据高等法院记者Elizabeth Byrne报道，英国女服务员在高等法院赢得了对于澳大利亚 "背包客税"歧视的诉讼。
一名在悉尼担任服务员的英国背包客在高等法院赢得了她对背包客税的斗争。
关键点：
英国公民Catherine Addy认为，作为背包客的她所被征收的税款是对其国籍的歧视。
持417签证的外国公民在澳大利亚的收入不超过37,000澳币，但要缴纳15%的税款。
2021年11月3日，高等法院作出了有利于Addy女士的裁决。与此同时，其他外国工人也可能会密切关注这一裁决。
该女士声称，她因为国籍问题而受到了歧视，表现在她被要求按照与澳大利亚公民不同的税率缴税。
根据英国和澳大利亚之间的协议，背包客支付统一的税率，不能享受免税限额的好处。
其他同样受到该规则影响的背包客们一直在等待今天的裁决。
背包客声称税收与国际协议 "相抵触 "
该税种于2017年推出，并且由副总理兼国民党领袖Barnaby Joyce来推动。
它适用于417签证的持有人，该签证允许18至31岁的年轻人前往澳大利亚工作及度假。
该税种对于不超过37,000澳元的收入征收15%的税。
今天这一法律诉讼背后的女性Catherine Addy，她于2017年1月至2017年5月期间在悉尼两家酒店担任服务员，赚取了26,576澳元，之后她离开了澳大利亚。
Addy女士对这一决定提出质疑，即根据背包客税向她征税，而不是作为澳大利亚的居民。
Addy女士认为，该税种与澳大利亚与英国及其他一些国家签订的国际 "双重征税"协议相抵触。
该协议禁止对于国籍的歧视，指出对外国公民的征税方式不应该比处于类似地位的当地人更 加"繁重"。
今天，高等法院作出了有利于Addy女士的裁决，认定她处于劣势地位。
"在本案中，普通税法的适用，即澳大利亚公民和英国公民在相同情况下的应税收入的收费依据和评估方法是相同的，但税率却不同，"
一致的判决书称："根据相同的普通税法，做相同的工作，赚取相同的收入的条件下，对英国国民Addy女士的税率比对相同情况下的澳大利亚国民的税率更为繁重。"
该裁决为其他数千名被征收类似税款的外国工人要求再审开创了先河。
‘不是每天都有机会做这样的事情’
Addy女士表示，她对高等法院的裁决感到“高兴”。
她说：“感觉很棒，并不是每天都有机会做这样的事情。”
“外界有很多人与我联系，我知道还有更多的背包客有着同样的诉求，这非常令人激动。”
“我至今都没意识到这个事件会持续这么久，但我真的很高兴，现在终于都说出来了，我可以继续正常生活了。”
Addy女士说，2017年她在悉尼工作时被征收所谓的‘背包客税’，这使她损失了约1000英镑。
Addy女士说：“对于像我这样的人来说，这是一笔巨款。”
“这不仅仅是1,000英镑，还有成千上万的背包客，也被拖欠了这笔钱。”
“这是一大笔钱，但这不仅仅是钱的问题，更重要的是破坏了我们达成的公平协议。”
Addy女士最近完成了她的戏剧学习，并且住在伦敦。她说她希望能回到澳大利亚。
她说：“我希望他们还能让我回来，因为我爱澳大利亚。”
Addy女士在爱尔兰公司Taxback.com的帮助下赢得了她的案子。
负责此案的律师表示，在2017年6月至2021年6月至2020年6月期间，有将近82万个417和462份签证发放，其中超过32万份签证来自受背包客税裁决影响的国家。
早期对受影响人群的估计值要低得多。
ATO表示：这一决定不会改变大多数背包客的税率
ATO在一份声明中表示，他们正在考虑高等法院的裁决，并将尽快提供进一步的指导。
ATO的一位发言人表示：“这一裁决不会改变大多数打工度假者的税率。”
“该裁决仅适用于打工度假者同时是澳大利亚税务公民以及智利、芬兰、日本、挪威、土耳其、英国、德国或以色列的情况。
“大多数打工度假者都是非澳大利亚公民。因为他们在澳大利亚是为了度假，并为支持这一度假而工作。”
ATO表示，任何认为自己可能受到高等法院裁决影响的人都应该“在提交、修改申报表或提出异议之前，查看ATO网站以获取最新的指导意见”。
该发言人表示：“雇主应该继续遵循已公布的预扣税表，直到我们更新ATO网站数据并提供进一步的指导。”
————
原文如下：
British waitress wins High Court discrimination battle over Australia's 'backpacker tax'
By High Court reporter Elizabeth Byrne
An English backpacker who worked as a waitress in Sydney has won her battle over the so-called backpacker tax in the High Court.
Key points:
British national Catherine Addy argued a tax imposed on her as a backpacker discriminated against her on the basis of her nationality
Foreign nationals in Australia on 417 visas are subject to a 15 per cent tax on income up to $37,000
Today the High Court ruled in Ms Addy's favour — a decision likely to be closely watched by other foreign workers
The woman claimed she had been discriminated against because of her nationality when she was made to pay tax at a different rate to Australian residents.
Under an agreement between Britain and Australia backpackers paid a flat rate, without the benefit of the tax-free threshold.
Other backpackers caught by the same rule have been waiting on today's decision.
Backpackers claim tax 'at odds' with international agreement
The tax was introduced in 2017, driven by then and now Deputy Prime Minister and Nationals Leader Barnaby Joyce.
It applies to holders of 417 visas, which allow young people between 18 and 31 to travel to Australia for a working holiday.
It imposes a 15 per cent tax on income up to $37,000.
Catherine Addy, the woman behind today's legal action, worked as a waitress in two Sydney hotels earning $26,576 between January 2017 and May 2017, when she left Australia.
Ms Addy challenged the decision to tax her under the backpacker tax, instead of as a resident of Australia.
Ms Addy argued the tax was at odds with an international "double tax" agreement Australia has with Britain and a number of other nations.
That agreement prohibits discrimination on the basis of nationality, by stating foreign nationals should not be taxed in a more "burdensome" way than locals in a similar position.
Today, the High Court found ruled in Ms Addy's favour, finding she had been worse off.
"In the present case, the application of the ordinary taxation laws – the basis of the charge and the method of assessment in relation to the taxable income of Australian nationals and nationals of the United Kingdom in the same circumstances – was the same, but the tax rate was not," the unanimous judgement said.
"The tax rate was more onerous for Ms Addy, a national of the United Kingdom, than it was for an Australian national in the same circumstances – doing the same work, earning the same income, under the same ordinary taxation laws."
The ruling has cleared the way for thousands of other foreign workers who were similarly taxed to request a review.
'It's not every day you get to do something like this'
Ms Addy said she was "delighted" with the High Court's ruling.
"It feels great, it's not every day you get to do something like this," she said.
"There are so many people out there who have contacted me, and I know there are more [backpackers], it's very exciting.
"I don't think we quite realized that it would go on as long as it has, but I'm really glad that it's finally all said and done now and I can crack on with life."
Ms Addy said the so-called backpacker tax had cost her about 1,000 British pounds when she was charged for her work in Sydney in 2017.
"That's a massive amount of money for someone like me," Ms Addy said.
"It isn't just 1,000 pounds, there are tens of thousands of backpackers out there, who effectively are owed money.
"It's a lot of money, but it's not just about the money, it's about the fairness of the fact that we have we had an agreement, and it was broken."
Ms Addy, who recently completed her drama studies and lives in London, said she hoped to return to Australia.
"I hope they still let me come back, because I love Australia," she said.
Ms Addy bought her case before the court with the help of Irish-based firm Taxback.com.
The lawyers who ran the case say there were almost 820,000 417 and 462 visas granted during in the period June 2017 to June 2021 to 2020, with more than 320,000 of these from the countries affected by the backpacker tax ruling.
Earlier estimates of people affected have been much lower.
Decision won't change tax rates for majority of backpackers: ATO
In a statement, the ATO said it was "currently considering" the High Court's decision and would "provide further guidance as soon as possible".
"This decision will not change the tax rates for the majority of working holiday makers," an ATO spokesperson said.
"This decision is only relevant where the working holidaymaker is both an Australian resident for tax purposes and from Chile, Finland, Japan, Norway, Turkey, the United Kingdom, Germany or Israel.
"Most working holidaymakers will be non-residents as they are in Australia to have a holiday and working to support that holiday."
The ATO said anyone who believed they could be affected by the High Court's decision should "check the ATO website for updated guidance prior to lodging or amending a return or lodging an objection".
"Employers should continue to follow rates in the published withholding tables for working holidaymakers until we update the ATO website with further guidance," the spokesperson said.
