurisdiction should provide information under its network of agreements in a timely manner. (ToR C.5)
|
||
Determination | Factors | Recommendations |
The assessment team is not in a position to evaluate whether this element is in place, as it involves issues of practice that are dealt with in the Phase 2 review. | ||
Phase 2 Rating | Factors | Recommendations |
Compliant. | Australia did not always provide an update or status report to its DTA partners within ninety days in the event that it is unable to provide a substantive response within that time. | Australia should ensure that the new system put in place to provide updates to EOI partners after 90 days in those cases where it is not possible to provide a substantive response within that timeframe operates effectively. |