The CBFCA made a
Submission to the DIBP on these refund issues which were accepted by the DIBP as being correct at law. The CBFCA is now aware that the DIBP, over the intervening period (yes it has been almost 18 months), has now prepared a statement to be issued under a DIBP Notice (DIBPN) relating to the processing of refund applications. On this aspect, there has been significant work by the DIBP to achieve this outcome with the CBFCA, and that work is acknowledged. For the CBFCA, a clear and concise policy on refunds is appropriate and the CBFCA has pursued a position from its Submission to the effect that:
- The DIBP can request information from licensed customs brokers on any aspect of an import declaration when a refund application is lodged however, in relation to the seeking of this information, payment of the refund should not be withheld if information is outstanding that does not relate to the actual refund application. Other information which may be required from the importer of record or service provider from lodgement of the initial import declaration is a separate matter to the refund
- Licensed customs brokers who lodge a refund application should not be required to provide additional information as to the original import declaration (if they were not the entity which lodged the original import declaration), but would be expected to communicate with the owner of the goods to try and obtain that information to assist the DIBP
In relation to policy and process communication, the CBFCA again reiterates the need for the DIBP to consider, in relation to any of its policy determinations, the development of a process similar to Rulings and other Procedural Statements adopted by the Australian Taxation Office as members will be aware that many Notices from the DIBP are, in the main, short on referenced legislative requirements, precedent from Court determinations, or actual comprehensive commentary. Without an appropriate in-depth and legislative reference policy determination, many issues remain at the interpretation of the regulator or readers of any Notice. This is not an appropriate way of communicating existing policy, process or practice.
Your industry Association has again urged the DIBP to consider a more appropriate methodology of what it refers to as to the
articulation of policy.
Suffice to say in relation to refund applications, members should note that this statement by the DIBP will now see the refund application arrangements return to what was, and should always have been, the appropriate methodology employed by the DIBP in relation to the refund application process and compliance overview.