Tax. Cheaper to not claim at all (for me)??

• 

  ilostnemo on 07/09/2014 - 17:28

  +2

  Based on your laptop being using only 60% for work, I'd guess you can only claim depreciation on the 60% ie $480 which will be $160 for the 1st year and less for the following years.

  You still have to be able to inform them on how you got to the amount of the claim, but you don't actually need written evidence.

  You must be able to substantiate your claims for deductions with written evidence if the total amount of deductions you are claiming is greater than $300. The records you keep must prove the total amount, not just the amount over $300.

  If the total amount you are claiming is $300 or less, you need to be able to show how you worked out your claims, but you do not need written evidence.

  • 

    [Deactivated] on 07/09/2014 - 18:41

    Thank you for your reply.

    Just to confirm:

    If I claim $160 this year for the laptop, and only claim this, I do not need written evidence, since the total claim is less than $300…

    And, I only need to 'inform' them, of how things worked out to be less than $300, only if they ask…?

    At this rate, isn't it better to just claim $300 (like everyone else, let's be honest), rather than $160?

• 

  Smulder on 07/09/2014 - 18:37

  +3

  The best thing to do would be to claim the depreciation on the computer, and then claim the difference between the depreciation and $300 as 'other work related expense', to bring it up to the $300 total.

  That way if the ATO ever asks you to justify your claims, you only need to justify $130-ish of 'made up' expense rather than the full $300, which might be a stretch.

  Also note that claiming exactly $300 can be one of the flags the ATO uses to prompt a ' please explain' letter.

  • 

    [Deactivated] on 07/09/2014 - 18:43

    Thank you for your reply; clarifies everything.

• 

  Waldo000000 on 08/09/2014 - 08:00

  +1

  it seems like it's better for me to just claim $300 for 'other work-related expenses' and provide no evidence (as you can)

  What makes you think evidence is not required? Could you please link to the ATO page that says this?

  Secondly, what makes you think it's ok to lie on your tax return? Please link to the ATO page that says this.

  Tax fraud is not a "bargain".

  • 

    [Deactivated] on 08/09/2014 - 09:48

    What Waldo seems to be saying is: you do need to HAVE evidence about your claim. You just don't need to provide it in your tax return when you lodge it. If you were audited, I believe you do need to be able to support all claims you have made, including for deductions like this post is referring to.

    • 

      Baysew on 08/09/2014 - 14:29

      The key word is Written evidence.

      If your total claim for all work-related expenses exceeds $300, you must have written evidence. ATO

      Secondly, where does it say the OP is going to lie about his return ?

      I've been calculating the work-related costs deductions

      So it seems he may have other items to claim for as well.

      Whilst no written receipts are required, he would need to be able to justify the expenses.

      Always a good idea to keep receipts, easy to miss out on legitimate claims.

      • 

        Waldo000000 on 08/09/2014 - 15:57

        Thanks for the link.

        Secondly, where does it say the OP is going to lie about his return ?

        I felt it was implied by the following (my emphasis):

        it seems like it's better for me to just claim $300…rather than to honestly claim my single item.

        I thought Smulder also implied dishonesty by saying:

        you only need to justify $130-ish of 'made up' expense

        If I've misunderstood, I apologise and please disregard.

      • 

        Smulder on 08/09/2014 - 16:37

        @Waldo000000:

        Yes, I also took the OPs post to mean anything above his legitimate computer deduction was being 'made up' to get to the $300.

        I was not condoning claiming false deductions, rather just suggesting that if he was going to claim false deductions, he should at least claim his legitimate deduction first.