Publication Type

Journal Article

Version

submittedVersion

Publication Date

9-2019

Abstract

Section 10(1)(g) of the Singapore Income Tax Act is a ‘sweeping-up’ provision which catches all income not falling under sections 10(1)(a)–(f). More than 50 years after its introduction, the application of section 10(1)(g) is still unclear despite the test laid out in IB v CIT. This article notes that the current jurisprudence is limited to cases involving gains or profits from the disposal of assets. It argues that the reliance on the Australian Myer Emporium test in IB v CIT was misplaced and that the section 10(1)(g) test should not have a sole focus on intention. Rather, it proposes a set of indicia of income drawn from the Badges of Trade, which it argues to be consistent with the existing jurisprudence. The article highlights that the tax consequences of receipts being assessed under sections 10(1)(a) or (g) are different and notes the importance of the receipts being assessed under the correct subsection.

Keywords

Income Tax, Taxation Law, Revenue Law, Tax Law, Singapore, Malaysia

Discipline

Asian Studies | Taxation-State and Local | Tax Law

Research Areas

Corporate, Finance and Securities Law

Publication

Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal

Volume

19

Issue

2

First Page

204

Last Page

226

ISSN

1472-9342

Identifier

10.1080/14729342.2019.1665764

Publisher

Taylor & Francis (Routledge)

Copyright Owner and License

Authors

Additional URL

https://doi.org/10.1080/14729342.2019.1665764

Download

Share

COinS