Now now DDzx,"Obviously, you are not a professional connected to...

Now now DDzx,

"Obviously, you are not a professional connected to the industry. Obviously, you are not an accountant or lawyer."

ROFL. I don't know where you got that idea. Is it because I highlighted the potential for self interest in the industry?

But let's just try and stick to the issue shall we - I said:

"It's *settled* when you can direct me to where this is written down."

Your response:

A. " it is made clear in their annual guidelines to the industry. If the ATO was interested in conducting compliance activity against traders who report under CGT, they would make a public notice."

Annual guidelines = how they have forewarned they are going to apply their discretion this year. You even appear to acknowledge that could change at a future point in time (by making a public notice) - even though, just to be clear, I believe they would be wrong to do so.

B."As for investors who try to pass of as traders, the ATO has been very clear about this, as in the following link: http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?Docid=TPA/TA200912/NAT/ATO/00001"

I think you know that's for the opposite situation and its not what we're talking about. (Just as an aside it also relies on the ultimate bureaucrat's discretionary power tool Part IVA ;)) Your reference also agrees with what I said previously that they are currently concerned with losses from the recent GFC and investors.


So can you not direct me to where it's clearly written down?

Not tax advice. DYOR.