Hamilton Bailey

Payroll Tax 21 Requirements

PT21 framework v1.0, effective 10 August 2026

Client reference number:

Date:

Reviewed by:

For Accountants

Payroll Tax 21 Requirements

PT21 is Hamilton Bailey's own 21-point framework, built from the body of rulings and case law set out below and applied to each client matter.

We work with Australian accounting firms and software providers that support Facilities Service Providers and can review the financial and operational evidence relevant to the framework.

What PT21 Means

The 21 requirements we work through on every client matter

PT21 is Hamilton Bailey's shorthand for our own 21-point framework. We work through all 21 points on every client matter when reviewing a Facilities Service Provider arrangement. Most are financial and operational, which is why we work alongside the client's accountant rather than trying to cover that ground ourselves.

What the accountant covers

Most of the 21 requirements live in the books: how fees flow, how accounts are kept and reconciled, and how the arrangement is evidenced in the financial records. That is the accountant's work, not ours. We ask the client's accountant to confirm those requirements are met for the year.

What we cover

We review the Service Agreement and the legal structure of the arrangement, and we prepare the legal component of the file that supports the client's position.

Why both sides

A payroll tax arrangement is part legal structure and part financial reality. Neither of us can speak to the whole of it alone. Working with the client's accountant means the arrangement is properly evidenced on both sides before anything is put to a Revenue Office.

The 21 Requirements and Supporting Authority

Key areas assessed under Hamilton Bailey's PT21 framework, and the authorities they are assessed against

PT21 framework v1.0, effective 10 August 2026

The 21 requirements are assessed against the whole body of authority below, not mapped to individual numbered requirements. The interaction of these rulings and decisions is why each client matter is worked through individually.

1
Valid and binding Service Agreement in place
2
Clear delineation of independent contractor status
3
Arm's-length fee arrangements documented
4
Operational independence demonstrated
5
Separate ABN registration verified
6
Professional indemnity insurance held by practitioner
7
Control over work methods retained by practitioner
8
Equipment and tools ownership clarified
9
Risk of profit/loss borne by practitioner
10
Right to delegate or subcontract
11
Ability to work for other Facilities Service Providers
12
No exclusivity clauses (unless commercially justified)
13
Billing arrangements properly structured
14
Patient records ownership defined
15
Marketing and branding separation
16
Leave and entitlements not provided (as employee would receive)
17
Superannuation arrangements compliant
18
GST registration and treatment
19
Medicare billing compliant
20
Privacy Act compliance documented
21
Further requirements disclosed in consultation

Note: Further requirements may be disclosed in consultation. Their substance is not published on this page in the interest of brevity, and can be discussed with interested parties.

Authorities assessed under Hamilton Bailey's PT21 framework
AuthorityCitationWhat it establishesType
Control and direction
Hollis v VabuHollis v Vabu Pty Ltd [2001] HCA 44 (opens in a new tab)Explains common law worker classification through the totality of the relationship, including control and integration.case
Azad v Hammond Park Family PracticeAzad v Hammond Park Family Practice Pty Ltd T/A Jupiter Health Warnbro [2022] FWCFB 66 (opens in a new tab)Considers whether a general practitioner was an employee or independent contractor under the Fair Work Act.case
Zhang and Commissioner of TaxationZhang and Commissioner of Taxation (Taxation) [2020] AATA 3008Considers PAYG withholding and worker classification by examining control, banking and business presentation.case
HKYB and Commissioner of TaxationHKYB and Commissioner of Taxation (Taxation) [2018] AATA 4770Considers PAYG withholding classification through contracts, payment arrangements and advertising.case
Mark Mitchell v Uraidla PhysioMark Mitchell v Uraidla Physio [2017] FWC 2476 (opens in a new tab)Considers whether a physiotherapist was an employee or independent contractor for unfair dismissal jurisdiction.case
Winday InternationalWinday International Pty Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2016] NSWCATAD 270 (opens in a new tab)Applies NSW payroll tax provisions to radiology arrangements, including contracts, banking and public presentation.case
Health Services for Men Pty Ltd & Ors v D'Souza & OrsHealth Services for Men Pty Ltd & Ors v D'Souza & Ors [2000] NSWCA 56 (opens in a new tab)Considers contractual intention, control and ownership of patient records in practitioner arrangements.case
Financial integration and fee flow
Thomas and NaazThomas and Naaz Pty Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2021] NSWCATAD 259, affd [2022] NSWCATAP 220 and [2023] NSWCA 40 (opens in a new tab)Applies NSW relevant contract provisions to practitioner payments and examines contractual, operational and payment arrangements.case
The Optical SuperstoreCommissioner of State Revenue (Vic) v The Optical Superstore Pty Ltd [2018] VSC 524, appeal [2019] VSCA 197Examines when amounts paid or payable to practitioners can be taxable wages under relevant contract provisions.case
Homefront NursingHomefront Nursing Pty Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2019] NSWCATAD 145 (opens in a new tab)Examines payroll tax relevant contracts involving general practitioners, including the relationship between payment flows and work.case
Service v Federal Commissioner of TaxationService v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [2000] FCA 188Considers the tax treatment of professional income and arrangements involving a related service entity.case
Federal Commissioner of Taxation v PhillipsFederal Commissioner of Taxation v Phillips (1978) 8 ATR 783Considers the deductibility and commerciality of fees paid to a related service entity.case
Contract terms and characterisation
Personnel ContractingConstruction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v Personnel Contracting Pty Ltd [2022] HCA 1 (opens in a new tab)Confirms that rights and obligations in a comprehensive written contract are central to common law characterisation.case
JamsekZG Operations Australia Pty Ltd v Jamsek [2022] HCA 2 (opens in a new tab)Confirms the primacy of a comprehensive contract when characterising an employment or contractor relationship.case
Dental Corporation Pty Ltd v MoffetDental Corporation Pty Ltd v Moffet [2020] FCAFC 118Considers common law employment and the extended superannuation definition in relation to a dentist's engagement.case
Revenue office rulings by jurisdiction
RevenueSARevenueSA Revenue Ruling PTA041, Relevant Contracts - Medical Centres, version 1, issued 22 November 2023 (opens in a new tab)Explains RevenueSA's view of relevant contract provisions for practitioner arrangements through worked examples.ruling
Revenue NSWRevenue NSW Revenue Ruling PTA 041, Relevant Contracts - Medical Centres, issued 11 August 2023 (effective from 1 July 2018) (opens in a new tab)Explains Revenue NSW's view of relevant contract provisions for practitioner arrangements.ruling
State Revenue Office VictoriaState Revenue Office Victoria Revenue Ruling PTA-041, Relevant contracts - medical centres, issued 11 August 2023 (opens in a new tab)Explains the Victorian State Revenue Office's view of relevant contract provisions for practitioner arrangements.ruling
Queensland Revenue OfficeQueensland Revenue Office Public Ruling PTAQ000.6.5, Relevant contracts - medical centres, issued 3 March 2025 (effective from 1 December 2024) (opens in a new tab)Explains Queensland Revenue Office's view of relevant contract provisions for practitioner arrangements.ruling
Federal tax and worker classification guidance
Taxation Ruling TR 2023/4TR 2023/4 Income tax and superannuation guarantee: who is an employee?, issued 6 December 2023 (opens in a new tab)Explains the ATO's view of the common law employee distinction for PAYG withholding.guidance
Practical Compliance Guideline PCG 2023/2PCG 2023/2 Classifying workers as employees or independent contractors - ATO compliance approach, published 6 December 2023 (opens in a new tab)Explains the ATO's compliance approach to worker classification after the 2022 High Court decisions.guidance
Taxation Ruling TR 2022/3TR 2022/3 Income tax: personal services income and personal services businesses, issued 23 November 2022 (opens in a new tab)Explains the personal services income and personal services business rules, including the unrelated clients test.ruling
Practical Compliance Guideline PCG 2021/4PCG 2021/4 Allocation of professional firm profits - ATO compliance approach, effective from 1 July 2022 (opens in a new tab)Sets out the ATO's compliance risk approach to allocations of professional firm profits.guidance
Yalos EngineeringYalos Engineering Pty Ltd and Commissioner of Taxation [2010] AATA 408Considers the personal services business tests, including who makes offers to the public.case

Authorities current as at 9 August 2026. Revenue rulings are amended from time to time. This table is general information only and is not a substitute for current advice on a specific arrangement.

Some authorities are not linked because a stable public URL could not be confirmed.

Verified Accounting Firms

Firms that have confirmed they can evidence the 21 requirements.

  1. 1
  2. 2

    Placeholder

    To be announced upon positive verification

  3. 3

    Placeholder

    To be announced upon positive verification

For Accounting Firms and Software Providers

Applications are open to accounting firms and software providers that can evidence the 21 requirements, including reconciliation.

Evidence-led Client Service

Provide clients with evidence-led payroll tax compliance services

Clear Process

Established workflow for the PT21 review and the annual client review

Grounded in Current Authority

Work anchored to the current rulings and decisions set out on this page

Interested in Working With Us?

If you can evidence the 21 requirements for our joint clients, we'd love to hear from you.

Are You a Medical Sector Accountant?

Call us

(08) 5122 6500

Email us

accountants@hamiltonbailey.com

Response time

Within 72 hours

Express Interest