The IPA submitted its comments as part of a consultation from the ATO looking at its performance audit to assess the effectiveness of its engagement with tax practitioners in achieving efficient and effective tax and superannuation systems.
“We receive regular communications from our members on the frustrations with the ATO systems and processes in administering the tax system,” the IPA said in its submission.
“In general, these concerns stem from time-wasting and inefficiencies from routine dealings with the ATO. Our members have been under significant pressure with managing the impact of the pandemic on their clients.
“This has included dealing with the ATO as the government agency responsible for administering some of the pandemic incentive schemes. These pressures have not abated as there is still ongoing support required to return businesses to sustainable levels.
“We are aware of the burden this can place on our members and the potential impact on mental health. Our members have specifically identified frustrations with the processes and interactions of the ATO as adding to their mental health concerns.
“This is partially due to the extra work undertaken to assist clients accessing both Federal and more recently State Based business support COVID initiatives. Tax practitioners are generally time poor and any inefficiencies in the current climate are not well received.”
The IPA made a number of recommendations in its submission including introducing a scheme for compensation for detriment caused by defective administration.
“Our members usually do not pass on any charges to their clients in relation to the extra time taken in dealing with ATO matters as the time taken is not commensurate with the value perceived by either the tax practitioner or their clients as taxpayers. Our members treat this time as a sunk cost of doing business,” the IPA stated.
“To prove detriment in the case of client-related affairs, costs need to be raised against the client before applying to the ATO for compensation. This is often something that is not in either party’s best interests and nor is it efficient; a more streamlined and less bureaucratic approach is required.”
One of the IPA’s major concerns dealt with the way in which tax practitioners communicate with the ATO and it highlighted the inefficiencies and confusion surrounding the ATO’s portal.
“Tax practitioners’ main interaction with the ATO is via OSfA. OSfA is a big improvement on the previous outdated portal system which was far from best practice and long overdue in its replacement,” the IPA submission stated.
“It took a high level of advocacy to encourage the ATO to bring this new system (OSfA) into existence. This system is not as reliable and on-line as tax practitioners require. There are scheduled downtimes communicated through weekly tax professional newsletters and web status pages – however, the amount of downtime and unscheduled downtime is unacceptable. Tax practitioners, even before the pandemic, do not keep traditional business hours and often work on weekends, and OSfA is not available when required.”
The submission also raised concerns about the relationship between the ATO and the Tax Practitioners Board saying that many members saw the TPB as an extension of the ATO.
“Tax practitioners report complaints concerning unregistered practitioners and other issues of misconduct to maintain professional standards, however, there is little recourse by the TPB in remedying these rogue elements. There seems to be little protection of the profession by the TPB in these circumstances,” the IPA stated.
To read the full submission go to https://www.publicaccountants.org.au/media/3938967/submission-ANAO-Tax-agent-IPA-April18-Website-26-4-2022.pdf
