THOMSON REUTERS Australia & New Zealand

INSIGHT

Why top CFOs are transforming Statutory Reporting with technologyPAGE 16

OECD Releases Initial Peer Reviews on Implementation of CbC Reporting

JULY 2018FOR TAX & ACCOUNTING PROFESSIONALS

Catch me if you can - Transfer Pricing in the quantum age of speed and transparency PAGE 3

ATO corporate tax transparency report – looking beyond the raw dataPAGE 6

Focusing on Australia’s money laundering problem

How smart workflow management brings success in sport and tax

INSIGHTTHOMSON REUTERS

The Future Tax What’s in it for you? Change is a constant player in our world, with technology transforming the labour and consumer markets in equal measure, bringing with it a new global financial regulatory framework.

And so, it is no surprise that the tax and accounting industry has had many changes to navigate over the last ten years, from technological disruption, global legislative and regulatory reforms and changing customer needs.

There is also an increasing demand being placed on leaders in tax and finance to take a strategic role and add value to the business, above the operational line. However, in a recent survey we conducted, 57% of leaders saw their current systems and processes a blocker to this.

As leaders we have an opportunity to determine what role can we play in shaping the future of our business - from the way we serve our customers, meet our statutory and compliance obligations and how we direct and embrace technological and process innovations.

Thomson Reuters has operated in more than 100 countries for more than 100 years. We’ve naturally seen a lot of change over that time. We’ve helped many organisations, locally and global with assisting in managing these challenges but also providing trusted answers to turn these challenges into an opportunity. With our expertise in understanding and implementing technology, you can create opportunities not only in terms of compliance, but in helping thrive in an increasingly challenging global environment.

Our Insight magazine brings together a collection of articles providing insights on the key issues facing tax and accounting professionals which we hope will help spark new conversations you can have with your team to challenge the status quo.

We welcome your feedback on the issues they raise as well as any questions about how Thomson Reuters can help resolve these with our suite of tax and accounting solutions.

Edmund Wong Acting Managing Director Thomson Reuters Tax & Accounting ANZ

IN THIS ISSUE

EDITORIAL

IAN MOSSMarketing ManagerThomson Reuters - Tax & Accounting

EMMA FLANAGANMarketing Associate Thomson Reuters - Tax & Accounting

ANNABEL MEEHANContent ManagerThomson Reuters - Tax & Accounting

MARCUS SANDMANNMarketing DirectorThomson Reuters - Tax & Accounting

DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT

POLISHED CREATIVE SERVICESSydney, Australia

03 Catch me if you can – Transfer Pricing in the quantum age of speed and transparency

04 Compliance industry warms up to FinTech, RegTech

05 OECD Releases Initial Peer Reviews on Implementation of CbC Reporting

06 ATO corporate tax transparency report – Looking beyond the raw data

07 How smart workflow management brings success in sport and tax

08 Tax departments can fight terrorists

09 What the ATO’s proposed GST compliance measures mean for Corporate Australia

10 Confronting the BEPS obstacles

12 My head is in the cloud

14 With Cryptocurrencies, what role should government play?

16 Why Top CFOs are transforming Statutory Reporting with technology

18 Focusing on Australia’s money laundering problem

© 2018 Thomson Reuters

2

Author: Joanne Ting – Transfer Pricing Product Specialist

While the promise of quantum physics and its commercial application has been hyped for some time now, IBM’s success is a big deal for many reasons – quantum machines can process huge amounts of data extremely quickly, by using the counterintuitive nature of quantum physics. Speed is just one important feature – this type of processing affords big data classification and topological analysis of complex data sets, something which traditional data mining methods are unable to complete.

We are firmly in the age of big data capitalism. So where does tax feature in this? Everywhere. “Death and taxes” as the only certainty remains solid in the sub-atomic particle world. Regulatory bodies across the globe through the power of quantum solutions will be armed with the formidable power to delve into the tax positions of companies in an unprecedented level.

Shall we herald the age of quantum regulators? Not quite yet, but soon.

The regulatory sector, particularly from a tax compliance and financial crime perspective is already not just one of the largest benefactors of the data collection, processing, analytics revolution but has also been on the front foot in working with technology partners to harness the potential.

From a transfer pricing perspective, the ability of the ATO and global counterparts to legislate, collect, cross-reference data and take action on cross-border tax anomalies is remarkable. There are now limited legal loopholes in which to hide thanks to the OECD’s BEPS Action Plan, including the new rigorous Action 13 CbC reporting requirements, and there will be even higher levels of transparency in the future.

Data transfers between tax authorities in the supercomputer age will be made at lightning speed, allowing them to size-up in mere moments the veracity of a company’s declaration of cross-border structures and revenue models.

Whilst we’re not quite there yet, companies have started turning to automation and technology to ensure the CbC reports and transfer pricing documentation they produce are accurate. In addition, corporations need to be prepared to provide explanations and support their global structures and tax positions so it’s more important than ever to have accurate and timely data available to make the right decisions. We have seen in recent times how quickly company executives can be called upon for questioning in the public spotlight if there are suspicions of wrongdoing (Facebook, Commonwealth Bank, etc). The potential reputational risk, not to mention financial risk, of being seen to be non-compliant is something that multinationals cannot afford with the advent of big data analytics in this new era of hyper-transparency.

Catch me if you can – Transfer Pricing in the quantum age of speed and transparency

BM was the first off the block in late 2017 by announcing it had created a 50-qubit quantum computer. Quick on their tail were other tech giants, such as Google and Intel etc. The race to build “useful” business quantum solutions was on.

BEPS Action Manager

Documenter

Intercompany Agreements

Benchmark

Operational Transfer Pricing

Transfer PricingThomson Reuters provides trusted answers to help you manage today’s transfer pricing risks while preparing for tomorrow’s possibilities.Thomson Reuters ONESOURCE suite of Transfer pricing solutions can help reduce the cost and complexity of your reporting and compliance needs with the following suite:

Learn more: ONESOURCE Transfer Pricing

Watch: ONESOURCE Transfer Pricing Video

1

2

3

4

5

ONESOURCE

THOMSON REUTERS INSIGHT | JULY 2018

3

FinTech and RegTech are poised to dramatically change the financial industry, although firms aren’t yet sure how specifically that change will happen.

Author: Sanjeev Chatrath Managing Director, Region Head – Asia, Financial & Risk, Thomson Reuters

Financial services firms and their compliance functions have long embraced technical change and development, but in the past few years, the pace and scale of that change have accelerated dramatically. That has left the industry feeling certain it needs to adapt, but not quite sure how.

Around the world, financial firms are warming up to the reality that regulatory technology (RegTech) and financial technology (FinTech) are going to change the professional landscape. In fact, many of them are quite excited to see what these capabilities bring. However, they haven’t yet updated their legacy systems to handle such vast changes, and the amount of money available to find and fund FinTech and RegTech solutions varies widely across the world.

Those are among the findings of “FinTech, RegTech and the Role of Compliance in 2017,” Thomson Reuters second annual survey of financial professionals and how they relate to RegTech and FinTech. Worldwide, almost 800 financial firms responded to the survey. Their answers show the ways in which the financial industry is – and isn’t – weaving powerful new capabilities into its business model.

Warming up to FinTech and RegTechIn 2016, 16 percent of respondents said they felt no need to be involved in FinTech. This year, just 2 percent of respondents answered the same. That indicates the risk and compliance field has accepted that FinTech and RegTech are going to become fixtures of global business (although it has not necessarily formed consensus on how they will operate once they become mainstays).

Sixty-nine percent of respondents believe they can use RegTech and FinTech to improve efficiency and reduce the cost of doing business, and 36 percent believe these technologies may eventually lead to less manpower and time needed to complete compliance tasks. Interestingly enough, 27 percent of respondents said they need “more resource to evaluate, understand and deploy FinTech/RegTech solutions.” That underscores the impression that even as excitement and interest in FinTech and RegTech grow, they are still seen somewhat as curiosities with intriguing, but unclear, application.

Updating legacy systemsSixty-one percent of respondents said they were “mostly confident” their IT infrastructure was able to support RegTech and FinTech capabilities with only minor upgrades needed. However, when the 10 percent of 2017 respondents who said they felt “not very confident” they were up to the same task are considered, it appears there is progress to be made before it can be said RegTech and FinTech are fully integrated into the industry.

Finding room in the budgetIt takes money to make money, as the saying goes. Accordingly, it also takes money to regulate the money industry. That’s why it’s good only 9 percent of respondents reported having no budget for RegTech; just last year, that figure stood at 24 percent. Even more encouraging, 38 percent of respondents expect their budget for RegTech solutions to grow in the next 12 months. That’s up slightly from the 35 percent who said the same in 2016. At the other end of the spectrum, the number of firms that reported having no budget for RegTech has dropped significantly from 24 percent in 2016 to 9 percent in 2017.

0%

Source: Thomson Reuters Regulatory Intelligence - Fintech, Regtech and the Role of Compliance 2017

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%35%

34% 34%

7%

12% 13%

24%

2016

2017

G-SIFIs 2017

9%

4%

0%

7%

3%

42%

38% 38%40%

45%

Grow Stay the same Be reduced I don’t knowWe do not have a budget for Regtech

Your firms budget for Regtech solutions over the next 12 months will:

COMPLIANCE INDUSTRY WARMS UP TO FINTECH, REGTECH

Overall, the results of “FinTech, RegTech and the Role of Compliance in 2017” show an industry that has acknowledged FinTech and RegTech are coming, and are going to reshape the status quo, but is not quite ready to embrace them.

4

OECD RELEASES INITIAL PEER REVIEWS ON IMPLEMENTATION OF CBC REPORTINGOn May 24, 2018, the OECD issued a press release on the initial peer reviews of the country-by-country (CbC) reporting initiative. Based on the reviews, many countries have CbC reporting legislation in place.

Under the BEPS Action 13 minimum standard, jurisdictions have committed to tax transparency by requesting large MNE groups to provide the global allocation of their income, taxes, and other indicators of the location of economic activity. The first annual peer review focuses mainly on the domestic legal and administrative framework. It is part of a phased approach that monitors the domestic legal and administrative framework, the exchange of information framework, and the confidentiality and appropriate use conditions over three annual reviews (2017, 2018, 2019). The second annual peer review, covering all members of the Inclusive Framework, was launched in April 2018. It will focus on the exchange of information, as well as the confidentiality and appropriate use conditions.

The key findings presented in the initial peer review report are current as of January 12, 2018. According to the report, 60 jurisdictions have a comprehensive domestic legal and administrative framework in place. A few jurisdictions are awaiting official publication of their final legislation. Some jurisdictions need to complete additional guidance. 28 jurisdictions received recommendations to their legal and administrative framework. Finally, the OECD recommended that 33 jurisdictions (most of these do not require CbC reporting for the 2016 fiscal year) put in place or finalise their domestic legal and administrative framework.

With respect to the exchange of CbC reports, 58 jurisdictions have multilateral or bilateral competent authority agreements (CAAs) in place that are effective for tax periods beginning on or after January 1, 2016, or on or after January 1, 2017. 39 jurisdictions provided detailed information on appropriate use of CbC report information.

According to the press release, the initial exchange of CbC reports should begin in June 2018. Information collected includes the amount of revenue reported, profit before income tax, income tax paid and accrued, as well as the stated capital, accumulated earnings, number of employees, and tangible assets, broken down by jurisdiction. More than 1,400 bilateral relationships are currently in place for CbC exchanges, with more expected throughout 2018.

For more information about BEPS developments and best practises to inform your global tax strategy visit our dedicated website today: tax.thomsonreuters.com.au/BEPS

Thomson Reuters provides a full suite of technology solutions to help companies thrive in the age of Disruptive Innovation.

Learn more at: tax.thomsonreuters.com.au/onesource

THOMSON REUTERS INSIGHT | JULY 2018

5

ATO CORPORATE TAX TRANSPARENCY REPORT – LOOKING BEYOND THE RAW DATA

Towards the end of 2017 the ATO published its corporate tax transparency report for 2015-16.

The report included:

» 1,693 Australian public and foreign-owned companies with an income of $100 million or more; and

» 350 Australian-owned resident private companies with an income of $200 million or more.

ATO Deputy Commissioner, Jeremy Hirschhorn said the community should have confidence that the largest companies are being required to pay the right amount of tax on their Australian profits, and he said most do so voluntarily Total income tax payable by large corporates in 2015-16 was $38.2 billion, or almost 60% of total company income tax payable in 2015-16.

The ATO has a continuing close relationship with the largest companies in terms of their tax compliance and it knows what is going on. Measures such as the establishment of the Tax Avoidance Taskforce, and the introduction of new laws in Australia such as the Multinational Anti-Avoidance Law (MAAL), the Diverted Profits Tax (DPT) and Country-by-Country reporting (CbC) are instrumental in fostering improved compliance. Of course, disputes regularly occur on tax issues (often, but not always, related to transfer pricing issues in large corporate cases) – there are invariably differences of opinion on how various tax law provisions operate – and these may end up before the courts. That is appropriate. Large companies have a myriad of tax issues at play at any one time. The ATO knows this.

In reviewing the data released, the ATO said there may be a focus on the number of groups which paid either no tax or small amount of tax relative to gross income.

However, it cautioned that it is important to remember that:

» corporate income tax is payable on profits [taxable income], not gross income [it is important to understand for example how accounting income is calculated, although this is not released in the ATO data];

» in any given year a significant percentage of even the largest companies make losses, not just for tax purposes, but also for accounting purposes;

» it reflects the tax returns as lodged and does not reflect subsequent ATO compliance activity.

Large companies may tend to react to the release of the ATO data, but it is suggested they should be proactive and get on the front foot to explain how they comply with the tax laws and why, for example, they may pay small amounts of tax (or no tax) in any given year. There are many reasons for this eg no tax is paid when no profit is made in a year; prior year losses are deductible and can reduce taxable income to nil; tax offsets such as R&D will reduce taxable income. Resource companies for example often undertake large R&D expenditures. It is widely accepted that there should be no truck with illegal tax avoidance/evasion activities, but there are means available under tax laws for legitimate tax deductions to be claimed.

In commenting on release of the ATO data, Corporate Tax Association of Australia Executive Director Michelle de Niese said that not paying tax in a particular year does not equate to tax avoidance, a point made by the ATO. She said commentators that ignore this “are presenting an inaccurate and often patently false picture of the level of compliance by large corporates” in Australia. Ms de Niese said the significant reduction in tax payable by large corporates in 2015-16 (it was down $3.6 billion over the previous year) was overwhelmingly driven by the energy and resources segment, reflecting a decline in iron ore and coking coal prices.

Reasons why large corporates did not have a tax liability included:

» Current year accounting loss incurred. » Current year tax loss incurred (an accounting profit was

reported but tax adjustments, such as depreciation, resulted in a tax loss).

» Prior year losses were utilised. » Tax offsets such as R&D were claimed.

Learn more: Thomson Reuters ONESOURCE Corporate Tax solution

Ms de Niese said these outcomes reflect the proper working of Australia’s tax laws and relevant accounting standards and would be reflected in the data of any business, large or small.

There is a danger that tax transparency measures and disclosures may not consider, or ignore, the complexities of the tax system. This can cause misinterpretation and confusion. Tax transparency is here to stay, but corporations affected need to be on the front foot in handling it. The rapid media news cycle demands it.

6

The schedule must account for the following factors: 18 teams, 6 games a week, 23 rounds, plus rest and travel time, over a period from March to late September. Any glitch can throw the whole enterprise into chaos – upsetting fans, players, facilities, sponsors and many more stakeholders.

So how does the competition run so smoothly? Through a combination of strategic planning and flexibility to change the elements as needed, and most importantly, a technological platform to manage this with confidence.

What can Footy teach Tax?The ATO has been placing increased emphasis that large companies should adopt the best practice for tax governance as outlined in its “whole-of -tax” framework. This means transparently managing tax risk by ensuring that not only is the correct tax paid on time but there are auditable controls in place throughout the process to account for the company’s tax position – and the company can demonstrate the robustness of the technology behind all of this.

To take on these best practice recommendations means that many companies might need to rethink the technology and methods behind their tax governance practice.

For companies with large quantities of entities, or business across global tax jurisdictions, using spreadsheets to remain up-to-date with changes in tax laws, the volume (and changeability) of tax-filing deadlines can be an arduous and error-prone exercise. Then, if adding the assignment and tracking of tasks and responsibilities of your team to the existing system – achieving compliance becomes even more difficult.

But this is where the methods utilised by Footy can help. The best way to keep on top of your game in tax governance is to follow the AFL’s example. By implementing a system that combines pre-determined due dates, pre-populated content and the ability to enter user-defined information – companies with complex global tax affairs will be able to achieve the peace of mind worthy of a major sporting organisation.

The Thomson Reuters ONESOURCE Workflow Calendar offers such a solution. With content for over 120 countries for direct, indirect tax and statutory content, the Calendar enables you to track, manage and organise tax workflows,

Ahead of each footy season, the AFL has the momentous task of planning the competition.

tax-filings, and payments with ease. And, with the customisable, real-time Dashboard, not only will you have visibility over all events, the interactive traffic light reporting feature makes it easy to see how you are tracking at a glance, increasing the efficiency of your reviews.

Survival of the organisedThe stakes involved in achieving compliance in corporate tax management are just as high as those in running a national sporting competition: fines for missing lodgement deadlines are hefty, and tax laws are ever-changing, not to mention the impact on a company’s image when called out for tax avoidance by the media and the Australian public.

Make sure you and your team are match-ready by taking advantage of our ONESOURCE Workflow Calendar.

How smart workflow management brings success in sport and taxChristine Jacobs – ONESOURCE WORKFLOW Product Specialist

Watch: ONESOURCE Calendar Video

Learn more: ONESOURCE Calendar

THOMSON REUTERS INSIGHT | JULY 2018

7

The tax departments of multinational corporations have the skills to effect money launderers, terrorist finance organisations and human traffickers seeking to infiltrate businesses to fund their illicit enterprises.

Author: Brian Peccarelli, President, Tax & Accounting, Thomson Reuters

Liam Neeson pretty much set the standard for swagger in dealing with terrorist finance in the movie Taken when he unleashed his famous monologue:

I don’t know who you are. I don’t know what you want. If you are looking for ransom, I can tell you I don’t have money, but what I do have are a very particular set of skills. Skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you...

The tax departments of multinational corporations may not have the same cinematic flair, but they do have the skills to effect a very similar fate on the money launderers, terrorist finance organisations and human traffickers seeking to infiltrate businesses to fund their illicit enterprises.

The fact is, no one has more detailed data on the performance of each component of a corporation than the tax and accounting departments. The only thing that’s been stopping companies from tapping all of that intelligence to power their anti-money laundering (AML), anti-fraud and risk operations has been the entrenched view of tax and accounting as solely a backward-looking function.

It doesn’t have to be that way. With today’s technology, that retrospective view of tax is rapidly morphing. Tax departments now have the capacity to start analysing tax data for all manner of forward-looking projections, thanks to the last several years of enterprise resource planning software integration, increased demand from global tax authorities to provide more granular, timely tax information and the adoption of artificial-intelligence-powered tax analytics.

While most of these projections to date have focused on what-if scenario analysis to chart the potential impacts of different regulatory reforms or business decisions on company financials, they can also be used to spot anomalies and red flags that are consistent with money laundering and other crimes.

Take, for example, trade-based money laundering, whereby criminals disguise proceeds of crime through elaborate transactions in the global supply chain. Though the process can vary significantly from case to case, it typically

involves the misrepresentation of price, quantity or quality of imports or exports. A simple example would be a drug cartel creating a third-party “business” to export goods at an invoice price that is much lower than the actual value of the goods being sold. The importer receiving those goods then sells them at the correct price and the differential between the two now becomes the laundered proceeds of crime.

According to a March 2017 study by Global Financial Integrity, this type of money-laundering scheme helps to launder roughly US$2.2 trillion a year, often through legitimate businesses who are unaware that this activity is even occurring.

Tax departments are uniquely situated in the corporate structure to spot the evidence of this type of crime. Tax, accounting and global trade professionals are routinely operating at the flashpoint for financial crimes because they are responsible for reconciling invoice totals with taxes, tariffs and port duties paid on the underlying goods. However, because they have only looked backward at old documents that may have already been falsified by criminal elements, the tax folks have not historically been tapped for this type of insight.

That perception is about to change. New reporting requirements such as Brazil’s Nota Fiscal Eletronica, which requires companies to submit electronic invoices to the government to receive clearance before goods are shipped, are empowering the tax and accounting departments to access global trade data as it happens. Likewise, new technologies developed to analyse this data are giving them the insights they need to spot anomalies as they are taking shape.

Armed with these types of real-time analytics and a mandate to look for the red flags of financial crime, the tax and accounting department could become the tip of the sword in the corporate effort to root out financial crime.

The key is shifting the focus of the tax department from backward- to forward -looking.

The tools are there; it’s up to us to start leveraging them to change centuries-old perceptions and start unlocking our inner Liam Neesons.

A version of this article originally appeared on CFO.com.

TAX DEPARTMENTS CAN FIGHT TERRORISTS

8

In the pursuit of a whole-of-tax compliance approach to tax governance, the ATO has been making plans to add another element to shore-up Australia’s existing tax compliance framework: The GST Large Business Program.

Aimed initially at the Top 100 businesses in Australia, the Program would require these taxpayers to participate in Pre-Lodgement Compliance Reviews (PCRs) for GST. The ATO, using a Justified Trust methodology – employed most recently in the Streamlined Assurance Reviews – would work with each of these taxpayers to build a holistic understanding of their business and tax risk position, and then work with them to mitigate these risks.

The move signals tighter scrutiny of the taxing of cross-border transactions but also the ATO’s commitment to working with top businesses to reduce the risk of non-compliance and produce a comprehensive best tax practice guide. The ATO has stated its intention through the Program is to reduce time and cost for both itself and taxpayers in the future and provide confidence to the community that these taxpayers are paying their fair share of tax.

However, there is also an expectation that many companies will have much work to do, in order to produce the sample data required for the assessment. Whilst the Program isn’t in yet in effect, getting a head start on the management of indirect tax as part of a business’ tax management system to stand up to an ATO audit, is critical.

This is where having an automated GST system will greatly benefit companies in this position. Indirect tax values can vary greatly from country to country, with many in a state of daily flux – Brazil for example. So rather than manually managing GST compliance, which can be both time-consuming and inaccurate, an automated system that correctly calculates indirect tax in the background, such as our ONESOURCE Indirect Tax Solution, removes these complexities and provides the business with confidence in the integrity of their monthly GST data.

In addition to having a robust compliance recording and reporting system in place, the added benefit of using tax automation is the prevention of tax leakage and loss of revenue, or penalties for non-compliance and interest on late payments – which can amount to significant amounts given the scale of transactions for large businesses.

The Government’s determination to tighten the loopholes in our tax system means that it will continue to devise measures such as the proposed Pre-lodgement Compliance Reviews, and in all likelihood, will extend these to a wider range of taxpayers.

Tax transparency for corporate Australia remains a prominent theme in 2018.

WHAT THE ATO’S PROPOSED GST COMPLIANCE MEASURES MEAN FOR CORPORATE AUSTRALIA

The Thomson Reuters Weekly Tax Bulletin is a comprehensive and analytical tax news series, published weekly.

Keeps you completely up-to-date with all changes in tax and related matters.

Provides business focus on key tax issues you need to understand.

Provides an indispensable research and reference tool for tax technical issues.

Fast, easy access to the information you need.

Subscribe to Weekly Tax Bulletin

Or call 1800 074 333

Watch: Our Tax Break episodes with Weekly Tax Bulletin!

Checkpoint Weekly Tax Bulletin

TAX & ACCOUNTING NEWS FOR PROFESSIONALS

indirect taxasia Pacific

acHieVe accUrate, GLOBaL indirect tax cOmPLiancethomson reuters’ OneSOUrce indirect tax compliance is a 42 jurisdiction software solution that helps achieve a higher level of indirect tax compliance through automation of currently manual processes. the software allows you to improve your cashflow and protect your reputation by reducing indirect tax error, any associated penalties and late payment interest charges.

COMPLIANCE

OneSOUrce indirect tax compliance automates the production of indirect tax returns and includes comprehensive exception reporting and return preparation workpapers, designed specifically for local tax rules and rates. a global product tailored for local needs, OneSOUrce indirect tax has the spreadsheet look and feel you are used to, and is backed by a database environment with tax targeted functionality unavailable in generic spreadsheet models.

the solution offers indirect tax professionals:

• Efficiency – Save time and increase accuracy when preparing

your returns with automated workpaper generation, including notes, cross-referencing, and roll-forward processes.

– demonstrate a genuine return on investment through time saved and reverse audit input tax refunds.

– Standardise your indirect tax return preparation processes, within the asia Pacific region and across the globe. includes new content for malaysian GSt.

– electronic lodgement through Standard Business reporting (SBr) reduces manual input time.

• Control – Standard workpapers help substantiate your returns by providing a full audit trail from your accounting, procurement, and billing

systems to your return. – Generate reports that perform the same transaction level tests that tax authorities undertake during an audit. – deep integration with OneSOUrce Workflow manager for managing complex tax workflows and data collection and consolidation. – ability to electronically lodge the tax return in conjunction with thomson reuters SBr-compliant OneSOUrce e-Filing manager.

• Flexibility – insert and customise schedules in your workpapers to suit your needs. – create your own reports to capture information for both tax analysis and management reporting. – create and control your own formulas and variables to link and reference.

Audit defense data

COMPLIANCE FUNCTION OF ONESOURCE INDIRECT TAX

DETERMINATION FUNCTION OF ONESOURCE INDIRECT TAX

ONESOUrCE INdIrECt tAx

AUTOMATEDdeterminationCalculationrecording for 175 Countries

GLOBAL SALES & TRANSACTIONS

SAPE-CommerceLegacy

Global & Historicaltax Liabilities

VAtGStJCt

AUTOMATEDremittance

AUTOMATEDreturns Processing

OtHEr dAtAOtHEr dAtA

© 2014 thomson reuters/OneSOUrce. all rights reserved.indirect_tax_aPac_SL_3-14

ContaCt Us today:

AU: 1800 074 333 NZ: 0800 785 483

thomsonreuters.com.au/taxsolutions

onesource.anz@thomsonreuters.com

Recommended Reading

Brochure: Thomson Reuters ONESOURCE Indirect Tax Asia Pacific - Achieve Accurate, Global Indirect Tax Compliance

THOMSON REUTERS INSIGHT | JULY 2018

9

Confronting the BEPS obstaclesAre global businesses ready for the Base Erosion Profit Shifting (BEPS) regime?

Deadlines for businesses to begin BEPS reporting are fast approaching.

Potential fine for late or non-compliant lodgement of a BEPS report with ATO:

$525,000

For companies with calendar-year reporting dates, the deadline for filing of the first BEPS reports is:

15 February 2018

For companies with June-year balance dates, the deadline is:

30 June 2018

Thomson Reuters has assessed business response to BEPS. Our third annual Global BEPS Survey received responses from 135 corporate executives and tax and transfer pricing executives across dozens of countries and industries.

Businesses are worried about their BEPS response.

say they are “not confident” or “slightly confident” in responding to country-by-country reporting requirements and to deadlines, master filings and local filings.69

Get your full analysis. tax.thomsonreuters.com.au/beps

RECOMMENDED READING: Brochure: BEPS Action Manager

Whitepaper: Justified trust and its implications for businesses

10

The number of tasks required can seem overwhelming.

SIMON HADDAD, TAX DIRECTOR ANZ, THOMSON REUTERS

Most frequent obstacles to country-by-country reporting

Internal governance issues 26%

Gathering information within the group

9%

Waiting for jurisdictions to set rules

21%

Time needed

12%

IT systems issues

19%

Analysing and reporting data

14%

Resources, including staff

16%

Understanding requirements

Obs

tacl

e

7%

The 2017 survey shows how many businesses have had to reshape operations to deal with BEPS measures.

26% Implement changes to transfer pricing policy

22% Implement changes to intercompany agreements

19% Conduct review of business’s value chain and key profit drivers

14% Conduct review of historical business structures

7% Implement a restructuring

4% Transfer any tangible or intangible assets

3% Recommend that the company hire or relocate employees in certain jurisdictions

Find out how Thomson Reuters can aid BEPS implementation for your organisationThomson Reuters’ BEPS solutions meet BEPS compliance needs and provide efficient and effective resolution of BEPS issues. Thomson Reuters Checkpoint® BEPS Global Currents and ONESOURCE® give you trusted answers, analysis and documentation tools deliver scrutiny-proof reporting that tax authorities expect.

Source: Thomson Reuters 2017 Global BEPS Survey

Read the Thomson Reuters 2017 Global BEPS Survey

THOMSON REUTERS INSIGHT | JULY 2018

11

Author: Asif Alam: Global Business Director, Technology Practice Group, Thomson Reuter

MY HEAD IS IN THE CLOUDCloud computing is now standard practice (or should be) across almost all industries. As companies, what’s our next step to take advantage of this technology?

Working with a variety of technology companies in activities as varied as consumer electronics, internet-related services and customer relationship management (CRM), I spend a lot of time with my head in the cloud. And professionals across a wide range of industries have their heads in the cloud, too. Like many new technologies, the cloud has brought with it a number of disruptions to business strategy, operations and work practices – disruptions that derail some businesses and empower others.

Cloud computing is now firmly entrenched across a wide variety of industries, well beyond those that we would call “the technology sector.” Healthcare, finance, retailers, automotive and many other industries have been disrupted by cloud computing, but many advantages have emerged in the wake of this disruption.

Businesses have passed a tipping point, becoming comfortable with the security of cloud services and moving operations there at an ever-increasing rate.

We see companies leveraging modern cloud-computing platforms to create cloud-native applications, operating systems and devising comprehensive development. More and more are exploring opportunities to capture the benefits of this technology and create efficiency, effectiveness and competitive advantage.

The cloud also enables companies to:

» Reduce costs by managing onsite hardware, including expenses related to labour, hardware repair, etc. With cloud computing, the server is remotely located, allowing you to keep your infrastructure up to date with less overhead.

» Enhance security and reduce risk given the cloud’s dedicated staff (around the clock) that takes care of the systems and its security. Consequently, the risk of failures, hacks and breakdowns reduces considerably.

» Activate customer-centric service and support.

» Empower employee productivity everywhere.

» Store and access massive amounts of ever-bigger data.

Big changes driven by Big DataOne driver of the shift to cloud is Big Data. In short, this is data that would be too expensive to store, manage or analyse using traditional database systems. Traditional systems are increasingly cost-inefficient because of limitations around storing unstructured data (e.g., images, text and video), accommodating “high-velocity” data (real-time), or scaling to support very large (petabyte-scale) data volumes.

Data analytics only return more value when you have access to more data, so organizations increasingly find Big Data to be a rich resource for uncovering deeper business insights. The past few years have seen the mainstream adoption of new approaches to managing and processing Big Data. The emergence of the “Internet of Things” (e.g., the global network of billions of interconnected devices and sensors) has exponentially increased the volume of data in the form of text, video, images and audio.

The need to process these large amounts of data less expensively and really quickly, and the challenge of making sense out of it (analytics), are paramount, particularly as we see all companies becoming data and technology companies, regardless of industry.

12

THOMSON REUTERS INSIGHT | JULY 2018

Never miss a tax deadline again!Stay ahead with confidence with ONESOURCE Calendar and you’ll never look back.

ONESOURCE Calendar is a tax calendar which assists finance teams to meet every tax deadline. Thomson Reuters ONESOURCE Calendar is a tax calendar software that automates the process of due date monitoring and the tracking of tax-related activities, so you’ll never inadvertently miss a tax due date.

Easy to set up and simple to use, ONESOURCE Calendar software is a configurable solution you can count on.

ONESOURCE CALENDAR

Beyond “why” to “how”As cloud computing has evolved to be one of the most significant technology developments of our time, it has made countless new businesses possible and created incredible opportunities for large enterprises to innovate like start-ups and retire decades of technical debt. Yet even as the “why” of this transformation is clear (that cloud computing offers access to data storage, processing and analytics on a more scalable, flexible, cost-effective and even secure basis than can be achieved with an on-premises deployment), the “how” is still challenging to many.

Stephen Orban, of AWS’s Enterprise Strategy function and author of Ahead in the Cloud: Best Practices for Navigating the Future of Enterprise IT, says making the most of the cloud requires much more from enterprises than mere technology change.

An enterprise must transform by changing its culture, changing its bureaucracy, changing its organization, changing its technical architecture—and making them agile … [This is] not about a transformation that has a finite end state. It’s about becoming an organization that is capable of quickly deploying technology to meet business needs, regardless of where the technology comes from. Stephen Orban

That mindset and agility will require organizations to keep an eye on the future of cloud, particularly on hybrid and multi-cloud deployments. We will evolve from talking about hybrid-IT, multi-cloud and managed services to how clouds connect and maximize how networks are used.

Putting our heads togetherOur customers are no different – they are quickly moving old infrastructure to the cloud and building new applications there. Thomson Reuters is also utilizing the cloud by shifting our infrastructure to this model, putting commercial content on the cloud to meet our customers in the environment where they’ve chosen to build.

As technology and data continue to permeate industries, the line has blurred between what is considered a technology company and everything else. Technologies like artificial intelligence, machine learning and cloud are increasingly integral to driving productivity and efficiency. Like our customers, Thomson Reuters is transforming to be more flexible and agile in embracing change, proactively thinking about how we can use technology to enhance our customers’ evolving needs and workflows.

Or call 1800 074 333

Learn more: ONESOURCE Calendar

13

THOMSON REUTERS INSIGHT | JULY 2018

With Cryptocurrencies, what role should government play?

Cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin are meant to circumvent the traditional banking system. That may have more impact on the basic functioning of a Nation’s economy than one might realise.

Author: Nayeem Syed Assistant General Counsel at Thomson Reuters

In December 2017, Bitcoin’s value rose by nearly 50 percent, with one of its biggest spikes coinciding with CME Group announcing it had United States regulatory approval (CFTC) to launch a Bitcoin futures exchange. One month later, Bitcoin’s value fell by nearly 50 percent, with one of its biggest dips coinciding with South Korean regulators’ announcement of a ban on its citizens using anonymous bank accounts to trade Bitcoin. Those who sought and were able to time the market for short-term gain did well. But how did those thinking longer-term evaluate Bitcoin in terms of fundamental value and then apply regulatory risk premium?

For many, circumventing traditional financial markets and regulation is the chief appeal of cryptocurrencies. However, as their champions seek to access retail investors around the world, the link between government approval and price may reveal the key to realising the theoretical benefits that cryptocurrencies claim to offer over fiat currencies (those a government has declared have value, but are not backed by a physical commodity). That validation may be critical in establishing confidence that cryptocurrencies could eventually fulfil their promise to dramatically cut both cost and speed of payments.

Broadly, governments around the world have banned cryptocurrencies, given them some leeway to gain experience, or proactively explored frameworks to permit private crypto-finance at some stage with a few governments actually developing their own forms of cryptocurrency. Such state sponsored development is encouraging. When regulators are more involved there tends to be more progress; therefore, more regulatory engagement and innovation of those kinds may well be where we see a more widely acceptable crypto currency model emerge, gain acceptance and then scale. Direct or indirect involvement of state actors may not be the only way cryptocurrencies will truly establish themselves within the mainstream, but the chances are certainly higher. Equally, it may be the only way for regulators to control this technology and redirect the underlying activity out of the shadow economy.

SovereigntyGovernments use their control over the supply of currency to manage their domestic economies and their ability to trade with and control their relationship with other governments. They determine how much currency there is and how easily it can change hands; together with interest-rate control, how much debt can be created and ultimately how much growth is possible. This economic control is important for achieving social and political goals.

Governments can directly determine who can create more wealth and indirectly who can gain power over the economy. Indeed, when a government loses control of its currency, it loses a large part of its independence. Greece, as part of the Euro, famously lost much

of the ability to determine key parts of its internal affairs, including its social welfare system (which has significant electoral implications).

Loss of sovereignty is critical to understanding why governments are (at a very deep level) inherently wary of alternatives to fiat currencies.

Full Faith and CreditWe are able to trust the complete strangers we deal with when we trade both everyday items and fairly significant materials. This is, of course, because they offer us physical notes or transfers of digital versions of the same to our bank accounts or apps in a way we believe is reliable.

That perception of reliability is actually an assumption that our banks will hold those notes or transfers safe and our government will ultimately redeem them for other forms of value. This is rational, but not actually true. The government will not redeem notes for other physical goods or services. Governments may, in some cases, guarantee savings held at certain institutions, but only up to a threshold. They can only do so because they control the amount in circulation and can simply print more.

If no one can truly control the creation and deletion of a cryptocurrency, how can a government model assume that risk and protect investors?

14

Fitness and ProprietyBanks perform a vital function for any economy, reinforcing the macro strategy and following the micro rules set by governments. When they don’t, they are invariably punished. In economic and regulatory terms, banks and governments usually agree very well with each other. (It is not a coincidence that banks and regulators hire often staff from each other.) This broad consensus in economic and regulatory approach ensures a level of certainty and stability - and therefore predictability - which is considered desirable by many economists.

However, cryptocurrencies don’t need the current banking system at all. Many welcome this, seeing it as enabling the greater democratisation of banking. However, upending the system to simply weaken the power (and wealth) of bankers would also have many unintended consequences. Banks manage transfers of money across the entire economy, which enables governments to count, track and tax them.

Jumping in with something we can’t fully understand managed by entities we may never know creates an uncomfortable regulatory vacuum.

Bad ActorsGovernments target the proceeds of crime in part to try to deter the underlying crime. With

cryptocurrencies, it’s impossible to trace transfers. There is little doubt that criminal elements have provided much of the demand for cryptocurrency innovation. Bad actors will find many benefits from being able conduct their financial business without money laundering controls. The government can assure all participants that it has established a sound framework and are supervising institutions and payment intermediaries can be relied on. They can only do so because they authorise entry and can send people to jail.

If it exists entirely in a digital form, what is to stop a cryptocurrency disappearing altogether? Who would one look to blame let alone sue?

Systemic RisksIn theory, centralised monetary and fiscal policy and market interventions support stable growth and prevent market collapse. While some have argued that may be an illusion: volatility, recessions and financial crime and banking failures have and will always remain a constant threat; however, they can be partially redirected and its worse effects mitigated.

Indeed, while human greed can’t be regulated away entirely, at least its criminal manifestations can be punished and changes can be made from the lessons.

If Mt. Gox, one of the largest trading exchanges in the world, was

compromised and hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of Bitcoin were stolen, what is stopping attacks happening over and over and over? Given this, how could one even attempt to hedge or insure against a cryptocurrency position?

Just moving ahead with risks we can’t predict or likely be able to do anything about probably should make a responsible government wary.

Proceeding CarefullyGovernments are understandably cautious (and inherently resistant) toward to any challenges to fiat currencies. However, a clear message from their varying responses to date to cryptocurrency innovators is that understanding and then consciously addressing the key policy concerns that governments have will help enormously in developing a cryptocurrency toward acceptance.

Equally, governments actively embracing the underlying technologies may be the only way to fully understand and effectively counteract threats to their sovereignty and enable them to supervise their economy and develop tools and capabilities to prevent systemic risks.

15

THOMSON REUTERS INSIGHT | JULY 2018

Why Top CFOs are transforming Statutory Reporting with technology

As global regulators seek to minimise corporate tax avoidance and increase transparency among multinational enterprises, the role of the tax, accounting and finance department has been elevated to new heights.

Author: Marc Mehlman, Vice President and Head of the ONESOURCE Direct Tax

With new and evolving statutory reporting requirements as well as intense scrutiny on tax practices, forward-thinking organisations are realising the importance of empowering their accounting, finance and tax departments with the tools they need to not only maintain compliance in a complex environment, but to also develop a global strategy focused on minimising risk in response to changes in regulations, accounting standards and tax law, and driving better business decisions.

As a CFO, if you haven’t yet made updating your global strategy a priority, the time is now.

Consider this scenario: You’re reviewing statutory reports with the board and one member asks a question related to your company’s risk mitigation when it comes to global tax exposure. Or, one of them presses you on your strategy for country-by-country reporting. Could you answer these questions with certainty? Suppose the Audit Committee raises a concern on the level of controls in place and would like to better understand the viability or existence of a meaningful audit trail. What would your response be?

As both board members and shareholders increasingly realise the importance of a company’s global footprint, it’s critical to support your accounting, finance and tax departments as they strive to remain compliant amidst an ever-changing global landscape and enable them to build a strategy that complements the long-term vision of your company. Whether you’re developing new products, expanding into new jurisdictions, or considering potential acquisition targets, tax structuring and compliance are critical components of major business decisions. So, what can you do to better support your accounting, finance, and tax operations?

Filing financial statements is a legal obligation in most countries around the world. Complexities around country-specific regulations make compliance a challenging task. Your company’s reputation could be at risk because statutory financial reports are on public record in most countries. In certain countries, like the Netherlands, directors of a legal entity are held personally liable for unpaid tax debt. Also, in most countries, you can’t apply for any government contracts unless financial statements are filed with the RFP. And it’s only a matter of time before regulators start to connect the dots between statutory reporting, BEPS regulations, tax returns, local VAT compliance, etc.

Typically, the complex process of statutory financial reporting is managed by local finance teams, outsourced to audit firms, or some combination of both. Within most multinational accounting departments, statutory reporting processes are still overwhelmingly manual, with spreadsheets being the primary vehicle for data collection and report generation. In today’s world, this antiquated approach will no longer suffice.

Spreadsheet-based processes bring with them major inefficiencies in terms of wasted time, inaccurate data, and delayed reporting.

Given the potential for monetary or reputational consequences, leading multinational organisations are taking a vested interest in harmonising their people, processes and data using technology to take ownership and control of their statutory reports.

Historically, it has been easier to leave this process with the local controllers and know that the job is getting done. As a CFO, you have many pressing issues on your plate. Stepping in to what is deemed a “working” process and changing it up is not usually at the top of this list. However, it doesn’t have to be difficult. Leading multinational corporations have paved the way for shifting locally managed reporting obligations to regional and centrally managed centres by leveraging technology that is integrated with globally curated content. In years past, only manual transactional process like A/P or A/R were centralised, but as organisations evolve, we are increasingly seeing the centralisation of statutory reporting for a more standardised and efficient process. Tax may soon follow.

Understand the Challenges1

16

When it comes to optimising statutory reporting, your people, processes and technology solution must all work in harmony. As technology becomes more and more of a necessity in the corporate tax department, so do team members who are tech-savvy-or at least take an interest in learning more about how technology can help them do their jobs better. Some organisations are even creating technology-specific positions within their tax, accounting and finance departments to ensure they are getting the most out of their investment in technology.

Secondly, it’s important to have a deep understanding of your current statutory reporting processes so you know what needs to be improved and the ways in which technology can make a difference.

Keep in mind that your end goal is to develop a consistent statutory reporting process for all regions in which you do business.

When you are ready to choose a statutory reporting technology solution, look for one that offers a centralised platform to reduce the time spent on data collection, data manipulation, and multiple report iterations. Additionally, country-specific regulations and local language requirements should be built-in, so your accounting professionals can ensure compliance in any country around the world. And, with integrated legislative updates, your team can redirect the time they’d normally spend on research and formatting to more value-added activities, like strategic planning, data analysis, and understanding their part in executing on the company’s vision.

Our analysis shows that the typical accounting team that has employed software for managing their statutory reporting process has reduced the number of drafts by up to eight times. Spread that across 30+ countries and the result is meaningful efficiency gains.

For further proof, consider this example. A major retailer with 60 entities reduced the time taken to produce annual/quarterly reports required by local regulator organisations (like the SEC) from nine months to six months by implementing a statutory reporting software solution. That’s what the latest advances in technology can do-save your company three months of time. Time that can be re-invested into high-value, strategic activities.

Audit defence capabilities are also significantly improved with technology. Users can easily reconcile the walk from GAAP to local statutory, and effortlessly load general ledger data in multiple formats with audit trails for all data sources. Integration within a centralised platform also ensures your quarterly tax provision is accurate as data flows seamlessly from one module to the next.

A longer-term benefit is that technology supports the move to a Shared Service Centre or Global Process Services model.

Recently, both a multi-billion-dollar conglomerate and a global food & beverage company implemented a centralised technology platform and used it to develop a standard statutory reporting process. The result was full oversight and control of their global financial reporting obligations. With a solid foundation for a Global Process Services model, they consolidated core business activities, like statutory financial reporting and tax compliance functions. In the end, benefits to these companies included a significant reduction in the time and cost associated with multiple iterations by audit teams, lower third-party costs, shortened “cycle time,” less manual spreadsheet work, the creation of a central data repository, and easy access to audit documentation.

BETTER INSIGHTS DRIVE BETTER BUSINESS DECISIONSWhether your tax, accounting and finance operations are locally-based, centralised or otherwise, investing in the right tools and resources optimises your company’s ability to meet evolving regulatory requirements and gives your team the time it needs to focus on planning, strategy and analysis. It’s this shift in focus that results in better insight for you, better business decisions for your company, and greater returns for your shareholders.

This article originally appeared in Thomson Reuters Voice on the Forbes website.

Identify the Right Tools and Resources

Realise the Benefits

2

3

Thomson Reuters ONESOURCE drives global tax compliance and accounting decision-making with the industry’s most powerful portfolio of corporate technology solutions. Emphasising efficiency throughout the financial accounting preparation process, ONESOURCE Statutory Reporting provides you with flexible, easy-to-use reports based on a proven Big 4 accounting firm publication.

Find out how we can assist your business locally.

Learn more: Thomson Reuters ONESOURCE

Watch: ONESOURCE Statutory Reporting Solution video

THOMSON REUTERS INSIGHT | JULY 2018

17

FOCUSING ON AUSTRALIA’S MONEY LAUNDERING PROBLEM

A scandal involving spotty compliance with anti-money laundering regulations might be the wake-up call Australia’s financial institutions should have been expecting.

The roots of financial crime in AustraliaTo start with, what is the broader context around Australia’s money laundering problems?

Nathan Lynch: Australia has been dragging its feet for 10 years with its commitment to extend its anti-money laundering (AML) laws to cover so-called “designated non-financial businesses and professions” (DNFBPs). This would bring lawyers, accountants, real estate agents and jewellers within the AML/CTF regime. As I have discussed in recent articles and TV coverage, this is a major vulnerability for financial crime in Australia.

The big bombshell this month, however, was the announcement that AUSTRAC (the Australian AML regulator) had launched an unprecedented civil action against the country’s largest bank for extensive AML breaches. The regulator has alleged that Commonwealth Bank turned a blind eye to the laundering of drug cartel money and terrorist financing through its Intelligent Deposit Machine (IDM) network. The claim says that A$9.8 billion of cash moved through this channel without any basic controls in place.

CommBank’s IDMs allowed customers to deposit cash with no identity verification and no limits on cash deposits. Cartels were paying “smurfs” A$300 to A$400 a day to quite literally sit on milk crates at a Commonwealth IDM with a backpack full of drug money. They just fed notes into the machines until they were full.

Can you explain the alleged regulatory breaches at Commonwealth Bank, and what made them possible?

Lynch: The legal claim says CBA failed to submit 53,506 threshold transaction reports (TTRs) over a period of three years. These TTRs, involved A$624.7 million. In addition, the regulator has claimed that over a period of three years, CBA did not monitor transactions through a total of 778,370 accounts. AUSTRAC also alleges that the bank failed to report suspicious matters on time, or at all, for transactions worth A$77 million.

In essence, the breaches come back to the bank’s failure to manage the tensions between its commercial arms, its operations teams and financial crime compliance. When problems emerged they were glossed over and not reported to the board. At one stage a “software coding error” went undetected for three years. This meant that CBA failed to file more than 53,500 threshold reports.

The statement of claim details how brazen the launderers had become. When they discovered the vulnerabilities, criminal syndicates exploited them ruthlessly. To give you an idea, in the second half of 2012 a total of A$89 million in cash was deposited through CommBank IDMs. Two years later a total of A$3.35 billion in cash was deposited during the same time period.

Alarms went off inside branches. Staff reported their suspicions internally and even begged for help, but nothing was done.

Due to the lack of controls, CBA will never know how much of that A$8.9 billion represented the proceeds of crime.

In August 2017, Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA), the nation’s largest bank, came under fire for a massive breach of anti-money laundering regulations. The scandal and resulting fallout will have far-reaching implications, not just for CBA, but for the financial compliance and regulatory community at large. We spoke with Nathan Lynch, Asia-Pacific bureau chief for Thomson Reuters Regulatory Intelligence, who has been following events closely, to get his insights into this evolving story.

18

How did these problems finally come to light?

Lynch: The problems really emerged during Australian Federal Police (AFP) surveillance operations. The AFP was monitoring overseas syndicates that sent armies of lowly-paid “smurfs” to launder hundreds of thousands of dollars each day through CBA’s smart ATMs.

In late 2015, AUSTRAC began a series of on-site inspections to look at the major banks’ smart ATM controls. CBA was found to be seriously deficient. The other three major Australian banks are understood to have passed AUSTRAC’s on-site reviews.

What happens next for AML in Australia?You’ve said this scandal is a turning point for Australian financial crime compliance - how so?

Lynch: The crackdown on CBA signals a broader change in the way that Australian regulators will approach anti-money laundering non-compliance. The “gently, gently” supervisory phase has ended and now AUSTRAC will take resolute enforcement action in cases of repeated, negligent or flagrant non-compliance.

The scandal and its aftermath will also mean that boards take AML compliance a lot more seriously than they did in the past. This, in turn, is likely to lead to better budgets for financial crime compliance teams in Australia.

What will this mean for CBA and other Australian banks going forward?

Lynch: The other major banks will be further scrutinised to ensure they have not been laundering money for drug cartels and terrorists through their smart ATM networks. Sources said it was unlikely that the scandal would spread to other banks, but overseas regulators such as those in New Zealand, the U.S., Hong Kong and the UK may be interested in CommBank’s activities in those markets.

You’ve been called upon by numerous national and financial media outlets for an insight into the scandal and an analysis of what’s coming next in the regulatory environment. How have you (and Thomson Reuters) become such a trusted voice on the topic?

Lynch: To be honest, it’s a result of more than 10 years of writing about this field, presenting at industry events, speaking in the media, conducting training through industry associations and publishing regular articles on our industry-leading Regulatory Intelligence platform.

Thomson Reuters is the most respected brand in the world when it comes to Risk and Financial Crime Compliance, so this opens a lot of doors. We’ve also built incredible relationships with the local regulators, which is a result of the entire APAC team’s efforts - from events, to marketing to customer service. It’s easy making connections and inroads as part of the world’s most trusted information company. It’s incredible and something we should never take for granted. People have total faith that Thomson Reuters will treat them fairly and ethically - and protect them as sources - when reporting or analysing these big developments.

CONTRIBUTORS

BRIAN PECCARELLI

President, Tax & Accounting, Thomson Reuters

Brian Peccarelli joined Thomson Reuters in 1984 as a product accountant, and has since held roles in product development, sales, product management, marketing, and general management. He served most recently as president of workflow and service solutions within our Tax & Accounting business.

ASIF ALAM

Global Business Director, Technology Practice Group

Asif leads and drives strategic and commercial engagement with technology partners across the portfolio of Thomson Reuters assets: Legal, Financial & Risk, Tax & Accounting and News. Previously, Asif was the Head of Enterprise Capabilities, Market Development at Thomson Reuters. In this role, Asif led the business development and business management of the firm’s Enterprise product line in the Americas.

SANJEEV CHATRATH

Region Head and Managing Director. Financial & Risk

Sanjeev is responsible for client business in the region encompassing end to end client experience, account management, market development. The Financial & Risk business is recognized as a pioneer and market leader for delivering trusted and unbiased Intelligent Information and solutions to the Global Financial Community. Sanjeev has worked in Asian financial markets for over 20 years in leadership roles encompassing sales, client management and business management, spanning Asia Pacific, South Asia and Middle East. Prior to joining Thomson Reuters, Sanjeev worked with Citigroup where he was Chief Operating Officer and Region Head of Client Sales Management for the Treasury and Trade solutions business.

NAYEEM SYED

Assistant General Counsel at Thomson Reuters

Nayeem Syed is an Assistant General Counsel at Thomson Reuters qualified as a US attorney and UK solicitor. His recent focus has been on regulation and related FinTech and legal tech solutions, with particular attention to automation of legal and regulatory risk scoring, utilising knowledge reasoning, machine learning, text analytics, and blockchain technologies. Nayeem has an LLM in International Business Law and an MBA from London Business School.

MARC MEHLMAN

Vice President and Head of the ONESOURCE Direct Tax

Marc is responsible for setting the strategic direction and leading the execution of the business priorities. Marc’s remit includes US Income Tax Compliance and Global responsibility for Tax Provision and the ONESOURCE Workflow and Data Management tools. During his tenure at Thomson Reuters, Marc has held numerous leadership roles and managed a number of M&A transactions and business restructures, run the financial plan process at various levels of the company, and negotiated partner agreements. Prior to joining Thomson Reuters, Marc worked in asset management for Sanford Bernstein.

JOANNE TING

Transfer Pricing Product Specialist - Australian & New Zealand

Joanne is the product specialist for Thomson Reuters’ end-to-end transfer pricing content and technology product suite, including research offerings, documentation and benchmarking tools, BEPS compliance & risk analysis technologies, and an operational transfer pricing big data solution. Joanne is a Chartered Accountant and prior to joining Thomson Reuters in 2017 she worked in the transfer pricing team within KPMG Sydney, assisting multinational corporations with their transfer pricing compliance and advisory needs.

THOMSON REUTERS INSIGHT | JULY 2018

19

Trusted answers help you keep pace with the rapid twists and turns of todays tax regulations.

Thomson Reuters helps you navigate uncertain times.

tax.thomsonreuters.com.auGet Answers: 1800 074 333