I need a Youtube Tax Accountant
- Thread starter TXE
- Start date
- Status
Xynudu
Super Poster
I totally agree. Entertainment tax in Oz applies to food and entertainment deductions, not income.
This whole post smells of BS to me. Is the OP trying to tell us that the channel only made this huge amount of money in the last financial year ?
I find that very hard to believe.
In cases like this the first thing you have to do is get a ruling from the ATO on the income tax liability. There is a pro forma on the ATO web pages for this purpose. It is only legally binding for the applicable financial period.
The ATO will tell you straight off if the money is taxable, and under which section of the act.
A tax consultant will do exactly the same thing. Whether any strategies to mitigate taxation payable can be implemented is highly debatable.
I remember seeing an almost identical post to this last year. Maybe we have a serial ego tripper here ?
This whole post smells of BS to me. Is the OP trying to tell us that the channel only made this huge amount of money in the last financial year ?
I find that very hard to believe.
In cases like this the first thing you have to do is get a ruling from the ATO on the income tax liability. There is a pro forma on the ATO web pages for this purpose. It is only legally binding for the applicable financial period.
The ATO will tell you straight off if the money is taxable, and under which section of the act.
A tax consultant will do exactly the same thing. Whether any strategies to mitigate taxation payable can be implemented is highly debatable.
I remember seeing an almost identical post to this last year. Maybe we have a serial ego tripper here ?
Last edited:
DUPLICATE ACCOUNT
Serial ego tripper? Christ I just want to maintain some anonymousity and work out where to go from here. Sorry but I did not state the income in my original post. I was asked twice and thought it would be ok to state. I'm not the brightest person and I never expected things to go this crazy but they have.
From the web:
If you make money from YouTube you are a “performing artist" and now have to pay income tax on it, according to the Tax Office.
Digital savvy entrepreneurs, bloggers and filmmakers who could be making hundreds of thousands of dollars from advertising gained from their YouTube channels will now be taxed on it following a Tax Office ruling.
Tax experts say the decision could have wider ramifications for all online income sources.
Among Australia’s biggest and most recent hits is Elise Strachan , who dumped her flight attendant career for YouTube fame. Her channel “My Cupcake Addiction" has about 750,000 subscribers and is among the top three baking channels on YouTube, more than replacing her former income. Another local YouTube earner is Natalie Tran who gains more than $US100,000 ($121,000) from her site “communitychannel".
Andrew Taylor of More+Comedy, who manages some of our top YouTube earners – such as comedians Alex “Shooter" Wiliamson, Neel Kolhatkar, Frenchy and Em Rusciano – said more talent, ranging from knitting or market tips tutors to entertainers were heading to agents to help manage their YouTube channels.
“You do have to have a huge number of followers to make good money," Mr Taylor said.
YouTube talent derive income not only from Google’s advertising deals but also by signing up with a new breed of digital companies, called multi-channel networks, which sell advertising space on YouTube channels to brands.
“They are big in the United States and are growing in Australia," he said.
“There are good ones and bad ones. Australian ones generally don’t take a commission from ads that Google sell, but most United States ones do."
Anyone posting content to YouTube can make money by opting to allow advertising to run across it, the income is split between Google and the content-generator.
The tax decision says someone who received income from Google for their cooking and baking videos uploaded to YouTube was subject to the same income tax laws that apply to people with fluctuating income such as performing artists, authors and sportspeople. Google declined to comment but the Tax Office decision says that a “baker’s" income was based on a share of advertising revenue and the number of views their videos received.
“The income the taxpayer receives from Google for their YouTube videos is a reward for providing services relating to their activities as a special professional," the ATO’s ruling says.
“Therefore, the income can form part of the taxpayer’s assessable professional income."
PwC private client tax partner Paul Brassil said it was an acknowledgement by the Tax Office in the digital age that performers sought to gain income via YouTube and other digital means.
The ruling meant that people earning money from sources such as YouTube would be eligible for income-averaging concessions if they had unusually high income in a particular year.
“Most artists work hard for modest financial rewards between occasional successes – so it’s great to see the ATO being open to applying existing concessions to new income sources," he said.
Minter Ellison special counsel Hamish Wallace agreed, saying the Tax Office’s decision was a warning to anyone earning money online to seek professional advice.
“I think there’s quite a few people out there who might be carrying out activities thinking it’s just a hobby, but from the ATO’s perspective it’s carrying on a business and generating taxable income," Mr Wallace said.
Allens senior associate Shaun Cartoon said the ATO’s decision could apply to anyone who gained rapid fame through a clip posted to YouTube.
“In the digital age, what starts out as a hobby can quickly turn into something commercial if a person develops an online following and derives income as a result" Mr Cartoon said.
“If there are a lot of hits and the clip is deriving income, it’s going to be hard to say that the income is not assessable for tax purposes, particularly if the activity is organised and repeated."
From the web:
If you make money from YouTube you are a “performing artist" and now have to pay income tax on it, according to the Tax Office.
Digital savvy entrepreneurs, bloggers and filmmakers who could be making hundreds of thousands of dollars from advertising gained from their YouTube channels will now be taxed on it following a Tax Office ruling.
Tax experts say the decision could have wider ramifications for all online income sources.
Among Australia’s biggest and most recent hits is Elise Strachan , who dumped her flight attendant career for YouTube fame. Her channel “My Cupcake Addiction" has about 750,000 subscribers and is among the top three baking channels on YouTube, more than replacing her former income. Another local YouTube earner is Natalie Tran who gains more than $US100,000 ($121,000) from her site “communitychannel".
Andrew Taylor of More+Comedy, who manages some of our top YouTube earners – such as comedians Alex “Shooter" Wiliamson, Neel Kolhatkar, Frenchy and Em Rusciano – said more talent, ranging from knitting or market tips tutors to entertainers were heading to agents to help manage their YouTube channels.
“You do have to have a huge number of followers to make good money," Mr Taylor said.
YouTube talent derive income not only from Google’s advertising deals but also by signing up with a new breed of digital companies, called multi-channel networks, which sell advertising space on YouTube channels to brands.
“They are big in the United States and are growing in Australia," he said.
“There are good ones and bad ones. Australian ones generally don’t take a commission from ads that Google sell, but most United States ones do."
Anyone posting content to YouTube can make money by opting to allow advertising to run across it, the income is split between Google and the content-generator.
The tax decision says someone who received income from Google for their cooking and baking videos uploaded to YouTube was subject to the same income tax laws that apply to people with fluctuating income such as performing artists, authors and sportspeople. Google declined to comment but the Tax Office decision says that a “baker’s" income was based on a share of advertising revenue and the number of views their videos received.
“The income the taxpayer receives from Google for their YouTube videos is a reward for providing services relating to their activities as a special professional," the ATO’s ruling says.
“Therefore, the income can form part of the taxpayer’s assessable professional income."
PwC private client tax partner Paul Brassil said it was an acknowledgement by the Tax Office in the digital age that performers sought to gain income via YouTube and other digital means.
The ruling meant that people earning money from sources such as YouTube would be eligible for income-averaging concessions if they had unusually high income in a particular year.
“Most artists work hard for modest financial rewards between occasional successes – so it’s great to see the ATO being open to applying existing concessions to new income sources," he said.
Minter Ellison special counsel Hamish Wallace agreed, saying the Tax Office’s decision was a warning to anyone earning money online to seek professional advice.
“I think there’s quite a few people out there who might be carrying out activities thinking it’s just a hobby, but from the ATO’s perspective it’s carrying on a business and generating taxable income," Mr Wallace said.
Allens senior associate Shaun Cartoon said the ATO’s decision could apply to anyone who gained rapid fame through a clip posted to YouTube.
“In the digital age, what starts out as a hobby can quickly turn into something commercial if a person develops an online following and derives income as a result" Mr Cartoon said.
“If there are a lot of hits and the clip is deriving income, it’s going to be hard to say that the income is not assessable for tax purposes, particularly if the activity is organised and repeated."
- Status