| dc.contributor.author | Edmundson Peter | en_US |
| dc.contributor.editor | en_US | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2010-05-28T09:56:44Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2010-05-28T09:56:44Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2001 | en_US |
| dc.identifier | 2007003709 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.citation | Edmundson Peter 2001, 'GST and financial supplies: a comparative analysis of legislative structure', Lexis Nexus Butterworths, vol. 30, pp. 132-146. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0311-094X | en_US |
| dc.identifier.other | C1 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10453/10480 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Australia has recently implemented a goods and services tax. In applying this tax to financial services we have employed an assessment structure which differs significantly from the structure of provisions overseas. The Australian approach is much more complex than the approach overseas, yet this complexity only brings with it drawbacks rather than benefits. In the long term Australia would be better off adopting the simpler structure used in the United Kingdom, the European Union, Canada and New Zealand. | en_US |
| dc.language | en_US | |
| dc.publisher | Lexis Nexus Butterworths | en_US |
| dc.relation.isbasedon | en_US | |
| dc.title | GST and financial supplies: a comparative analysis of legislative structure | en_US |
| dc.parent | Australia Tax Review | en_US |
| dc.journal.volume | 30 | en_US |
| dc.journal.number | en_US | |
| dc.publocation | Australia | en_US |
| dc.identifier.startpage | 132 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.endpage | 146 | en_US |
| dc.cauo.name | LAW.Faculty of law | en_US |
| dc.conference | Verified OK | en_US |
| dc.for | 180100 | en_US |
| dc.personcode | 950905 | en_US |
| dc.percentage | 000100 | en_US |
| dc.classification.name | Law | en_US |
| dc.classification.type | FOR-08 | en_US |
| dc.edition | en_US | |
| dc.custom | en_US | |
| dc.date.activity | en_US | |
| dc.location.activity | en_US | |
| dc.description.keywords | en_US | |
| dc.staffid | en_US |