CHICAGO – The No. 5 UConn men’s basketball team (12-1, 2-0 BIG EAST) rebounded from a slow start to win its eighth-straight with a 72-54 victory over DePaul (8-5, 0-2) on Sunday at Wintrust Arena. Alex Karaban led all scorers with 21 points in…
Blog
-

Cal Nets Another Win At Haas, Beats Columbia 74-56
BERKELEY — The California men’s basketball team secured its eighth straight win and stayed perfect at Haas Pavilion with a 74-56 win over visiting Columbia. The Bears never trailed and overcame a sluggish start to lock up its 12th win of the…Continue Reading
-

£2m, 6500bhp, 10 cars, 1 winner
Pastures new beckoned for this year’s Britain’s Best Driver’s Car shootout – and that isn’t something we’ve been able to say very often.
There are few UK motorsport circuits that BBDC hasn’t visited before – mostly because this annual…
Continue Reading
-

The moral hazard of investing in Russia
Your article “Putin’s frozen assets threat rattles EU capitals” (Report, December 19) fails to take any account of the large moral hazard issues at hand.
The article noted that some EU governments were balking over the use of immobilised…
Continue Reading
-
JGBs Fall Amid Japan’s Fiscal Policy Risks – The Wall Street Journal
- JGBs Fall Amid Japan’s Fiscal Policy Risks The Wall Street Journal
- Japan’s Yen Debasement Robin J Brooks | Substack
- Bank of Japan raises rates to 30-year high, signals more hikes Reuters
- Nikkei gains, JGB futures rise ahead of expected BoJ rate hike Business Recorder
- Bitcoin (BTC) Rebounds as BoJ Calms Yen Fears Despite ETF Outflows FXEmpire
Continue Reading
-

Grants hit the right note for emerging talent
Early-career and young artists across Newcastle will have the chance to develop their creative skills thanks to support from City of Newcastle.
Tantrum Youth Arts, the National Young Writers Festival and Newcastle Youth Orchestra are…
Continue Reading
-
ATO clarifies GST position on key issues in power industry – Technical update
The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) has released updated web guidance addressing the GST treatment of several key arrangements commonly encountered in the energy sector. The new guidance, released in December 2025, addresses three areas that have been the subject of ongoing industry enquiry and ATO compliance activity.
- Bundled Power Purchase Agreements (BPPAs);
- Connection services – Gifted Assets; and
- Connection services – Agency arrangements (including Div 153-B).
Below, we summarise the key aspects of the new guidance and outline the practical implications for industry participants.
Commissioner’s View on GST treatment and attribution in BPPAs
(see full details)
Overview
1. The ATO has published guidance on BPPAs, consistent with the position previously communicated with MinterEllison and covered in the website article New ATO position on Bundled Power Purchase Agreements.
2. Specifically, the subset of power purchase agreements where a Generator ‘bundles’ the supply of green products (such as large-scale generation certificates) with the Contract for Difference (CfD), without receiving specific consideration for the green products in return.
3. As a preliminary point, the ATO’s guidance is based on specific private rulings issued on particular BPPA arrangements. The ATO acknowledges that there may be other types of BPPAs where the consideration for the green products is not received upfront. If the analysis of the agreement indicates separate consideration is payable, other than the entry into the CfD for the green products, the attribution of the GST payable on the supply of the green products may be different to what is described below. The guidance requests that taxpayers further engage with the ATO on variations to BPPA arrangements.
4. The Commissioner’s position on the GST treatment of these standard BPPA arrangements can be summarised as follows:
Nature of the supplies
5. Under the BPPAs considered by the ATO, the:
a. Generator supplies:
i. a derivative when entering into the CfD; and
ii. green products (in return for non-monetary consideration from the Off-taker, being their entry into the CfD).
b. Off-taker supplies a corresponding derivative when they enter into the CfD.
6. The ATO considers the supply of the CfD is a derivative, and therefore an input-taxed financial supply, whilst the supply of green products is a taxable supply (where the Generator and Off-taker are located in Australia).
Attribution of GST
7. The attribution of the GST payable on the Generator’s taxable supply of green products is triggered in full, upfront, when the non-monetary consideration is received (being the initial entry into the CfD by the Off-taker).
8. Practically speaking, this means the Generator should issue a single tax invoice for the supply of all the green products expected to be transferred over the life of the BPPA upfront, and not include a GST component in any further invoices for either the CfD payments or the actual transfer of green products each month/period.
Valuation considerations
9. Valuing the CfD non-monetary consideration may be difficult. The ATO notes that you may choose to value the green products instead, although this may also be difficult given the quantum to be supplied over the contract period is unknown. When the parties are unrelated, the Generator may use a reasonable method that is agreed to with the Off-taker in determining the GST-inclusive market value of the green products, including valuation methodologies that are consistent with professional guidelines.
Limitations on claiming input tax credits under BPPAs
10. The ATO notes that an Off-taker generally has only 4 years after attribution to claim back any GST (as an input tax credit) on the supply of green products under the BPPA. This means that input tax credits may not be available for green products acquired more than 4 years after the BPPA was executed.
Recommendation
11. We recommend reviewing the GST treatment of any existing BPPA arrangements to ensure consistency with the ATO’s new guidance, and to confirm that the 4-year limitation period for claiming input tax credits will not adversely affect your position.
Connection Services – Gifted assets
(see full details)
Overview
12. The ATO has also published guidance on how GST applies to electricity connection services, with the aim of clarifying common misunderstandings observed during justified trust reviews.
13. In the course of providing electricity distribution services, Distributors are required to connect new Customers to the electricity network upon request from a Customer. For business Customers, there can be significant construction work required in order to connect the Customer’s business premises to the Distributor’s electricity grid network. While there are certain connection works that are required to be carried out by the Distributor for safety purposes, other works can be carried out / arranged by either the Distributor or the Customer, at the Customer’s discretion.
14. If the Customer chooses to arrange construction of the asset by a third party, notwithstanding that the Customer has incurred the cost for the construction of the relevant electricity assets required for the connection, the ownership of those assets is generally required by the relevant jurisdiction’s regulatory framework to be “gifted” to the Distributor for the purposes of safety and good asset management.
Implications for Distributors
15. Distributor may be liable for additional GST where they receive gifted assets from a Customer (in additional to monetary connection fees). The tax invoice issued by the Distributor should reflect both the monetary and non-monetary consideration (the gifted assets) received for the connection services.
Implications for Customers
16. GST-registered Customers may be liable for GST when they transfer gifted assets to a Distributor. The Distributor may request a tax invoice for the supply of the gifted assets made to them. The consideration for this supply will be the GST-inclusive value of the portion of the connection services for which no monetary consideration was provided.
Recommendation
17. Parties who transfer or receive gifted assets should ensure that GST has been properly accounted for on these transactions.
Connection Services – Agency arrangements
(see full details)
Overview
18. In most Australian jurisdictions, regulations ensure that electricity Customers have a contract governing a Distributor’s supply of network connection services with the relevant Distributor. These typically take the form of “deemed’ contract which automatically arise by law when a Customer takes a supply of electricity. These are in addition to the contracts entered by Customers with their nominated electricity Retailer. Retailers often collect the connection services charges from the Customers on the Distributor’s behalf, as they have an existing billing arrangement with Customers.
19. From a GST perspective, the connection service is a supply made by the Distributor to the Customer – the Retailer is not making this supply, and is not liable for the associated GST. Rather, any GST included by the Retailer on their invoice to the Customer for the connection services should be passed on to the Distributor, and reported by the Distributor on their BAS.
20. Noting the administrative difficulties in implementing this in practice, subdivision 153-B of the GST Act can simplify the GST obligations for the Distributor and Retailer by allowing them to enter into an arrangement where the Distributor is treated as if they had made a supply of connection services to the Retailer, and the Retailer is treated as if they have made a supply of connection services to the Customer.
Recommendation
21. Distributors and Retailers seeking to rely on subdivision 153-B should ensure that a written agreement is in place to support the arrangement.
If you have any questions about how this new ATO guidance may affect your business, or require assistance reviewing your existing arrangements, please contact a member of our Energy or Tax team.
Continue Reading
-

‘Doppelgänger’ economies don’t capture Brexit reality
Martin Wolf (“How to get the UK out of its economic hole”, Opinion, November 24) quotes a recent US National Bureau of Economic Research working paper in support of his view that Brexit damaged the economy. Yet he and it miss the whole point of Brexit which was to restore full UK self-government after 40-odd years of EU trade protectionism and over-prescriptive regulation.
This would obviously cause short-term disruption as the NBER authors’ business panel of companies confirms. If you examine UK data behaviour from 2016, evidence of this disruption is predictably found linked to the dates of the Brexit referendum and final EU-departure. The evidence also suggests it has steadily disappeared, as one would expect — see my Journal of Forecasting piece in February 2024; and on the trade issue, National Institute of Economic and Social Research authors in winter 2022.
The use of a variety of comparator country-groups or “doppelgängers” to compare UK performance over the past decade on GDP per capita etc is invalid as a way of linking the UK’s supposed weak performance to Brexit. The comparison is primarily the effect of combining a bizarre group of countries such that its average performance happened to be close to the UK’s before 2016, but most of which have no basic similarity to the UK economically (Estonia and Greece for example). As the UK’s relative behaviour since 2016 could be due to numerous differential factors at work both here and elsewhere, there is simply no identifying link to Brexit.
The UK has performed quite similarly to truly similar economies like France and Germany since Brexit, as noted by Julian Jessop in a recent Substack piece and in his letter to the FT on December 3 (“Analysis that Brexit was a disaster fails the smell test”).
So swapping countries on this method can give you virtually any “Brexit effect” you want, revealing its identification failure. The UK is in fact sui generis and has to be explained by its own acts and shocks.
Its growth slowed sharply after the 2008 financial crisis, well before Brexit. Poor UK policies from both Conservative and now Labour governments have failed to restore it to its previous trend of over 2 per cent.
But these policies can be improved in the long term; that improvement can be boosted by moving more quickly on the path to free trade and pragmatic UK common law regulation, which Brexit has made possible.
Patrick Minford
Professor of Economics, Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University, Wales, UKContinue Reading
-

Whale oil or fossil fuels — both are catastrophes
The comparison of whale oil use decline with today’s projected petroleum oil demand reductions, in Michael Haigh’s guest column, neglects to factor in the devastating effects and subsequent costs of unabated burning of hydrocarbons (“Whale oil’s slow decline carries lessons for today”, Markets Insight, December 12).
Continuing the convenient use of whale oil to keep the parlour lamps lit reduced whale populations and perhaps altered ocean ecology. A bad outcome, but nothing like the catastrophes to come with another 50 years of burning.
In that timeframe, the already frequently flooded city of Jakarta (the most populous settlement on the planet) must be either elevated or relocated.
Where is that cost factored into this economic prediction?
Thomas Paino
Hudson (a former whale oil capital), NY, USContinue Reading
-

Southern Ocean carbon ‘anomaly’ reveals what models can still miss
The chilly waters of the Southern Ocean that surround Antarctica like a moat are among the least explored and least understood of all the world’s oceans. This is stark because we also know that this ocean plays an outsized role in regulating…
Continue Reading
