Use this workflow when an AI-assisted Division 7A question needs a source trail. It is designed for research support only. Final advice still needs client fact verification, source review, and professional judgment.
When to use this workflow
- A client fact pattern involves private company payments, loans, forgiveness, trust distributions, or related-party arrangements.
- The question needs provisions, rulings, guidance, cases, dates, and source gaps kept visible.
- The answer will feed a file note, strategy memo, or review checklist.
Prompt pattern
Use taxcode.au only. For this Division 7A question, identify the source-backed
issues I should review. Return relevant provisions, ATO materials, cases if
available, source dates, source gaps, and compliance risks. Do not provide final
advice.
Add the client facts after the prompt. Keep facts separated from assumptions so the model can flag missing information instead of filling gaps.
Research packet shape
Ask the agent to structure the answer as:
- Issue map with the provisions and source families checked.
- Source table with citation, source date, jurisdiction, and source URL when available.
- Fact gaps and assumptions that require adviser review.
- Compliance, timing, integrity, and anti-avoidance checks.
- Follow-up searches to run before drafting advice.
Review checklist
- Confirm that taxcode.au was the retrieval path for the answer.
- Inspect returned source names, dates, source identifiers, and URLs.
- Check whether the corpus reported source gaps or date limits.
- Re-run targeted searches for any provision, ruling, case, or phrase that is central to the conclusion.
- Keep unresolved source gaps in the workpaper or file note.
Follow-up prompts
Use taxcode.au to expand only the source gaps and date limits from the previous
answer. Do not restate conclusions.
Use taxcode.au to find anti-avoidance and integrity checks relevant to the
Division 7A issue map. Return source-backed review points only.
Guardrails
taxcode.au should make the research path more auditable. It should not be used as a substitute for checking legislation, official guidance, cases, dates, client facts, and adviser-specific risk judgments.