Tax Practitioners Board v Hacker (No 3) [2020] FCA 1814

Tax Practitioners Board v Hacker (No 3) [2020] FCA 1814

The respondents deliberately provided unregistered tax agent and BAS services for reward, in full knowledge of their unlawfulness, justifying significant pecuniary penalties to reflect specific and general deterrence. They further committed repeated and admitted contempts of court by breaching undertaken orders, exhibiting a pattern of blatant disregard for court authority, warranting imprisonment for the first respondent and fines. Penalties and costs were moderated to avoid double punishment and reflect partial success on the applicant's claims.

Parties
Applicant: Tax Practitioners Board; First Respondent: Kent Scott Hacker; Second Respondent: One Stop Global Staffing Pty Ltd ACN 097 166 204; Third Respondent: Naleview Pty Limited ACN 051 420 010
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment on Penalty and Relief After Findings of Contravention and Contempt
Outcome
Declarations made; injunctions granted; pecuniary penalties and imprisonment imposed; apportionment of costs ordered.
Legal Topics
Tax Agent Services Act – Unregistered Services, Civil Penalties, Contempt of Court – Breach of Undertakings, Injunctive Relief, Costs – Apportionment
Taxation Regulatory Law Contempt of Court Tax Agent Services Act – Unregistered Services Civil Penalties Contempt of Court – Breach of Undertakings Injunctive Relief Costs – Apportionment

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 40 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tax Practitioners Board

Applicant

Kent Scott Hacker

First Respondent

One Stop Global Staffing Pty Ltd ACN 097 166 204

Second Respondent

Naleview Pty Limited ACN 051 420 010

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment on Penalty and Relief After Findings of Contravention and Contempt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate penalties for contraventions of ss 50-5(1) and 50-5(2) of the Tax Agent Services Act 2009 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether declaratory and injunctive relief is appropriate
  3. 3 Imposition of penalties for contempt of court

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents deliberately provided unregistered tax agent and BAS services for reward, in full knowledge of their unlawfulness, justifying significant pecuniary penalties to reflect specific and general deterrence. They further committed repeated and admitted contempts of court by breaching undertaken orders, exhibiting a pattern of blatant disregard for court authority, warranting imprisonment for the first respondent and fines. Penalties and costs were moderated to avoid double punishment and reflect partial success on the applicant's claims.

Court Disposition

Declarations made; injunctions granted; pecuniary penalties and imprisonment imposed; apportionment of costs ordered.

Orders

  • Declarations that each respondent contravened s 50-5(1) and/or s 50-5(2) of the Tax Agent Services Act 2009 (Cth) as specified.
  • Declaratory findings and penalties for multiple contempts of court against first and second respondents.