No right to stay, no right to work, a visa renewed every two years. The Tribunal still found she had abandoned her Australian residence.
Your client leaves Australia on a dependent visa. No right to stay overseas permanently. No right to work. The visa expires every two years and must be reapplied for from outside the country.
Fourteen years later, the Tribunal says she abandoned her Australian residence. Ward [2026] ARTA 872 is one of the clearest examples of how a “temporary” departure becomes permanent - and the factors the Tribunal weighed read like a diagnostic checklist.
What happened
Ms Ward left Australia in 2009 for her husband’s US work assignment. She lived in California for nearly 12 years - kids in local schools, joined the PTA, bought a house in 2014. In 2021, they sold the US house and moved to the Netherlands. Not back to Australia.
Her St Ives home had been rented out since 2009. It sold in February 2023 for $2.3 million. Her residency status determined whether she could access the Div 118 main residence exemption on the gain.
Her domicile was agreed to be Australia. So the sole question under s 6(1) ITAA36: did she have a “permanent place of abode” outside Australia?
The checklist
The Tribunal worked through the standard factors. Every one pointed the same way.
Time away: 17 years overseas, 145 days in Australia across that period, zero returns during the three years under review [17, 21].
Settled overseas life: kids in school, community ties, a house bought and lived in for years. When the family left the US, they settled in the Netherlands [23].
Acts of abandonment: sold the house - her most significant connection to Australia - and came off the electoral roll [24].
Economic centre overseas: family income earned overseas, joint US tax returns, and the US house sale not declared in her Australian return [26, 27].
Thin Australian ties: bank accounts, a licence, belongings at a relative’s, beneficiary of a trust the Tribunal found insufficient to weigh [26].
Visa status: irrelevant. “Temporary” visas renewed in succession for 15 years. Substance over form [27].
She had “definitely abandoned” her Australian residence well before the relevant period [22].
Why this matters
Residency under the domicile test is always fact-dependent. Ward does not change the law. But it gives practitioners a useful reference point for how the Tribunal weighs “permanent place of abode” when the facts are clear.
If your client has been overseas for years, settled accommodation, children in local schools, economic life centred overseas, Australian property sold, and successive visa renewals showing permanence despite technical temporariness - Ward says that is a permanent place of abode outside Australia.
The practical lesson: the label on the visa does not determine residency. The life your client builds around it does.
General information only. This note was accurate when written. The law may have changed since and the note is not updated. It is not legal or tax advice, does not take account of your circumstances and must not be relied upon as a substitute for advice on your own matter. If the issue is live for you or your client, email arda@nortonquaytaxlaw.com.au for advice on the current position.