The Full Federal Court has found that a taxpayer had a “permanent place of abode” in Bahrain, even though he lived in temporary accommodation, and therefore allowed his appeal against a decision that he was a resident of Australia.

This decision confirms that the correct focus of the “permanent place of abode” residency test is whether there has been an abandonment of Australian residence (i.e., to live permanently outside of Australia), rather than whether a person lives in permanent accommodation overseas.

In particular, the Full Court considered that the phrase “place of abode” is not a reference to a person’s house or flat or other dwelling but rather the town or country in which a person is physically residing permanently.