Most helpful replyATO Certified Response
ATO Certified Response31 May 2023
Hiya @Ryland 👋
Assumption:
- Jul22 - Dec22 with original BMS Id - reported to ATO successfully under STP
- Transferred YTD amounts, such that the "closing balances" in original BMS Id were transferred as the "opening balances" in new BMS Id, keeping the same Payroll Ids for all transferred employees (original Payroll Id = new Payroll Id)
- Jan23 - May23 with new BMS Id - reported to ATO successfully under STP2
- Duplicate ATO Income Statements, as the ATO publish Income Statements for each combination of ABN/Branch/BMS Id/Payroll Id, therefore you double-counted income, as you were not aware of the impact of changing BMS Ids
- Subsequently used STP2 new field "Previous BMS Identifier" in a once-off update to inform the ATO that you had transferred YTD amounts from original BMS Id to new BMS Id. This is only possible if your new payroll solution offers this "replacement of key identifiers" functionality.
- When the ATO receives that once-off replacement BMS Id via the update, they will correct the oversight to only now have one Income Statement for the ABN/Branch/Original BMS Id/Payroll Id.
If that is exactly what you have done, then call the ATO and discuss the timing of when they will complete their step 6 above. However, if you did not:
- Transfer YTD amounts from the original Payroll Ids/BMS Id to the new Payroll Ids/BMS Id
- Update the new Payroll Ids/BMS Ids via "replacement key identifiers" update functionality
Then it is not an ATO problem, as they action data you send them, but instead, there are outstanding actions on your part.
Sorry, being explicit in these circumstances is essential to prevent misunderstanding actions. Were those 6 steps in assumptions above accurate and complete? That will inform what happens next to correct this.
Deanne