Taskforce Action on Electronic Sales Suppression Tools

How the Serious Financial Crime Taskforce is acting against electronic sales suppression tools.


On this page

  • Businesses illegally using ESSTs
  • Taskforce warning
  • What should you do?
  • Accessing the SFCT ESST Intelligence Bulletin
  • Case study

Businesses Illegally Using ESSTs

The Serious Financial Crime Taskforce (SFCT) is aware of businesses using electronic sales suppression tools (ESSTs) to underreport their taxable income. With the increased use of digital technologies and online interactions, we are seeing:

  • Businesses supplying and using ESSTs or software to avoid paying tax.
  • Businesses connecting ESSTs to point-of-sale systems to:
    • Permanently delete, re-sequence, or misrepresent transactions.
    • Reduce sales values.
    • Produce fake tax records.
  • ESSTs taking the form of cloud-based software and linking to domestic and offshore payment platforms.

It has been illegal to produce, supply, possess, use, or promote ESSTs in Australia since October 2018.


Taskforce Warning

The SFCT is providing a strong warning to businesses about ESSTs.

We understand there are sophisticated networks of operators actively developing and marketing these tools to small business owners. They often package them as an “all-in-one complete business solution” with low commissions, website presence, and an online ordering tool.

To identify these businesses, we use:

  • Intelligence and data on lifestyle indicators.
  • Bank information.
  • Small business benchmarks.
  • Tip-offs from the community.

These businesses will be dealt with the full force of the law.


What Should You Do?

If you are a business using ESSTs, you should come forward and make a voluntary disclosure rather than wait for us to contact you. We may be able to reduce your penalties.

Business owners should exercise reasonable care when choosing a point-of-sale and other business systems to ensure they:

  • Meet their business needs.
  • Comply with the law.

If you suspect a person or business is involved in producing, supplying, possessing, using, or promoting ESSTs or software:

If you prefer to speak with us in a language other than English, you can call the Translating and Interpreting Service (TIS National) on 13 14 50 for help with your call.


Accessing the SFCT ESST Intelligence Bulletin

The bulletin warns businesses about the illegal use of Electronic Sales Suppression Tools.

Download the SFCT ESST Intelligence Bulletin (PDF, 117KB).


Case Study: Choosing the Right Point-of-Sale System

When purchasing a point-of-sale system for your business, exercise due diligence and thoroughly research a product before purchasing.

Dodgy operators are manufacturing point-of-sale systems with electronic sales suppression tools (ESSTs). ESSTs can take many forms—devices, hardware, cloud-based software, or other means. This illegal software allows businesses to untraceably falsify, manipulate, hide, delete, or prevent the creation of selected transactions from their electronic records.

They are marketed to businesses as integrated business products and solutions with:

  • Online ordering
  • Interactions with web content
  • Registered and unregistered payment platforms
  • FinTech services (such as mobile payment apps and online banking)
  • Marketing solutions

Many of these are offered as subscription services with ongoing weekly or monthly fees, often with low upfront costs.

Through ESSTs, these operators can:

  • Steal money
  • Steal client data
  • Hold business owners to ransom
  • Assume web domain names
  • Alter public-facing business information, such as hours of operation

If it seems too good to be true, it probably is.


Example: Sabrina’s Fish and Chip Shop

Sabrina owns a fish and chip shop. Her business has always been cash-based, making it easy to pay her employees from the till and under-declare her takings. Although Sabrina knew this wasn’t right, she continued to find ways to avoid her tax obligations.

Tech-savvy Sabrina discovered a product that could help her reduce her taxable income—an electronic sale suppression tool (ESST). She purchased a new point-of-sale system from a dodgy operator who attached a cloud-based ESST to it.

For a while, Sabrina continued to run her business as usual. The illegal ESST manipulated the store’s transaction records, allowing her to delete and re-sequence transactions at the touch of a button. Sabrina used the extra money to quickly pay off a large mortgage on a seaside property, buy a boat, and transfer money to her family overseas.

What Sabrina didn’t know was that one of her employees, Paul, had noticed something strange. When closing up for the day, Paul observed that the point-of-sale transaction record was showing unusually low profits on one of their busiest days. He reviewed the previous week’s transaction records and found that this discrepancy kept occurring. Paul found this suspicious and contacted the ATO tip-off hotline to report it.

After receiving the tip-off, the ATO referred the matter to the SFCT, which began an investigation into Sabrina’s tax affairs. Upon closer inspection, the SFCT found:

  • Sabrina’s personal spending was up to 8 times the amount declared as income.
  • Over 5 years, Sabrina had underreported nearly $4 million in business income.

There was strong evidence showing that Sabrina, despite being well-educated and aware of correct business practices, had deliberately chosen to underreport her income in her tax returns.

The estimated penalties Sabrina is now liable for are around $1.4 million.

Please note: Many of the comments in this publication are general in nature, and anyone intending to apply the information to practical circumstances should seek professional advice to independently verify their interpretation and the information’s applicability to their particular circumstances.

Related Posts

10

Dec
English Post, Finance Services

Withdrawal and contribution due to divorce not considered ‘special circumstances’ regarding excess super contributions

In a recent decision, the AAT rejected a taxpayer’s claim that there were ‘special circumstances’, that warranted an excess contributions determination to disregard or re-allocate an excess contribution. Facts In October 2018 the taxpayer separated from his wife. As at 30 June 2019, the taxpayer’s total superannuation balance was recorded at just over $1,820,000, held in separate […]

10

Dec
Chinese Post, Finance Services

离婚导致的提款和缴款不被视为超额超级缴款的“特殊情况”

在最近的一项裁决中,AAT 驳回了纳税人的主张,即存在“特殊情况”,需要作出超额缴款裁定,以忽略或重新分配超额缴款。 事实 2018 年 10 月,纳税人与妻子分居。截至 2019 年 6 月 30 日,纳税人的总养老金余额记录为略高于 1,820,000 澳元,存放在单独的基金中。 2020 年 4 月,作为纳税人离婚程序的一部分,从纳税人的一个养老金基金中提取了 1,575,000 澳元,并支付给他前妻。这导致纳税人截至 2020 年 6 月 30 日在该基金中的会员账户余额减少了 427,497 澳元。 2020 年 6 月 18 日,纳税人做出了 100,000 澳元的非优惠性供款,因为他的养老金总余额(支付给前妻后)为 1,389,272 澳元(即在 2020 收入年度结束时低于 1,400,000 澳元)。但是,根据 1997 年 ITAA 第 292-85(2) 条,纳税人在截至 2020 年 6 月 30 日的财政年度的非优惠性供款上限为零,因为在该财政年度开始之前,他的养老金总余额超过了该年度的一般转移余额 1,600,000 澳元。[…]