1. 20-5 Eligibility for Registration
2. 20-5(3)(a) Company has ceased to meet registration requirement that each director is a fit and proper person

On 27 March 2025, the Tax Practitioners Board (TPB) made the decision to terminate the tax agent registration of Albus Advisory Pty Limited as it ceased to meet the tax practitioner registration requirement under the Tax Agent Services Act 2009 (TASA) that each director be a fit and proper person on the basis of its finding that its sole director, Mr Peter White, was not a fit and proper person.

After completing an investigation, the TPB found that Mr White was no longer a fit and proper person on the basis that:
• he engaged in conduct that breached the following items of the Code of Professional Conduct (the Code) in the Tax Agent Services Act 2009:
o subsection 30-10(1) – honesty and integrity
o subsection 30-10(2) – complying with taxation laws in the conduct of your personal affairs)
o subsection 30-10(5) – managing conflicts of interest
o subsection 30-10(7) – competency
o subsection 30-10(11) – not knowingly obstruct the administration of taxation laws
• as the director of a company trustee of a trust he:
o made distributions from the trust to individuals who were not eligible family-member beneficiaries or, in the case of one of the individuals, was the settlor of the trust, which specifically excluded that person as a beneficiary;
o reduced the funds available for the benefit of the eligible beneficiaries of that trust by making distributions to individuals that were not eligible family-member beneficiaries;
o completed a family trust election (FTE) form for the trust that he later attempted to revoke by claiming the election was an administrative error, when as a tax agent, Mr White ought to have known that the period in which he could revoke the election had expired and where the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) found that the election was not an administrative error;
o failed to lodge family trust distribution tax (FTDT) payment advice forms for distributions made by the trust;
o failed to ensure the trust paid the FTDT arising from distributions made to those non-family-member beneficiaries;
o lodged income tax returns as the tax agent for the two non-family-member beneficiaries of the trust, declaring the distribution amounts they received as beneficiary income from the trust, when these amounts should have been declared by the trust and assessed for FTDT;
• he devised and assisted in implementing a tax minimisation scheme for a client and his related entities;
• as the settlor of another trust, which precluded him from benefitting from that trust, he:
o engaged in tax evasion by facilitating personal income to be paid into the trust, including payments he received for his advice in relation to the tax minimisation scheme, and took steps to conceal this income from the ATO;
o represented to the ATO that the payments received via the trust were gifts or loans, despite not having any loan documentation to support that claim and despite his failure to report these payments to his employer, Ernst & Young (EY), as a partner, in accordance with its policy of receiving gifts, until after EY commenced an internal investigation into his conduct;
o made a false or misleading statement to a bank by signing a declaration form as the trustee of the trust when he was not in fact a trustee;
o made false or misleading statements to the ATO by not declaring extensive personal income, including the payments made by clients through the trust, in his income tax returns;
• he failed to register for goods and services tax (GST) when required to do so and failed to pay GST of $205,366 on $2,259,000 of payments he received for professional services;
• he failed to lodge 6 business activity statements (BAS) which he was required to lodge;
• he failed to lodge 2 personal income tax returns by their respective due dates;
• he failed to pay, or enter into a payment plan for, his taxation debt of approximately $2,000,000;
• he is subject to promoter penalty litigation initiated by the ATO and the resulting publicity stemming from his conduct has brought disrepute on himself, his former employer, and the tax agent profession.

Taking into account the seriousness of the above conduct, the TPB also determined that Albus Advisory Pty Limited should be prohibited from applying for registration for a period of five years from the date the termination of his registration takes effect.

The TPB considered Mr White’s conduct to be serious, deliberate and dishonest in nature and that he failed to demonstrate any reasonable level of acknowledgement, contrition or remorse for his conduct. The TPB also considered that Albus Advisory Pty Limited represented an ongoing risk to the public, tax system and the tax practitioner profession if it remained registered, based on the view that it was unlikely for the company to continue operating without involvement or influence from Mr White.