| dc.contributor.author | Alley, Clinton | en_GB |
| dc.contributor.author | Bentley, Duncan | en_GB |
| dc.contributor.author | James, Simon | en_GB |
| dc.contributor.department | University of Waikato, New Zealand; Bond University; University of Exeter | en_GB |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2009-01-15T10:31:52Z | en_GB |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2011-01-25T10:25:52Z | en_GB |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2013-03-19T15:57:24Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2001 | en_GB |
| dc.description.abstract | The definition of "residence" for individuals differs between
Australia and New Zealand. This article examines the global context in
which individuals now operate and puts forward a "number of days"
test as the most appropriate to protect the revenue and attract foreign
investment. This may be reinforced by using the "centre of vital
interests" definition as a tie-breaker. Using this discussion, the article
examines the advantages and disadvantages of each of the New Zealand
and Australian definitions and puts forward proposals for the revision
of the Australian definition. | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Vol. 4(1), pp. 40-72 | en_GB |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10036/47484 | en_GB |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_GB |
| dc.publisher | Monash University | en_GB |
| dc.relation.url | https://www.jausttax.com.au/past-issues/volume-4-issue-1 | en_GB |
| dc.subject | residence | en_GB |
| dc.subject | tax legislation | en_GB |
| dc.subject | New Zealand | en_GB |
| dc.subject | Australia | en_GB |
| dc.title | The New Zealand Definition of “Residence” for Individuals: Lessons for Australia in a “Global” Environment | en_GB |
| dc.type | Article | en_GB |
| dc.date.available | 2009-01-15T10:31:52Z | en_GB |
| dc.date.available | 2011-01-25T10:25:52Z | en_GB |
| dc.date.available | 2013-03-19T15:57:24Z | |
| dc.identifier.journal | Journal of Australian Taxation | en_GB |
