A strategy to make a member withdrawal shortly before that member’s death can be an effective way to minimise the tax consequences where:

individuals want their superannuation death benefits paid to beneficiaries who are not tax dependants following their death; and
those entitlements have a high taxable component.

Most people want to leave their superannuation entitlements in the superannuation environment for as long as possible to maximise the tax concessions provided to superannuation funds. However, if those entitlements remain in the fund following that member’s death, the tax implications can be substantial, particularly compared to a withdrawal while the member is alive.
There can be a fine line between a (potentially tax free) member benefit and a (often taxable) death benefit. The tax legislation defines the difference as being:

on the one hand, a payment to you because you are a member of the fund; or
on the other hand, a payment to you, after another person’s death, because that other person is a member of the fund.

A death bed member withdrawal can fall either way, depending on how it is implemented.
What issues should be considered?
For anyone considering the implementation of a death bed member withdrawal, below is a list of some issues to consider:

Who will be making the request? Will it be the member themselves or their attorney?
Who will be considering the request and how must they do it? Are there one or more trustees or directors of the corporate trustee? Will they do what we want them to do?
What are the assets we are intending to transfer to make the benefit payment? Will these be paid out in cash or will assets be transferred in specie?
Can the member withdraw their benefit while they are alive? Which condition of release do they satisfy?
What will the impact be on the member’s estate planning? Does the member’s Will direct their superannuation differently to their superannuation documents?
Does the payment before death expose the superannuation to the risk of an estate challenge, while leaving it in superannuation may keep it away from one?
Will the member lose insurance entitlements?
Does the member have an accumulation account or pension account? How will the member payment be treated in respect of these accounts?
What are the tax and duty consequences for the fund and the member in making the proposed benefit payment?
What does the trust deed say? Will it allow us to do what we want to do?
What can we do now to make the work we need to do later easier?

Conclusion
The tax consequences of getting a strategy like this wrong can be substantial.
If you or your clients would like further information about the steps required to implement a death bed member withdrawal, please contact a member of our team.
The post Death bed member payments – tax free superannuation benefit or taxable death benefit? appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

Cooper Grace Ward has been named as a finalist in the Women in Law Awards in the category of Diversity Law Firm of the Year.
The Diversity Law Firm of the Year recognises law firms who foster a diverse culture and encourage the retention of female legal professionals.
The assessment criteria focused on retention and recruitment policies, the provision of flexible work arrangements and distinct policies implemented to lift the number of females into senior positions.
This year has been particularly challenging for law firms, so it’s great to see that CGW continues to perform well in this space against our peers. The elements required for change to achieve awards like this are initiated and executed over many years.
The winners will be announced in December.
The post Cooper Grace Ward a finalist in Women in Law Awards 2020 appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

The government has reintroduced its Bill to increase the maximum number of people who can be in a self managed superannuation fund from four up to six. Many are excited about this concept, but is it really a good idea?
While there are clearly advantages to six member SMSFs, there are also downsides. Before diving into multi-member SMSFs (particularly with as many as six members), there are a number of things to consider and advice for advisers to give to members before joining.
Without this, members may find themselves trapped in an SMSF and potentially suffering loss, and could look to recover from advisers who have recommended adding more members to an SMSF.
Disadvantages to six member SMSFs

Being one of six controllers often does not give you much influence over decisions.
It can be very difficult for a member to leave an SMSF, as it will usually require the consent of the other directors/trustees/members. Once membership gets to six, this can be more difficult to obtain.
One driver for six member SMSFs is the ability to have family assets such as business premises in the SMSF. This can make paying death benefits or rolling out even more difficult as liquidity is very limited.
Death benefit payment decisions will be made by the other trustees/directors. Does the trust deed allow binding death benefit nominations, death benefit guardians and reversionary pensions to ensure the desired result is achieved?
Decision making will be even more complicated in SMSFs where trust deeds provide for proportionate voting based on member balances (which already can cause significant complications).

Things to consider with six member SMSFs

How are decisions of the trustee/directors made? Is it by majority, unanimously or some other majority? Are votes weighted by member balance? Should different decisions have different thresholds?
Does the trust deed allow one member to roll their benefits out unilaterally? Can that member solely sign documents to sell or transfer assets?
What will happen to my benefits if I die? What can I do to make sure my wishes are implemented?
If I lose capacity, can my attorney appoint themselves as a trustee/director (without the involvement of the other members/shareholders)? Can they protect my interests?

Advice advisers should give to members about six member SMSFs

The practical difficulties for members in SMSFs controlling decisions about their benefits, and especially retrieving their benefits and rolling them to a different superannuation fund.
The risk of control changing if member, trustee or director votes are weighted by account balance.
The importance of proper death benefit planning to ensure death benefits flow as intended.
The risk of being trapped in the SMSF and unable to remove benefits, including because of the illiquidity of the assets in the SMSF (as most SMSF trust deeds do not contain adequate provisions to break this type of deadlock).
Who is my attorney, can that person be appointed as a trustee/director in my place, and what is their ability to influence decisions and protect my interests?
The benefits of tailoring the trust deed and company constitution to protect the member’s interests.

There are a range of factors to consider before getting into a six member SMSF, and advisers should ensure they are taking clients through them before embarking on a strategy involving multiple members in an SMSF.
Please contact a member of our superannuation team if you would like to discuss six member SMSFs further, or the steps to take if you are in or considering one.
The post Six member self-managed superannuation funds – are they really a good idea? appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

Several years ago, the ATO published valuation guidelines for self-managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) to assist in their compliance obligations. SMSFs and their auditors are facing a number of challenges in applying these in 2020.
There are two valuation issues, especially for 2020.

Has the value of SMSF assets changed significantly since the last valuation due to COVID-19?
The ATO has reminded SMSFs that, generally, SMSF assets must be valued to market every year.
A formal valuation of real estate by a registered valuer is not required every year, but trustees should obtain a new valuation from a registered valuer if it has become materially inaccurate or it has been affected by an event such as COVID-19. Appraisals from a real estate agent can be acceptable with other evidence, and must include details of comparable sales.
Valuations should provide market value ‘as close as possible to 30 June’.
If SMSFs do not provide their auditors with ‘sufficient appropriate evidence’ to substantiate the values of the SMSF assets, they must consider qualifying their opinion and lodging an Auditor Contravention Report (ACR).
Evidence of the value of assets cannot be obtained due to COVID-19
Where ‘sufficient appropriate evidence’ cannot be obtained due to a situation such as COVID-19, auditors must still consider a qualification and ACR, and include the reasons why the trustee could not obtain satisfactory evidence.
Where that is as a result of COVID-19, it will not lead to penalties from the ATO.
This means that SMSFs who cannot provide the evidence must give their auditors details of what steps they have taken to obtain the evidence and why they were unsuccessful.

The valuation of SMSF assets will concern SMSF auditors in 2020 even more than before. It is important for SMSFs to have their evidence and documentation to survive the audit process unscathed (especially where it has been unable to obtain that evidence due to COVID-19).
Please contact a member of our superannuation team if you would like to discuss valuation issues for SMSFs.
The post SMSFs, the 2020 audit and property valuations appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

Discretionary trusts that own ‘residential land’ in New South Wales or hold an ownership interest in a company or unit trust that owns residential land in New South Wales must amend their trust deeds before 31 December 2020 to exclude foreign persons as beneficiaries, otherwise foreign land tax and duty surcharges may apply.
New South Wales now deems discretionary trusts to be ‘foreign persons’, unless the trust deed is amended before midnight on 31 December 2020 to:

exclude all foreign persons as eligible beneficiaries
prevent any amendment to the exclusion of foreign persons as beneficiaries, so that the exclusion is permanent and irrevocable.

This is the case even if none of the eligible beneficiaries of a discretionary trust are foreign persons.
Why does this matter?
If a discretionary trust is deemed a ‘foreign person’, surcharge duty of 8% and surcharge land tax of 2% will be payable on any residential land in New South Wales acquired or owned by the trust since the surcharges were introduced in 2016. This can also be the case where the discretionary trust is a shareholder or unitholder in a company or unit trust that owns the residential land.
Read our previous article here for more information.
What should you do?

Arrange for the trust deeds of any discretionary trusts that own residential land in New South Wales or hold an interest in a company or unit trust that owns residential land to be amended, where necessary and appropriate, to satisfy the ‘foreign person’ exclusion requirements under these recent changes by New South Wales Parliament. This is the case even if the trust deed previously satisfied the New South Wales foreign beneficiary requirements.
Ensure any trust deed amendments are signed as soon as possible to avoid missing the 31 December 2020 deadline.
Submit the trust deed and all variations to Revenue NSW for confirmation that the trust is not a ‘foreign person’.

Cooper Grace Ward can amend a discretionary trust deed to satisfy the ‘foreign person’ exclusion requirements for $440 including GST. Please complete the application form and send it as soon as possible to [email protected] together with a copy of the trust deed and all variation and change of trustee deeds.
If you have any questions about the surcharge provisions or amending your trust deed, please contact a member of our team.
The post Time is running out! Amend your discretionary trust deed before 31 December 2020 – NSW foreign duty and land tax surcharges appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

In a rising property market, parents are increasingly helping fund their child’s deposit for their first home. Many families also continue to wholly or partially fund their adult children’s lives indefinitely; buying them successive houses, businesses, or cars, paying out their debts or otherwise rescuing them from financial scrapes.
Such generosity is rarely documented.
Parents may expect repayment but understandably trust their child will pay them back when they are financially able to do so.
Alternatively, money may have been advanced to an adult child without (many?!) strings attached during that child’s marriage or relationship, but that relationship begins to fail and parents want to act protectively.
What happens in those circumstances if the adult child separates from their spouse before they have repaid their parents, assuming it was ever intended that they would?
There are two ways the family law courts can treat a payment made by a parent to their child in a property settlement:

The court may accept the payment is a loan that ought to be repaid in full to the parent. The loan will be included in the property pool.
Alternatively, the court may determine the payment was a gift to the child, with the parent having no expectation of repayment. This would generally be a contribution on behalf of the spouse that received the payment from their parent. Such a contribution (in the absence of other evidence) will increase the percentage weighting given to the child’s contributions.

‘Bank of mum and dad’ should act like any other bank when advancing money to their children. This is because the family law courts are reluctant to accept that a child has a loan owing to their parents unless there is clear evidence of their parents’ expectation of repayment. This requires, for example:

A written loan agreement was entered at the time the money was advanced, or at least during the relationship. It is not so compelling to produce a loan agreement that has been entered into after separation. An informally written ‘IOU’ that has not been properly drafted by a lawyer, may also not suffice.
The loan agreement was at arm’s length terms, including for instance, a commercial interest rate, repayment schedule and clauses to call for repayment.
Security was taken for the loan, such as a second registered mortgage encumbering the child’s house.
A record was kept of the loan being repaid in accordance with the loan agreement.

After separation, it is common for the other spouse to argue that money advanced by their ex-partner’s parents was a gift not a loan, despite any unwritten understanding that existed during the relationship.
If you are gifting money to children and expect to be repaid, it is imperative to ensure the loan is properly documented and security taken, in case you find yourself in the unenviable position of being caught in the middle of a matrimonial dispute.
If you are dealing with similar issues in your family law matter, please do not hesitate to contact one of our experienced family lawyers.
The post My parents gave me money – is it a gift or a loan in my divorce? appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

Cooper Grace Ward is thrilled to be recognised as an Employer of Choice for 2020 in the Australasian Lawyer Awards.
Australasian Lawyer recently asked law firms across Australia to submit nominations and provide information around employee engagement and retention metrics in addition to key initiatives and achievements in a range of areas from diversity and inclusion to training and development.
It appears our submission was one of the favourites, as CGW has been selected along with 24 other respected Australian law firms as an Employer of Choice for 2020.
The announcement was published in the media today.
The post Cooper Grace Ward an Employer of Choice for 2020 appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

Register now
Have you ever had a client resolve a dispute and ask whether GST should be included in a settlement sum paid under a settlement deed? You’re not alone!
Clients often ask their accountants to advise on the GST implications of a deal they have negotiated that resolves a dispute. In this webinar, we will work through case studies to help you advise clients on the GST implications of payments made to settle or resolve a dispute.
We will cover:

the common misconception that a payment is not subject to GST because it’s for damages – there’s more to it than that!
identifying the types of supplies that can be made under a settlement arrangement and the consideration for those supplies
the consequences of getting the GST treatment wrong
things to look out for in GST clauses.

After the webinar, you should be able to advise clients on the GST implications of payments made under agreements to settle a commercial dispute and identify risks with GST clauses in settlement agreements.
It will be recorded, so, if you are unable to attend at the advertised time, we will send you the live recording for future viewing.

Webinar – Getting the GST right in out of court settlements$165.00

Invoices, reminders and webinar links are generated and automatically sent through our email system. To ensure delivery to your inbox, please add @cgw.com.au to your safe senders list.

Category: Events

Related products

Is it time to restructure your clients’ business assets?
$165.00
Register Now

CGW Virtual SMSF Intensive Day
$290.00
Register Now

Webinar – Queensland’s wage theft legislation and the tips and traps of redundancies
$75.00
Register Now

The post Webinar – Getting the GST right in out of court settlements appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

As a result of COVID-19, Australians’ tax debts are at a record high. During the height of the pandemic, the ATO also slowed its tax debt recovery activity, so it collected less revenue than usual. The outstanding revenue will need to be collected – so what do you do if the ATO sues you for a tax debt?
Your approach will partly depend on whether you agree or disagree with the primary tax liability. If you disagree with the tax liability, you can challenge an assessment by objecting to it. This must be done through the specific process set out in Part IVC of the Taxation Administration Act 1953. However, in addition, you may also face the prospect of defending court proceedings where the ATO is suing you to recover the tax debt.
It can be difficult to defend tax debt recovery proceedings in isolation, without also separately objecting to the assessment. This is because of specific rules in the tax legislation that provide that a tax assessment (e.g. a notice of assessment) is evidence of the amount of the liability stated in the assessment and that the assessment was properly made.
Practically, this can mean that, even if a taxpayer has a genuine dispute about a tax liability, the ATO can take steps to recover the amount stated in the assessment.
What can you do to avoid the ATO starting tax debt recovery proceedings?
You and your advisers need to act promptly in exercising your objection and appeal rights.
In some cases, you can work within the ATO’s own internal guidelines to deal with a debt before the ATO starts tax debt recovery proceedings. For example, you might consider:

negotiating a 50/50 payment arrangement
requesting that any general interest charge is remitted
offering to provide security for the debt.

What can you do if the ATO has started tax debt recovery proceedings?
In cases where the ATO has already started tax debt recovery proceedings and you disagree with the assessments, it is important that you form a strategy to preserve the position in the tax debt recovery proceedings while you object to and appeal the underlying tax liability.
This may involve filing a defence in the tax debt recovery proceedings or negotiating a payment plan while an objection is lodged on the substantive tax or penalty dispute.
Managing both aspects of a tax dispute at the same time can be complicated – it often involves responding to any tax debt recovery proceedings or negotiating with the ATO for a deferral of collection activities and at the same time preparing your case objecting to the underlying tax and penalty amounts.
Please contact a member of the team if you would like to discuss.
The post Tax debts are at a record high – how do you respond if the ATO sues you for a tax debt that you disagree with? appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

Cooper Grace Ward is celebrating 40 years of providing legal services.
From its inception in 1980, Cooper Grace Ward has gone from strength to strength and has become one of the largest independent Queensland-based firms, serving clients across Australia and internationally.
The firm’s managing partner, Chris Ward reflected on the milestone.
“As a firm, we’re incredibly grateful to our clients and our wonderful team whose contribution and many achievements have made CGW what it is today. When I think back to our humble beginnings in 1980, it’s been quite the ride but it’s been our relationships with our people, our clients, our suppliers and even our competitors, that have carried us through the good times and the more challenging ones.”
Taking a risk
Founding partners, Peter Cooper, David Grace and Chris Ward met in the early 70s while partners working at a local Brisbane firm. They noticed a gap in the market and decided to band together and on 22 December 1980, launched Cooper Grace Ward as a new firm with a fresh approach.
Forty years of growth
In the 1980s, Brisbane was starting to step up on the world stage, hosting the Commonwealth Games in 1982 and the World Expo in 1988.
“We witnessed a real surge of government and business investment coupled with increased tourism, and suddenly monumental change was happening in Queensland and the Australian economy. Cooper Grace Ward was positioned well to benefit from that, and we began to grow exponentially,” Ward said.
During this period, the firm grew quickly with many new lawyers joining from other firms.
This growth slowed in the 1990s when the Australian recession kicked in and slowed the economy.
“When the ‘recession we had to have’ kicked in, it put the brakes on our growth for a while. It was a challenging time for us and our clients, but we adapted and made it through while many of our competitors did not,” he added.
During the 40 years of growth, the firm saw several major firms and partners merge into the Cooper Grace Ward fold including Power & Power, Thompson King & Connolly and Bain Gasteen. The firm also had an association with Hunt & Hunt Lawyers.
Retaining and nurturing team members
One of CGW’s defining principles has been to increase the emphasis on looking after team members who, with a greater level of support behind them, go the extra mile to look after the firm’s clients.
The results speak for themselves. The firm has been named a finalist in the Financial Review Client Choice Awards in eight out of the past 11 years, and a winner in three of those years.
Over the past decade, the firm has dedicated significant resources to ensuring they remain at the forefront of the diversity and inclusion spectrum, including forming a diversity committee who drive a range of initiatives around gender, age, impairment and cultural diversity.
The firm proudly totes a generous parental leave policy, diversity team and wellness committee. In addition, the firm was one of the first law firms in Queensland to have a domestic violence policy and to provide paid domestic violence leave.
Cooper Grace Ward has been recognised for its achievements in these areas, most recently being named as Human Resources Director – Employer of Choice 2020 and one of only four Australian law firms to be recognised as an Inclusive Employer by the Diversity Council of Australia.
Maintaining independence
Cooper Grace Ward has been an independent firm for four decades and its strategy going forward is to maintain that independence.
“Throughout our 40 years, it’s been important for us to keep an eye on the trends and continuously assess whether our strategy is right for us, and in strategic planning over the last two to three years our partners and team have reinforced the desire to remain independent, as it differentiates us in the market for clients and talent, and gives our partners control of our destiny.”
“In addition, our membership of ADVOC, compliments our strategy and gives us access to international clients and connections.”
Chris Ward is the current president of ADVOC Asia and Chair of ADVOC Global.
Moving forward
December 2020 will mark Cooper Grace Ward’s 40th year of practice, but the firm is still fresh-faced and growing.
The firm continues to invest heavily in knowledge, training and technology to better support clients and team members, and to underpin ongoing organic growth.
Chris Ward, the firm’s current managing partner and a founding partner of CGW, will complete his fourth term in December 2021, after 16 years in the role.
In October this year, the firm announced the appointment of Charles Sweeney as deputy managing partner.
Ward will work closely with Sweeney through a period of transition and Sweeney will then take on the role of managing partner from 1 January 2022.
The post CGW celebrates 40 years of legal excellence appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

Click below for who, what, where with graduate Sacha Robinson. Hear why she chose Cooper Grace Ward Lawyers and what is the best advice she’s ever been given.

 
The post Who, what, where with Sacha Robinson appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

Register now
There have been many high profile cases of underpayment of wages recently. A 2019 KPMG report put the annual figure for wage theft at more than $1.35 billion and estimated as much as 13 per cent of the total workforce has been affected – more than a million people. The complexity of award arrangements and the general lack of understanding of employment laws by employers are the key drivers of underpayment claims.
The impact of COVID-19 on various industries has also resulted in many businesses facing significant financial and operational challenges. Many employers have had to make tough decisions about reductions in staffing requirements and resources. When making decisions about major workplace change and effecting redundancies, it can be easy for employers to skip essential procedural requirements, exposing them to unnecessary legal risk.
In this webinar, Cooper Grace Ward senior associates Sandra Barry and Gemma Sharp will discuss the following:
Wage theft

understanding how wage theft can arise
best practice strategies to consider if a suspected breach has occurred
tips for conducting an effective wage theft audit
the Fair Work Ombudsman’s enforcement mechanisms
tips to minimise exposure to wage theft litigation
reviewing operations and implementing change to ensure compliance
recent and future reforms – what will they mean for employers?

Redundancy tips and traps

redundancy laws and an employer’s consultation obligations and redeployment obligations
genuine redundancy exemption under section 389 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)
tips and traps following the most recent JobKeeper legislation amendments
how to safeguard your business from claims of unfair dismissal following a redundancy.

The webinar will be recorded, so, if you are unable to attend at the advertised time, we will send you the recording for future viewing.
We hope you are able to join us.

Webinar – Queensland’s wage theft legislation and the tips and traps of redundancies$75.00

Invoices, reminders and webinar links are generated and automatically sent through our email system. To ensure delivery to your inbox, please add @cgw.com.au to your safe senders list

Category: Events

Related products

Is it time to restructure your clients’ business assets?
$165.00
Register Now

CGW Virtual SMSF Intensive Day
$290.00
Register Now

Practical, commercial and tax consequences of family law settlements
$165.00
Register Now

The post Webinar – Queensland’s wage theft legislation and the tips and traps of redundancies appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

Not necessarily.
It is a common misconception that assets owned by a trust will not form part of the property pool available for division between spouses.
It is also common for separated spouses to argue about whether a trust forms part of the property pool, is a financial resource or has no impact on their property settlement.
Whether a trust will form part of the property pool will depend on the nature of a spouse’s interest and their degree of control over the trust.
For a trust to be considered property, it is generally not enough for a spouse to simply be in a class of beneficiaries eligible for distribution from a trust.
When determining whether a spouse has control over a trust, the court will have regard to several factors, such as:

the terms of the trust deed
who is the trustee and appointer
if the trustee or appointer is not a spouse, the degree of influence a spouse has over them
who are the beneficiaries
the history of trust distributions
how the assets of the trust were acquired
contributions by spouses to the property owned by the trust
what benefits the spouses derive from the trust such as loans, motor vehicles, payment of expenses, etc.

A common trust structure can look like this:

 
Assuming there are no unusual circumstances, the trust will be treated as property of the parties and be included in the property pool because the wife controls the trust through her roles as appointer and director of the corporate trustee.
An example at the other end of the spectrum would be a trust set up by a spouse’s parents, where the parents built up the assets in the trust, are the appointers and trustees, and the spouse is simply in a class of beneficiaries. In those circumstances, depending on the history of distributions to the spouse, the trust will most likely to be treated as a financial resource, and not included as an asset in the property pool because the spouse has no control over the trust.
Of course, each case will depend upon its own circumstances.
If you are setting up a trust for the purpose of wealth protection from your spouse, we recommend that you first see a family lawyer about whether your intention can actually be met with a trust structure and obtain advice about whether a financial agreement would better suit your needs. Information about financial agreements can be found at this link .
If you have any queries about a trust structure in your family law matter, please do not hesitate to contact one of our experienced family lawyers.
The post Are family trusts protected from divorce? appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

Cooper Grace Ward’s Tax team has been featured in the 2020 Doyle’s Guide for Queensland as a first-tier tax law firm – the highest category achievable by Doyle’s Guide.
In addition, two partners in the tax team have been featured in the 2020 Doyle’s Guide for Queensland.
Fletch Heinemann has been listed as a preeminent tax lawyer and Linda Tapiolas has been listed as a recommended tax lawyer.
The 2020 listing of leading Queensland Tax Lawyers details firms practising in taxation advisory and disputes matters in the Queensland legal market who have been identified by clients and peers for their expertise in the area.
The firm congratulates Fletch, Linda and the entire tax team for this recognition.
The post Doyle’s Guide recognises CGW’s Tax team appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

Cooper Grace Ward managing partner, Chris Ward has been re-elected as President of ADVOC Asia until October 2022.
The decision was made this week at the 2020 ADVOC Asia AGM. The conference, usually held in one of the ADVOC member countries across Asia, was this year held online due to the ongoing global pandemic.
ADVOC is an international network of independent law firms whose members bring together their knowledge and expertise to support clients in jurisdictions across the globe. Rated by Chambers Global as a Band One leading law firm network, ADVOC currently consists of 93 firms and 5,500 lawyers spread throughout 72 different countries.
In October 2018, Ward was initially elected as President of ADVOC Asia and subsequently took on the role of Global Chair.
Ward was re-elected in 2019 and steered ADVOC through the early days of the pandemic and continues to oversee the strategic direction of the organisation going forward.
Commenting on the re-election, Ward said he is honoured to be asked to remain as the President of ADVOC Asia and will continue to drive the organisation through the uncertainty of 2020 and 2021.
“As the pandemic continues to wreak havoc across the world, I have worked to ensure our member firms share their knowledge and look for opportunities to enhance their services to clients. As President of ADVOC Asia and Global Chair, I will continue to lead the charge into 2021.”
“ADVOC has proven to be a trusted organisation during COVID-19 and the legal advisors on the ground in all relevant jurisdictions have assisted their clients during a time when we have had major disruptions in both international relations and trade,” Ward added.
The post Cooper Grace Ward’s Managing Partner to remain President of ADVOC Asia appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

Cooper Grace Ward’s Insurance team has been featured heavily in the 2020 Doyle’s Guide for Queensland.
The team has been listed as a first tier Workers Compensation & WorkCover Law firm. First tier is the highest category achievable and highlights firms acting on behalf of insurers and self-insured entities and practising within the areas of workplace injury, accident and WorkCover matters in the Queensland legal market.
In addition, partner Tony Park has been listed as a preeminent Workers Compensation & WorkCover Lawyer. Preeminent being the highest category achievable. Partner Brady Cockburn has also been listed as a leading lawyer in this category.
Tony also appears as a recommended lawyer in the Public and Product Liability Lawyers.
The firm congratulates Tony, Brady and the entire insurance team for this recognition.
The post Doyle’s Guide recognises CGW’s Insurance team appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

Changes to the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) will soon allow more customers access to the ACL’s consumer guarantees when acquiring goods or services.
The changes
The definition of ‘consumer’ under the ACL currently captures any person who acquires goods or services for an amount not exceeding $40,000 (or where the goods were acquired for personal, domestic or household use). The monetary threshold under the definition of ‘consumer’ is fundamental to the operation of the ACL’s consumer protection provisions.
The recently passed Treasury Laws Amendment (Acquisition as Consumer – Financial Thresholds) Regulations 2020 has amended the definition of ‘consumer’ by increasing the monetary threshold to $100,000. The amendment will commence from 1 July 2021. Until then, the existing $40,000 threshold will continue to apply.
The original threshold of $40,000 was set in 1986. The increase in the threshold follows a review of the ACL by Consumer Affairs Australia and New Zealand, which found that the protection afforded to consumers under the existing threshold has been eroded due to inflation in the cost of goods and services over time.
Consumer guarantees
The ACL provides consumers with implied warranties for the goods and services that they acquire. The consumer guarantees override any less favourable terms and conditions provided by a business and generally cannot be contracted out of.
For businesses that provide goods, some of the consumer guarantees imply warranties that:

goods will match any description provided
goods will be of an acceptable quality
goods will be reasonably fit for purpose
facilities for the repair of the goods are reasonably available
any express warranties given in relation to the goods will be complied with.

For businesses that provide services, some of the consumer guarantees imply warranties that services will be:

rendered with due care and skill
reasonably fit for purpose
supplied within a reasonable time.

The increased monetary threshold for the definition of ‘consumer’ will expand the availability of the consumer guarantees to a broader range of customers.
What goods and services providers should do next
Businesses should review their terms and conditions, marketing material and internal policies to ensure that they are compliant with the changes to the definition of ‘consumer’ from 1 July 2021.
If you run a business that requires assistance with ACL compliance, we recommend that you speak with one of our professionals in Cooper Grace Ward’s corporate advisory team.
The post Definition of ‘consumer’ under the Australian Consumer Law to be expanded from 1 July 2021 appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

Brisbane-based firm Cooper Grace Ward has announced the appointment of Charles Sweeney as deputy managing partner.
Chris Ward, the firm’s current managing partner and a founding partner of CGW, will complete his fourth term in December 2021, after 16 years in the role.
Ward will work closely with Sweeney through a period of transition and Sweeney will then take on the role of managing partner from 1 January 2022.
Sweeney leads the firm’s corporate and commercial group and is well-known in the industry for providing wide-ranging general commercial advice to clients, with particular areas of focus including corporate advisory, intellectual property and technology.
Sweeney’s experience includes serving as a non-executive director of ASX listed companies. He has also served on Cooper Grace Ward’s board and executive leadership team for several years.
Ward, commented on the appointment: “I’m pleased to have Sweeney elected as our deputy managing partner and to work with him on the transition to managing the firm.”
“Sweeney has a deep understanding of our team culture, our clients and our business, which will place the firm in safe hands for the future,” he said.
Sweeney expressed his delight on his selection for the role: “It’s an honour to be appointed as deputy managing partner of Cooper Grace Ward.”
“The firm has earned itself an enviable reputation for providing outstanding commercial client service and nurturing team members, and I’m pleased to be part of CGW’s history going forward.”
The appointment comes ahead of the firm’s celebration of 40 years of practice, having opened its doors in December 1980 and grown to become one of the largest independent firms based in Queensland.
The post Cooper Grace Ward Lawyers announces deputy managing partner appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

Register now
Who gets what and how much is a common concern in family law negotiations. So what are the parameters and how does the Family Court determine dividing up the matrimonial pool?
But once that is decided, there are a range of commercial and tax issues that can easily affect, derail or distort the best negotiated settlements. So what do I need to look out for, what commonly goes wrong and how do we make sure the settlement takes effect as intended where there are structures?
Join partners Scott Hay Bartlem and Justine Woods as they use a case study to work through these vital but often misunderstood questions.
The webinar will be recorded, so, if you are unable to attend at the advertised time, we will send you the recording for future viewing.

Practical, commercial and tax consequences of family law settlements$165.00

Invoices, reminders and webinar links are generated and automatically sent through our email system. To ensure delivery to your inbox, please add @cgw.com.au to your safe senders list

Category: Events

Related products

JobKeeper extension
$110.00
Register Now

Does a marriage ceremony make a difference?
$165.00
Register Now

Blended mental health first aid (MHFA) training for workplaces November 2020
$495.00
Register Now

Is it time to restructure your clients’ business assets?
$165.00
Register Now

The post Webinar – Practical, commercial and tax consequences of family law settlements appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.

From 1 October 2020, a new deductible gift recipient (DGR) category became available to community sheds. This article sets out some of the more important considerations for community sheds looking to obtain DGR status.
New deductible gift recipient category
Deductible gift recipients (DGRs) can receive tax deductible gifts and contributions from the public. If a donation is tax deductible, donors can deduct the amount of their donation from their taxable income when lodging their tax returns. For these reasons, DGR status is appealing to many organisations.
The Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (Cth) has been amended to introduce a new DGR category for community sheds.
Community sheds must meet the following criteria to be eligible for DGR status:
(a) have the characteristics of a community shed (set out below)
(b) be located in Australia
(c) be registered as a charity with the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC)
(d) have a DGR winding up and revocation clause in their governing documents.
To be classified as a community shed, an organisation must be a public institution that:
(a) has dominant purposes that advance mental health and prevent or relieve social isolation
(b) seeks to achieve those purposes principally by providing a physical location where it supports individuals to undertake activities, or work on projects in the company of others
(c) either:
(i) has no membership criteria, or
(ii) has membership criteria that relate only to gender and/or Indigenous status (where membership is, for cultural reasons, only open to Indigenous persons).
The new DGR category came into effect on 1 October 2020. Practically, the amendments apply to gifts and contributions made on or after 1 July 2020, provided the community shed obtains DGR status in the 2020/2021 financial year.
What should community sheds looking to gain DGR status consider?
Community sheds need to ensure they are eligible for registration (or already registered) as a charity with the ACNC.
Organisations looking to apply to become a charity will need to review their structure and governing document to ensure compliance with the ACNC’s requirements.
To gain DGR status as a community shed, an organisation’s governing document must clearly demonstrate that its dominant purpose is to advance mental health and prevent/relieve social isolation. An organisation will also need to show how it supports this dominant purpose. The following initiatives are examples of how support can be shown:

supporting members to understand mental health, for example by inviting guest speakers to discuss mental health issues
facilitating activities that promote social connections among members
welcoming people in the wider community to join the shed’s activities.

Organisations should also consider fundraising requirements before soliciting donations from the public. Generally, organisations need to hold a registration or licence to fundraise before undertaking fundraising activities. There are some limited exceptions to this requirement.
For more information on registration as a charity or obtaining DGR status, please contact Carly Ashwood or Adelaide Hayes.
The post Deductible gift recipient categories extended to community sheds appeared first on Cooper Grace Ward.