A hotel-hopping Korean Air pilot was ordered to pay income tax in Australia because he had a wife and children in Brisbane.
William Hughes, a commercial airline pilot for Korean Air, spent more than half the year up in the air and overseas.
The Malaysian-born, dual Australian and British citizen argued he should not have to pay income tax on his six figure salary, even though he paid mortgage and other household expenses for the family in Australia.
When he was in Seoul he stayed in temporary accommodation, hopping between hotels and apartments he shared with his colleagues.
He also routinely ate his meals in restaurants when he was in Seoul, which he said was not unusual in Asian cultures.
Mr Hughes' wife testified with her husband missing, she was left to manage the home and children basically on her own.
"I expect [Mr Hughes] to come to Australia and spend time with his children, to be a father figure. This causes a bit of tension, because [Mr Hughes] just wants to rest and can't always come to Australia," his wife said.
Mr Hughes also argued he does not own any assets other than the family home, he is not on the electoral role and he does not own a car in his own name.
'Not a guest or interloper'
Finding in favour of the Tax Office, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal found even though he spent more than half the year outside of Australia, he was a "fly-in fly-out" worker
He resides in Australia for the purposes of tax laws and therefore had to pay income tax on his six figure salary, the tribunal found.
"He was not a guest or interloper; his wife's statement makes it clear he was coming home where he was expected to undertake parental responsibilities - even if she was not always satisfied with his performance in that role," Senior Member Bernard McCabe said.
Mr McCabe also found Mr Hughes only had a limited social life in Seoul and whenever he could, he returned to his life in Australia and "the embrace of his family".
"For long stretches ... he lived in hotels when he spent nights in the city," Mr McCabe said.
This was in contrast to a previous decision by the tribunal, which found a Vanuatu citizen did not have to pay tax in Australia because he was he was estranged from his wife and did not stay in the family home when he was in Sydney.
But in this case, the fact Mr Hughes maintained a "regular and healthy relationship" with his family meant he had to pay tax in Australia.
