top | item 30399502

(no title)

jazoom | 4 years ago

Can you please link me to the source for this? I'm a GP and I've always found this a bit strange.

discuss

order

jaycar|4 years ago

Might be referring to the ATO withdrawing it's previous advice that GP's didn't fall within the extended definition of employee, for the purposes of the Super Gurantee Act.

Good write up of various contractor cases over the last year, here:

https://hallandwilcox.com.au/thinking/virdis-and-moffet/

"The cases also mark the ATO departure from its long-standing position regarding fee splitting arrangements in the medical field in ATO ID 2011/87, which was withdrawn on 23 August 2021 based on the decision in Moffet. Importantly, ATO ID 2011/87 reflected the ATO’s position for almost 10 years, and has been relied on by many businesses"

viraptor|4 years ago

Sorry, i don't have a link. This info was given to us from mediqfinancial.com.au people (if I remember correctly)