[rolleyes] [BS]

[url]http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,6553997%5E1702,00.html[/url]

Heroin dealer gets tax deduction
June 6, 2003

A CONVICTED heroin dealer will be allowed to claim a $220,000 tax deduction for money he lost during a drug deal, the Federal Court has ruled.

The ruling in favour of Perth man Francesco Dominico La Rosa is the culmination of a long-running saga between Mr La Rosa and the Australian Tax Office, which began when Mr La Rosa was serving a 12-year jail term for dealing heroin and amphetamines.

The ATO has been trying to make Mr La Rosa pay tax on his 1994-95 assessable income, which it estimated amounted to $446,954.

But Mr La Rosa insisted his taxable income should be reduced for that year - because it included a sum of $224,793, which had been stolen during a drug deal that went awry in 1995.

He appealed to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal in 2001, claiming the ATO had overstated his 1994-95 earnings in estimating his taxable income at $446,954.

The tribunal found Mr La Rosa could reduce his taxable income to $222,161 because the loss arose during his business.

In August last year, the ATO appealed to the federal court, arguing there was no evidence the money had been stolen and it was against public policy to allow stolen money as a tax deduction.

But the Federal Court upheld the AAT's decision, which had allowed Mr la Rosa to claim the $220,000 tax deduction.

The ATO then appealed to the Full Court of the Federal Court - which yesterday dismissed that appeal.

Mr La Rosa could not be contacted for comment today.

If they want to tax illegal drug running income as income to fatten .gov coffers, then they should treat it like anything else, and any deductions should apply.  IMHO.

Second

what do you expect from people who don't care about freedom or justice.

You gotta love Australia, just when you thought a country couldnt breed or act more retarded...

I'm in Aust and I think that's totally f*cked up. He was engaged in an illegal activity, he shouldn't have been able to ask for any exemptions (and while I'm generally sceptical of crime asset seizure laws, there should be a mechanism to seperate people like that from the proceeds of their illegal activities).

As it is, the law is often an ass, so the tax laws may not have a clause to disallow this sort of thing. I'm inclined to think that he won his appeal because the relevent laws may not have any specific mechanism to disallow his appeal, even if it's based on illegal activity. It's probably a case of "the tax laws as they currently stand don't allow us to say no to his appeal".

What is the alternative here though, the govt being able to disregard the written law on a whim because it's inconvenient? What other laws will they disregard in the same way tomorrow, and who's legal rights will be sacrificed in the process?

The way I see it, if he can PROVE he was ripped off by that amount, then the govt overstated his earnings plain and simple. Any other outcome would simply be govt theft (kinda like they did with their guns).
I hope our brothers down under can someday get their freedom back.

Third.

Income tax laws are not written to determine whether income is from legal or illegal activities. If you make so much money, you pay so much tax. The issue is simply "how much net income did the guy have".

What I want to know is: does he have paperwork to document his loss?

!!! but thats in perth!!!! Perth=hole.  only good for fishing :P

You would be suprised what happens over here.....alot of retarded people and fucked up laws...

heres another one for ya.  A Chief magistrate (Head judge person) got sentenced to 1 year jail for sending a "threatening" email to a colleague.