True Crime Mystery at the Australian Tax Office

In part 1 of this three-part crime mystery, deception by the Australia Tax Office's legal representatives is revealed in documents prepared by the Australian Government Solicitor while representing the ATO in court proceedings.

 In part 2, the mystery deepens as exceptional events unfold rapidly after efforts to silence a whistleblower are derailed by legal advice. 

Finally, in part 3 of this three-part series, motives are exposed and explanations for the puzzling mysteries at the end of part 2 are discussed. Is it a case of a culture of maladministration or are reasons for "men behaving badly" more villainous?

More villainous actions are carried out by other government agencies. This is not a "culture problem" confined to the Australian Taxation Office. The web of a singular criminal purpose spreads wherever the opportunity exists. 

The Australian Customs Service Parallel

The ACS has used its "power to destroy" in ways that mirror the ATO's conduct:

1. The Midford Paramount Case: Customs proceeded with a fraud case even after their own lawyers found it "devoid of morality" and a court had discredited it. The result was the total destruction of a successful Sydney business, later requiring a $25 million compensation payout by the government.
   
   
2. The Peter Tomson Case: A classic "migrant success story" was destroyed when Customs seized all trading stock in 1987, alleging duty evasion. It took 16 years for the truth to begin emerging in a parliamentary inquiry.

A side-by-side comparison of Jae Jang (ATO) and Midford Paramount (Customs), shows how different agencies used identical tactics—seizing stock, freezing accounts, and ignoring legal advice—to achieve the same result: the death of a targeted business. 

Tactical Commonalities: In both agencies, investigators were accused of swearing false information to obtain warrants, ignoring evidence of innocence, and maintaining "vendettas" despite legal advice.

Yet Another Australian Taxation Office Example

Mark Freeman’s bright business idea earned him a government grant, despite this, the tax office disregarded this and hit him with a huge bill. Seven years and $750,000 later, he is still fighting for justice.

The company had won research and development grants from the government’s innovation arm it was working in collaboration with the University of NSW and had third-party support from Standards Australia.

But the ATO decided the company wasn’t eligible for the grants and tax offsets and hit Freeman with a $250,000 tax bill.

Mr Freeman says corrupt ATO auditors have falsely assessed debts from the BTS R&D losses. It is alleged that senior ATO officials, have abused their assessment positions to corruptly manipulate information to falsify and diminish R&D loses, and knowingly manufacture associated debts against BTS to total more than $250,000. Mr Freeman alleges that senior ATO officials continually breached the Criminal Code Act (Cth) 1995 in order to avoid responsibility and accountability for their extensive corrupt conduct. 

Read more about the ATO targeting of Mark Freeman.

Burns Philp takeover of Goodman Fielder at bargain price with ATO threatening

In late 2002 and early 2003, Goodman Fielder fiercely fought an impending $102 million Australian Taxation Office (ATO) ruling while simultaneously defending itself against a hostile $2.4 billion takeover bid by Burns Philp, a smaller yeast and spice company led by Graeme Hart. 

Read more on "Burns Philp is owned by Kiwi corporate raider Graeme Hart" at Michael West Media.