Court rules in favour of ATO in dispute over WFH deductions
What happened
The respondent obtained the lease for the apartment in June 2020 on the basis that we would be required to work from home for the foreseeable future. However, in last week's decision, the Federal Court found that the tribunal had erroneously treated a single outgoing as two outgoings: one as “additional expenditure” for the second bedroom, and the other as a separate outgoing for a one-bedroom apartment. This matters for Professional Services & HR because contracting activity changes leverage, market appetite, and which clauses buyers can credibly trade with 2020 as the clearest commercial anchors; Rate caps is now more valuable
Buyer takeaway
For Professional Services & HR, treat this as a cost-boundary signal rather than just a headline; buyer assumptions may need refreshing before the next quote or award decision
Cost / money
Use this to refresh should-cost views and challenge any fast repricing. Keep the read-through directional unless the source itself provides hard commercial numbers
Supplier / commercial
Suppliers with fresh cost justification may push harder on reopeners, indexation, shorter quote validity, or pass-through language. Buyers should separate real drivers from negotiation posture
Safety / operations
The operational risk is indirect: tight budgets or repricing battles often reappear later as reduced slack, substitutions, or execution compromises that buyers then have to manage
What to watch
Watch for shorter quote validity, reopeners, pass-through requests, or attempts to reset pricing on the back of weak evidence
Key facts
- The respondent obtained the lease for the apartment in June 2020 on the basis that we would b
- However, in last week's decision, the Federal Court found that the tribunal had erroneously t
- The Commissioner of Taxation has been successful in a recent Federal Court of Australia d Sig
- The Federal Court has ruled that an employee was not entitled to deduct a portion of his rent
