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 the preliminary study was to form a view regarding the quality of, and controls over, the Budget estimates and to inform the decision whether to proceed to a full performance audit at this time. On the basis of the quantitative and qualitative analysis of the budget process undertaken during the study, the ANAO concluded that there are no apparent systemic problems in the cash-based estimating processes in the agencies reviewed that would, in themselves, lead to material statistical inaccuracies in the Budget's projected outcomes. The ANAO decided not to proceed with a full performance audit at this time.
The purpose of the report was to report to the Parliament on how effectively and efficiently the Australian Taxation Office administers the Tax File Number System, and to identify opportunities for improvement of that system. The ANAO developed a methodological framework for the evaluation of the efficiency and effectiveness of the ATO's administration of the TFN system. The framework examined the TFN system; individuals and their TFNs; TFN withholding tax arrangements; and TFN information matching.
The objective of the audit was to assess key aspects of the Australian Taxation Office's administration of the PAYE system in relation to employers' remittances and to identify opportunities for improvement. The audit focussed on four areas:
remittance monitoring, especially managing late remittances;
follow-up action for end of year reconciliation, including discrepancies;
handling compliance intelligence gained from the public; and
The objective of the audit was to ascertain and report to Parliament on the Australian Taxation Office's administration of the Fringe Benefits Tax and to identify opportunities for improvement. The ANAO identified five key issues relevant to the effective administration of FBT:
knowledge of the taxpayer base;
education of taxpayers;
client service - advice handling;
other enforcement activities - audits and reviews; and
the systems required to support the administration of FBT, including staff skills and training information systems.
The audit reviewed six budget-funded agencies (Australian Customs Service, Australian Taxation Office, Centrelink, Department of Defence, Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, and Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) and two off-budget entities (Airservices Australia and Reserve Bank of Australia). The ANAO also examined the Office for Government Online's (OGO, formerly the Office of Government Information Technology, or OGIT) whole-of-government coordination of the Commonwealth's Year 2000 efforts.
The objective of the audit was to ascertain and report to the Parliament on the ATO's administration of PPS and to identify opportunities for improvement. Four key compliance issues were identified: reporting PPS income, claiming PPS credits, remitting PPS income, claiming PPS credits, remitting PPS deductions, and managing PPS exemptions and variations. In addition, the following key aspects were considered: PPS risk assessments, coordination of PPS administration between the Small Business Income and Withholding & Indirect Taxes business lines, and PPS compliance project performance information.
The issues examined by the ANAO were considered on two levels. First, legal and ethical processes that focus on whether there are any impediments to the Government and public service implementing the CEIP in the way they have. The public interest issues turn largely on the question of whether the CEIP was for Government or party-political purposes. The other level on which these issues were considered is that of public accountability and the way in which decisions to spend public money are made. In turn, these issues raise questions about the relationship between, and authority of, the Government and Parliament. They may also involve consideration of what might be regarded as proper or responsible conduct by governments and the public service.
This is a follow-up audit to Audit Report No. 16, 1995-1996, Assessable Government Industry Assistance. This audit examined whether the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) had implemented the appropriate balance of compliance strategies to ensure that Australian Government Industry Assistance (AGIA) is adequately identified, disclosed to the ATO, and the revenue collected in an efficient and administratively effective manner. The objective of this audit was to report on the action taken by the Australian Taxation Office in addressing the recommendations of the 1996 Audit Report.