ATO & Tax Lawyers › Tax Litigation
Tax Litigation Lawyers — AAT. Federal Court. High Court.
When the ATO disallows your objection, the dispute moves to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal or the Federal Court. Tax litigation requires specialist knowledge of tax law, administrative law procedure, and the ATO's litigation strategy. A tax litigation lawyer manages the entire proceeding — from the statement of facts and issues through to hearing — maximising the prospects of a favourable outcome.
⚠ Where an ATO objection is disallowed, the taxpayer has 60 days to elect AAT review or Federal Court appeal. Missing this deadline permanently bars the challenge. Tax litigation requires specialist preparation — engage a tax lawyer as soon as the objection decision is received. Get advice now.
Tax Litigation Matters We Handle
From AAT proceedings to High Court — specialist tax litigation.
Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) Tax Proceedings
The AAT provides a merits review of ATO objection decisions — the Tribunal stands in the shoes of the original decision maker and decides the matter afresh. A lawyer prepares the statement of facts, issues, and contentions; manages the evidence (including expert evidence); conducts the hearing; and pursues settlement at every stage. The AAT is the starting point for most tax disputes after objection.
Federal Court Tax Appeals
A Federal Court tax appeal under Part IVC of the TAA 1953 is a full hearing of the dispute — not a review of the ATO's decision. The Federal Court is the appropriate forum for large or legally complex disputes, and for matters where the AAT has ruled against the taxpayer. A tax litigation lawyer with Federal Court experience manages the proceedings from commencement through to hearing.
Full Federal Court Appeals on Questions of Law
Decisions of the Federal Court (and AAT decisions on questions of law) can be appealed to the Full Federal Court. A Full Federal Court appeal is limited to questions of law — the Full Court does not rehear the facts. A lawyer identifies arguable questions of law in the primary decision and manages the Full Court appeal.
Tax Litigation Settlement
The ATO settles a significant proportion of tax disputes before hearing — particularly where the legal question is close, the amount is modest, or the ATO's position has weaknesses. A lawyer identifies when settlement is achievable, negotiates with the ATO's legal team, and documents settlement outcomes that are commercially favourable to the taxpayer.
Expert Evidence in Tax Proceedings
Many tax disputes — particularly those involving asset valuations, transfer pricing, and the commerciality of arrangements — require expert evidence. A lawyer identifies the expert evidence required, briefs appropriate experts, and manages the expert's report to comply with the AAT and Federal Court's requirements for expert evidence.
Costs Applications in Tax Proceedings
In the Federal Court, costs follow the event — a successful taxpayer is entitled to recover their legal costs from the ATO. A lawyer manages the costs application, seeks indemnity costs where the ATO has acted unreasonably (including failing to comply with model litigant obligations), and defends ATO costs applications where the taxpayer is unsuccessful.
The Legal Framework
How tax litigation works in Australia.
AAT — merits review, s14ZZK TAA 1953
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal conducts a merits review of ATO objection decisions under s14ZZK of the TAA 1953. The Tribunal stands in the shoes of the ATO decision maker and decides the matter afresh on the facts and law. The taxpayer bears the burden of proof — under s14ZZO of the TAA 1953, the taxpayer must prove that the assessment is excessive or that the decision is incorrect. The AAT can receive evidence not before the ATO, is less formal than the Federal Court, and is generally faster and cheaper. It is the preferred forum for most tax disputes after objection.
Federal Court — de novo appeal, Part IVC TAA 1953
A Federal Court appeal under Part IVC of the TAA 1953 is a fresh hearing of the tax dispute — not a review of the AAT's decision or the ATO's objection decision. The taxpayer again bears the burden of proof. Federal Court proceedings follow the Federal Court Rules 2011 — which require formal pleadings, discovery, and compliance with the Court's practice notes for commercial and taxation matters. The Federal Court is more appropriate for large disputes, legally complex questions, and matters where Full Court or High Court authority may be required.
Burden of proof — s14ZZO TAA 1953
The burden of proof in tax litigation is on the taxpayer — the taxpayer must prove that the assessment is excessive or that the ATO's decision is wrong. This is reversed from general civil litigation principles. In practice, it means the taxpayer must lead positive evidence that establishes the correct tax position — not merely that the ATO has failed to prove the assessment is correct. Understanding and managing the burden of proof is central to tax litigation strategy — a lawyer builds the case affirmatively from the outset, not defensively.
Limitation of objection grounds — s14ZZL TAA 1953
Under s14ZZL of the TAA 1953, in AAT proceedings the taxpayer is generally limited to the grounds raised in the formal objection. New grounds can only be raised with the leave of the Tribunal — and leave is not guaranteed. Similarly, in Federal Court proceedings, new grounds generally require leave. This makes the preparation of the original objection critically important — every available ground of challenge must be raised in the objection, even if not fully developed at that stage. A lawyer ensures the objection is comprehensive from the outset.
ATO model litigant obligations in tax proceedings
The ATO's model litigant obligations under the Legal Services Directions 2017 apply throughout tax litigation. They require the ATO to act honestly, consider settlement in appropriate cases, not pursue unmeritorious positions, and concede issues that are clearly decided against it. A lawyer who understands these obligations uses them strategically — to encourage the ATO to concede particular issues, to negotiate settlement at appropriate points in the litigation, and to seek enhanced costs orders where the ATO has not complied with its model litigant obligations.
Costs in tax proceedings — AAT vs Federal Court
In the AAT, each party generally bears its own costs — the AAT only rarely makes costs orders. This reduces the financial risk of pursuing tax disputes in the AAT. In the Federal Court, costs follow the event — so a successful taxpayer can recover their legal costs from the ATO, and an unsuccessful taxpayer may be ordered to pay the ATO's costs. The costs risk in the Federal Court is a significant factor in the decision whether to proceed to the Federal Court or pursue settlement. A lawyer provides a realistic costs assessment before recommending the litigation pathway.
How It Works
One request. Free tax litigation consultation.
Tell us the stage of your tax dispute — objection disallowed, AAT proceedings commenced, or Federal Court — and a tax litigation lawyer will assess your position and advise on strategy.
Submit Your RequestDescribe the dispute
Tell us the stage of the dispute (objection disallowed, AAT commenced, Federal Court), the amount in dispute, the grounds raised in the objection, and any upcoming deadlines or hearing dates.
Matched to a tax litigation lawyer
Your request is matched to a tax lawyer experienced in AAT and Federal Court tax proceedings — who can assess the merits, advise on the litigation pathway, and manage the proceedings.
Free consultation
A tax litigation lawyer contacts you for a free consultation — reviewing the dispute history, assessing the merits of the current position, and providing a realistic strategy and cost estimate for the proceedings.