Our staff add value to public sector effectiveness and the independent assurance of public sector administration and accountability, applying our professional and technical leadership to have a real impact on real issues.
The objective of this audit was to assess the Tax Office's implementation of the nine recommendations of Audit Report No.19 2004–05 Taxpayers' Charter, having regard to any changed circumstances affecting the implementation of the recommendations. This involved an examination of the Tax Office's:
systems and processes used to develop, maintain and update the Charter;
strategic commitment to implementing the principles of the Charter;
integration of Charter principles with its business processes;
systems for resolving disputes according to Charter principles; and
monitoring and reporting of its performance against commitments in the Charter.
The objective of the audit was to assess the completeness and reliability of the estimates reported in Tax Expenditures Statement 2006 (TES 2006). That is, the audit examined the development and publication of the detailed statement of actual tax expenditures required by Division 2 of Part 5 of the CBH Act. The development and publication of aggregated information on projected tax expenditures included in the Budget Papers pursuant to Division 1 of Part 5 of the CBH Act was not examined.
The objective of the audit was to evaluate the Tax Office's corporate management of data matching, including analytics.
The ANAO examined the Tax Office's strategic goals and governance arrangements for data matching and analytics, its compliance with privacy requirements and whether the Tax Office is achieving intended results, which include revenue collection, optimised compliance and provision of improved services to taxpayers.
Tax Office executives have been increasingly drawing on the interrelationships and conceptual commonalities of Tax Office data matching and analytics activity. Accordingly, the audit included these relationships and conceptual commonalities within the scope of the audit. The audit was guided, therefore, by a broader definition of ‘data matching': meaning ‘finding relationships and patterns in large volumes of data'. This includes the more traditional idea of data matching as ‘bringing together data from different sources and comparing it'.
The objective of the audit was to assess whether selected regulatory agencies have cost recovery procedures and practices which comply with the Government's guidelines. To address this objective, the audit assessed the management of cost recovery against the following criteria:
regulatory agencies have clear and consistent cost recovery procedures to identify their activities and costs, and set fees and levies;
regulatory agencies have effectively implemented their cost recovery procedures;
regulatory agencies regularly monitor and review their cost recovery activities; and
regulatory agencies regularly report on their cost recovery.
The objective of this audit was to assess and report on the administration of the regional delivery of NHT 2 and the NAP.
The scope of the audit encompassed both Environment and DAFF, including the Joint Team of staff from both departments working together under a common management structure for the delivery of both programs. The audit focused on:
the implementation of the regional delivery arrangements;
governance and financial management for regional delivery; and
monitoring, evaluation and reporting on the programs' performance.
The current audit has focussed on Stage 2 of the Scheme. Its objective was to assess whether ACIS is being administered effectively by DIISR and, as relevant, by Customs. In particular, the audit examined the department's arrangements for:
assessing the eligibility of participants to receive duty credits;
calculating duty credits accurately and adhering to the funding limits for the Scheme;
checking the integrity of participants' claims, which are self-assessed;
accounting for the duty credits transferred to and used at Customs; and
measuring and reporting on the performance of ACIS.
The audit also followed up on whether the ANAO's previous recommendations have been addressed.
The objective of this follow-up audit is to assess the Tax Office's progress in implementing the recommendations of Audit Report No.59 2002–03, Administration of Australian Business Number Registrations, having regard to any changed circumstances, or new administrative issues, affecting the implementation of those recommendations.
This second audit report relating to SMSFs examines the effectiveness of the Tax Office's approach to managing SMSF compliance risks. Specifically the ANAO examined the processes the Tax Office uses to:
identify the risks relevant to SMSFs not complying with their obligations under the SISA, including members accessing their superannuation early;
The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Tax Office's compliance approach for high risk income tax refunds in the individuals and micro enterprises market segments. The audit examined three key areas:
management and organisational arrangements relating to high risk income tax refund processes;
processes and procedures for identifying high risk income tax refunds, and the processes and tools used to evaluate and verify taxpayers' entitlements to income tax refunds; and
information technology systems, processes and controls supporting the processing of income tax returns and refunds.