🇦🇺Australia

Falsche Marktwertansätze mit nachteiligen CGT-Folgen

4 verified sources

Definition

Queensland guidance emphasises that values set in the probate inventory become the CGT cost bases for beneficiaries and that guessing or mixing replacement and market values can inflate CGT cost bases or distort tax outcomes.[1] The ATO states that where tax law refers to market value, taxpayers must obtain an objective and supportable market valuation, which is often required for inherited assets.[6] Deceased estate valuation services explain that property valuations are essential to meet ATO obligations and establish cost base for capital gains tax purposes.[3][8] If a property worth AUD 1,000,000 at death is recorded at AUD 900,000 due to an unsubstantiated estimate, and later sold for AUD 1,100,000, the taxable capital gain increases by AUD 100,000. At an effective marginal tax rate of ~32.5–47% for many beneficiaries, this can create an additional CGT burden of AUD 32,500–47,000 on just one asset, entirely attributable to poor valuation practices.

Key Findings

  • Financial Impact: Quantified: Under‑valuations of 5–15% on real property or share portfolios are plausible without professional valuation; for a AUD 800,000–1,200,000 property, a 10% understatement (AUD 80,000–120,000) can increase beneficiaries’ CGT by approximately AUD 26,000–56,000 per sale. Across an estate with multiple assets, additional tax leakages of AUD 20,000–100,000 are realistic.
  • Frequency: Common where executors rely on online estimates, agent appraisals or outdated insurance values instead of formal valuations; particularly frequent in suburban properties and mixed investment portfolios.
  • Root Cause: Misunderstanding of ATO market valuation requirements; belief that cheap or informal appraisals are sufficient; confusion between insurance replacement value and market value; pressure to minimise upfront valuation fees; lack of awareness that probate values lock in beneficiaries’ CGT cost bases.

Why This Matters

The Pitch: Trusts & Estates players in Australia 🇦🇺 expose beneficiaries to avoidable CGT of AUD 10,000–80,000 per property or share portfolio because estate valuations are guessed rather than professionally determined. Automation of valuation requests, evidence capture and audit trails optimises cost bases and preserves this value.

Affected Stakeholders

Executor, Beneficiary, Estate accountant, Tax adviser, Property valuer

Deep Analysis (Premium)

Financial Impact

Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.

Unlock to reveal

Current Workarounds

Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.

Unlock to reveal

Get Solutions for This Problem

Full report with actionable solutions

$99$39
  • Solutions for this specific pain
  • Solutions for all 15 industry pains
  • Where to find first clients
  • Pricing & launch costs
Get Solutions Report

Methodology & Sources

Data collected via OSINT from regulatory filings, industry audits, and verified case studies.

Evidence Sources:

Related Business Risks

Übersehene oder zu niedrig bewertete Nachlassvermögenswerte

Quantified: Typically 2–10% of gross estate value at risk through missed or undervalued assets; for a AUD 500,000–1,000,000 estate this equates to approximately AUD 10,000–100,000 of potential revenue leakage for beneficiaries, and personal liability exposure of similar magnitude for executors.

Überhöhte oder doppelte Bewertungskosten im Nachlassverfahren

Quantified: Typical avoidable overspend of approximately AUD 1,000–3,000 per estate in redundant valuation work (e.g., one extra full property valuation plus repeated jewellery or business valuations); larger or more complex estates may incur AUD 3,000–5,000 of unnecessary fees.

Verzögerte Nachlassauszahlung durch fehlerhafte oder unvollständige Inventare

Quantified: Delays attributable to inventory/valuation defects of 1–3 months are common, implying approximately AUD 1,500–6,000 per estate in combined opportunity cost of funds (0.2–0.4% per month on AUD 500,000–1,000,000) and incremental holding costs on properties; complex or disputed estates may see 6+ month delays with losses exceeding AUD 10,000.

Steuer- und Haftungsrisiken durch fehlerhafte Nachlassbewertungen

Quantified: Typical downside range of AUD 10,000–30,000 per affected estate, comprising tax shortfall penalties and interest of approximately AUD 5,000–15,000 plus legal/advisory costs of AUD 5,000–15,000 in the event of ATO or state revenue review triggered by incorrect valuations.

Trust Accounting Compliance Penalties

AUD 2,330+ fine per late lodgement (unit penalty AUD 2,330 as per Uniform Law); 15+ hours annually for Part B preparation per practice

ATO Trust Tax Return Non-Compliance Fines

AUD 222 base failure-to-lodge penalty per 28 days (up to 5 units); 20-40 hours annually for manual financial statements

Request Deep Analysis

🇦🇺 Be first to access this market's intelligence