<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Taxabull &#187; BHP</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.taxabull.com/tag/bhp/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.taxabull.com</link>
	<description>Australian Tax &#38; Accounting news. No BS.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Dec 2009 23:08:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Digging a hole into the ATO? Miners under siege! (2 of 2)</title>
		<link>http://www.taxabull.com/2009/09/27/mineshaft2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.taxabull.com/2009/09/27/mineshaft2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 12:24:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>taxabull</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Indirect Tax]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ATO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BHP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[excise duty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mining]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxabull.com/?p=111</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[BHP takes the ATO to court..! This all started last year when the ATO decided to abolish an excise exemption over BHP&#8216;s gas field in the North West shelf. This meant that BHP and its partners would be liable for up to $500m in excise duties..! Rather than directly attacking the ATO about this unexpected development, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h3>BHP takes the ATO to court..!</h3>
<p>This all started last year when the <a href="http://www.ato.gov.au">ATO</a> decided to abolish an excise exemption over <a href="http://www.bhpbilliton.com/">BHP</a>&#8216;s gas field in the North West shelf. This meant that BHP and its partners would be liable for up to $500m in excise duties..!</p>
<p>Rather than directly attacking the ATO about this unexpected development, BHP decided to adopt a more subtle tack&#8230;</p>
<p>They decided to wholeheartedly agreed with the new law and instead, are arguing that the North West shelf comprises of several gas fields <span style="text-decoration: underline;">NOT</span> one giant gas field.</p>
<p>This would mean that each gas field would fall under a separate production threshold which would effectively reduce the excise tax liability for the companies involved.</p>
<h1><span style="color: #0000ff;">Will it work? </span></h1>
<p>Only time will tell but you have to appreciate the creativity and finesse that the BHP tax advisors had dealt with this issue. With the amount of money involved, it is definitely worth a try..!</p>
<h3><strong>From the Taxabull team.</strong></h3>
<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1.75em; padding: 0px; border: 0px initial initial;"><em>#1 provider of Australian tax information on twitter</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.taxabull.com/2009/09/27/mineshaft2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

