Tax Evasion - What would you do?

Week 7 – Oral Presentation by Rae Horton

The basic speech structure demonstrates the old proverb for speakers:

Tell them what you are going to say, say it and tell them again what you have just said (Adler and Rodman 2003, p.349).

Think of an oral presentation being similar to an essay as having an introduction, a body or main section and a conclusion or closing. 

In your introduction you may wish to use visuals or other aids as a way of getting your audience’s attention.  According to Costigan (2014, p.3) the introduction should ‘create interest and grab the audience’s attention’ whilst establishing credibility and introducing your thesis.

Eunson (2012, p.353) suggests making only ‘three to five points in the body’ of your presentation.  The conclusion summarises where you would recapitulate material from the introduction and body.  You may also consider using something dramatic at the finish to leave your audience with something to think about.

Oral Presentation
Visual Aid:  Power Point presentation

Transcript of Oral Presentation  

Audience:  The following presentation is to an audience of accounting students who are about to graduate and go out into the workforce.  The topic being discussed is tax evasion and the question being asked is “What Would You Do?”

The consequences of tax evasion are serious including large fines, prosecution, jail terms, loss of business reputation and serious family stress.  According to the Australian Taxation Office, since 2006 fines totalling more than $14.45 million have been imposed, and reparation orders of $56.77 million were obtained for serious fraud (Australian Government 2014).

A recent report by the Tax Justice Network Australia, which is an international group focused on investigating tax avoidance, states that almost a third of companies listed on the ASX 200 pay only 10 per cent or less corporate tax (Morgan 2014).  It is estimated that the Australian Government is missing out on $8 billion per year in annual revenues (Tax Justice Network Australia 2014).  The corporate tax rate is 30 per cent, yet James Hardie and Westfield Retail Trust pay zero tax and further, Rupert Murdoch’s 21st Century Fox pays only 1 per cent tax.  

The following scenario demonstrates the difference one poorly considered decision can make.  Roger has just graduated from university and is about to start a new job as a Graduate Accountant for an accounting firm in the city.  He soon becomes aware of a series of arrangements his boss is setting up for his clients which are centred on schemes originating in the Bahamas (Australian Government 2014).

The Bahamas is a known tax haven and that means clients are getting away with paying either very little tax or no tax at all.  In fact, the Tax Justice Network Australia (2014) reported that ‘last financial year a massive $47 billion flowed from Australia to secrecy jurisdictions.’

At this point Roger has a decision to make.  Does he speak up – or say nothing?  

What would you do? 

To conclude, tax crime results in serious consequences.  Sentences have become more severe as the courts and community recognise the seriousness of tax crime.  More importantly, in some cases sentences for Tax Agents have doubled in recent years (Australian Government 2014).

References:

Adler, RB & Rodman, G 2003, Understanding human communication, 8th edn, Oxford University Press, New York

Australian Government n.d. ‘Tax matters – what would you do?’, viewed 2 December 2014, www.taxmatters.gov.au/whatwouldyoudo
‘Prosecutions and penalties to date,’  viewed 2 December 2014, www.taxmatters.gov.au/ourprosecutionrecord

Costigan, L 2014, ‘ Lesson 7 – Oral presentations.’  CQUniversity Australia

Eunson, B 2012, C21 Communicating in the 21st century,  3rd edn, John wiley & Sons Australia Ltd., Milton

Morgan, E 2014, ‘One third of top Australian companies pay less than 10pc tax: the Australian government is missing out on $8b per year,’ ABC news, viewed 2 December 2014, www.abc.net.au/news/