Print Article for : 2009 Employment Law Changes

Your Online Guide » Arts & Humanities » How Is Culture Formed

[#1]2009 Employment Law Changes

by Catherine Harvey, Cat

They can be held pretty much responsible for many laws governing making a will also. Many countries had no propensity to enforce where a person's belongings went to on their death and if today's standards are anything to go by, this could have led to many family feuds.

Many laws also came from Ancient Greece regarding making a will, although various parts of the country had their own take on it. Most areas under Roman jurisdiction or Greek would specify that when making a will, the family of the deceased should inherit everything. This was to ensure the continuation of that family.

Some local rulers in Greece agreed that greater ties could be made between friends rather than family and would allow considerations for this when their citizens were making a will. No women or adoptees were allowed to make wills and slaves or foreigners possessions would be seized upon death for public use.

To be of sound mind when making a will and to be under no duress were important rules that all law makers have kept when will writing and that still stand today. It would seem Ancient Greeks and Romans put a lot more store by the influence a woman could have over her husband and any cajoling or encouragement that might influence his decisions would make the will void.

The Romans considered making a will to be their moral duty. If they wished to disinherit a child it had to be for a good, provable reason and they had to leave them a minor monetary token to show their disproval. To die without leaving a will brought shame on the deceased and their family.

If a person is left out of a will entirely these days it does not show bad morals, just the will makers intention to disinherit. Romans could not contest part of a will like we can today. The will should stand or fall entirely, whereas now parts of a will can be upheld while others can be argued.

The effects of Christianity on making a will were quite profound. They instilled a duty to bequeath a certain proportion of belongings or money to the Church. Priests overtook law makers as witnesses to wills and they were often kept in churches.

This, in part, went a long way to making churches rich and, ultimately, to them being poor when this was no longer a requirement.

Trends regarding making a will had altered in mainland Britain by the 1600's. Girls of 12 and boys of 14 were now allowed to make wills leaving their personal effects. These changes were probably due to the fact that people were marrying at a much younger age and also dying at a very young age.

Will making has always been seen as a very serious business. The Larceny Act of 1861 shows that the crime of stealing, damaging or concealing a will was punishable by penal servitude for the rest of the criminal's life. Forgery of a will also came with the same punishment, although this had been reduced from the death penalty.

Since 1897 when the last changes to will making laws were made governing land transfer were introduced, there have been no major alterations. However, I am very pleased to say that the ancient rule of women only being allowed to make a will with their husband's permission has long been abolished.

1 Where the taxpayer gives consent to the Ruling being changed;

2 Without the taxpayer's consent, if the Private Ruling is about an arrangement which has not yet been carried out. This means that if the Private Ruling covered an arrangement which the taxpayer repeatedly carried out over time (for example buying and selling a particular item), the Private Ruling could be changed for any of the arrangements which occurred after the date of the change;

3 Without the taxpayer's consent where the arrangement had commenced. This is limited, however, to those circumstances where the Private Ruling was causing another taxpayer to be disadvantaged and his or her disadvantage was greater than the disadvantage that the Rulee would suffer if the Ruling were to be changed; and

4 By issuing a Public Ruling which is inconsistent with the Private Ruling. However, this could only occur if the taxpayer's arrangement has not begun to be carried out or if it has commenced and another taxpayer would be disadvantaged to a much greater extent than the Rulee.

If the taxpayer received the Private Ruling before he or she lodged the return for the year in which the arrangement took place, and then the taxpayer did not follow that Ruling, then the taxpayer may be liable for the extra tax that he or she would have paid under the Ruling. If the taxpayer had received the Private Ruling after he or she lodged the relevant return, then the Commissioner has the power to amend the assessment to take the Private Ruling into account. This may decrease the taxation liability but may also increase that liability.

The way in which a taxpayer can have a Private Ruling reviewed is determined by whether or not an assessment in respect of an income tax return has issued which deals with the arrangement covered by the Private Ruling.

If the assessment has already issued, then the taxpayer should have the assessment reviewed. If no assessment is issued, then the taxpayer should have the Ruling reviewed.

To have an assessment reviewed, the taxpayer needs to lodge an objection. That objection must be in writing in which the taxpayer informs the Commissioner which assessment is to be reviewed and provides details of the years and the relevant tax file number. The objection must also state which matter dealt with within the assessment is disputed and why the taxpayer believes that the assessment should be amended. For most short period of return taxpayers, the objection must be lodged within two years of the date upon which the taxpayer received the original assessment. There are no fees for lodging objections.

To have a Private Ruling reviewed, the taxpayer must also need to lodge an objection. Again, the objection must be in writing. The taxpayer must provide the Authorisation number of the Private Ruling. The taxpayer must also inform the Commissioner which part of the Private Ruling is disputed and why the taxpayer believes the Ruling should be changed.

This objection to the Ruling must be lodged within 60 days of the date of service of the Private Ruling upon the taxpayer or, for short period of return taxpayers, within two years of the last day allowed for lodging the tax return for the particular year that the Private Ruling is about, whichever is the latest. Again, there are no fees for lodging objections to Private Rulings.

Article Source : Pg. 24

About Author

Both Catherine Harvey & Frank Egan - Lac Lawyers are contributors for EditorialToday. The above articles have been edited for relevancy and timeliness. All write-ups, reviews, tips and guides published by EditorialToday.com and its partners or affiliates are for informational purposes only. They should not be used for any legal or any other type of advice. We do not endorse any author, contributor, writer or article posted by our team.

Catherine Harvey has sinced written about articles on various topics from Culture and Society, Home and Wedding Gowns. Legal expert Catherine Harvey looks at the laws governing and how they have changed over the years. To find out more please visit. Catherine Harvey's top article generates over 1500000 views. to your Favourites.

Frank Egan - Lac Lawyers has sinced written about articles on various topics from Culture and Society, Employment Law and Legal Matters. Frank Egan is the Chief Executive Officer of and has over 27 years of experience as a lawyer.. Frank Egan - Lac Lawyers's top article generates over 9900 views. to your Favourites.