•  
  •  
 

Abstract

[extract] To comment upon the various hearings of FCT v Mitchum in boxing style, ‘Mr Mitchum suffered a low blow in the first round, yet recovered to deliver a second round knock down and a lucky third round knock out.’ The case focused on the derivation and source of income under s25 (1)(b) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth), (ITAA) and the provision of dependent services under Article IX (2) of the Switzerland/Australian Double Taxation Agreement. The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the High Court would have reached a similar ruling in FCT v Mitchum if Article 17 of the United States/ Australia Double Taxation Agreement had been in effect.

Share

COinS