Imagine this: after years of hardship and illness, you’re forced to retire early on a Total and Permanent Disability (TPD) pension from your super fund. It’s your only income stream. Then come the medical bills – tens of thousands of dollars in treatments to manage the very conditions that ended your career. You might assume those costs are tax deductible as the TPD pension was payable because of this disability.

Unfortunately, a recent tribunal case shows it’s not that simple. In Wannberg v Commissioner of Taxation [2025] ARTA 1561, the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) upheld the ATO’s decision to deny nearly $100,000 in medical deductions. The case is a stark reminder that the tax system draws a sharp line between earning income and dealing with your health.

The Story Behind the Case

The taxpayer, Mr Wannberg, had left the workforce due to severe mental and physical health issues caused by years of abuse. His TPD pension from his super fund was his only income. In 2024, he applied to the ATO for a private ruling, asking whether about $98,000 in medical expenses – including psychotherapy, residential treatment, and dental work – could be claimed as deductions.

His argument was heartfelt and logical: these treatments were essential to manage his disabilities and sustain his eligibility for the pension. He compared his situation to a 2010 High Court case (Anstis), where a student was allowed to deduct self-education costs linked to her Youth Allowance.

But the ATO said no – and the tribunal agreed.

Why the Deductions Failed

The key issue came down to a single piece of tax legislation: section 8-1 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997. To be deductible, an expense must be incurred “in gaining or producing your assessable income” and must not be of a private or domestic nature.

The tribunal found no direct link – or “nexus” – between the medical treatments and the pension income. The TPD pension was payable because of his disability, not because of any ongoing effort to maintain it. As the tribunal put it, the medical costs helped him live with his condition, but didn’t produce the pension.

In other words, while staying healthy might be personally essential, it doesn’t make those expenses tax-deductible. The costs were considered private in nature – similar to most therapy, medical, or dental bills.

What This Means for You

This decision offers a few key takeaways for anyone receiving disability pensions, super income streams, or other support payments:

• Understand the “nexus” test: An expense must directly help you earn your income. Medical costs for managing a condition usually don’t meet that test.
• Recognise the private line: Even if a treatment relates to your ability to work, it’s likely still “private” unless it directly relates to producing income.
• Treatment vs assessment: Some taxpayers are required to obtain certificates from medical practitioners to maintain a licence so that they can continue with their current income producing activities. These costs are often deductible, unless the individual receives medical treatment.
• Plan for non-deductible costs: If you rely on disability or super pensions, factor medical expenses into your financial plan. Consider insurance options, offsets, or rebates (like private health or Medicare levy exemptions) to ease the load.
• Seek advice early: Before spending large sums, get an ATO private ruling or professional advice.

The Wannberg case is a tough reminder that the tax law cares more about how income is produced than how life is lived. The system draws a firm line between personal wellbeing and income generation – and unfortunately, even genuine medical needs often fall on the wrong side of that line.

If you’re unsure whether an expense might be deductible, don’t guess. Talk to us first. We can help you plan ahead, stay compliant, and make the most of the rules that do work in your favour.

Proposed Extension of the Instant Asset Write-Off and Other Tax Measures

A new Bill before Parliament – the Treasury Laws Amendment (Strengthening Financial Systems and Other Measures) Bill 2025 – proposes several key changes that could affect small businesses, listed companies, and the not-for-profit sector. The headline measure is the proposed extension of the $20,000 instant asset write-off for another year, to 30 June 2026.

Small Business Boost: $20,000 Instant Asset Write-Off Extended

If the Bill passes, small businesses with an aggregated annual turnover of less than $10 million will continue to be able to immediately deduct the full cost of eligible assets costing under $20,000 (excluding GST) through to 30 June 2026.

The threshold applies per asset, meaning multiple purchases can qualify if each individual item is under the limit. To claim the deduction, the asset must be first used or installed ready for use by the new deadline.

This measure remains one of the simplest and most practical tax incentives available to small businesses. It provides a direct cash-flow benefit by allowing the full deduction in the year of purchase instead of spreading depreciation over several years, as long as the taxpayer would actually have a tax bill for that year. For example, a tradesperson upgrading tools, or a café purchasing a new fridge or coffee machine, can immediately claim the full deduction – freeing up cash for reinvestment elsewhere in the business.

While the proposal still needs to pass Parliament, now is the time to plan. If you are considering new equipment or technology upgrades, budgeting early ensures assets can be delivered and installed before the cut-off date once the law is enacted.

Strengthened Corporate Disclosure

The Bill also proposes tighter disclosure rules for listed companies. Changes to the Corporations Act 2001 would require the disclosure of equity derivative interests – such as options, swaps, and short positions – under the substantial holding regime. These reforms are designed to improve market transparency and make it harder for significant shareholdings or control interests to remain hidden.

For listed entities, this will increase compliance obligations and may require updates to internal monitoring and reporting systems. Investors with substantial positions in listed companies should also review their current arrangements to ensure future compliance.

Greater Transparency for Charities

For the not-for-profit sector, the ACNC Commissioner would gain the power to publicly disclose “protected information” such as details of investigations, provided it meets a public harm test. This aims to strengthen public confidence in the charity sector by showing that the regulator is taking action where misconduct occurs.

For well-run charities, stronger transparency can enhance community trust – but it also highlights the need for robust governance, record-keeping, and compliance processes.

Financial Regulator Reviews Simplified

Finally, the Bill would reduce the frequency of reviews of ASIC and APRA by the Financial Regulator Assessment Authority from every two years to every five. While largely administrative, this signals a shift toward streamlined oversight to allow regulators to focus on core functions.

What You Should Do Now

Although these measures are still before Parliament, it’s wise to start planning. For small businesses, consider your 2025–26 capital expenditure needs and make sure any planned purchases can be installed and ready for use by 30 June 2026 if you are hoping to rely on the upfront deduction. For charities and listed entities, review governance and reporting frameworks to prepare for greater transparency requirements.

We’ll keep you updated as the Bill progresses. In the meantime, contact us if you’d like to discuss how these proposed changes might fit into your business or investment strategy.