---
title: "Letter responding to an ATO formal notice to give information or produce documents (with privilege claim)"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/precedents/taxation/ato-information-notice-response"
type: "precedent"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "a26-ato-information-notice-response"
area_id: "A26"
kind: "letter"
ai_level: "red"
version: 1
law_stated_as_at: "2026-10-17"
---

# Letter responding to an ATO formal notice to give information or produce documents (with privilege claim)

> Covering letter and schedules for answering an ATO formal notice: an item-by-item response, a document index, privilege and concession claims set out the way the ATO's LPP protocol expects, an extension request and a…

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/precedents/taxation/ato-information-notice-response  
Law stated as at: 2026-10-17

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

Covering letter and schedules for answering an ATO formal notice: an item-by-item response, a document index, privilege and concession claims set out the way the ATO's LPP protocol expects, an extension request and a client confirmation.

## Key facts

- Kind: Letter. A letter or email you adapt and send.
- Practice area: [Taxation](https://ailawframework.com/precedents/taxation.md)
- Jurisdictions: Australia
- AI level: Red. Keep AI out of the decisive steps. A lawyer does the work.
- Law stated as at: 2026-10-17
- Status: Maintained. Checked on 2026-10-17 against the 7 authorities it cites, for Australia.

## When to use it

Use when a client receives a notice under s 353-10 of Schedule 1 to the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (or a similar ATO notice power) and the lawyer is responding for them. Do not use it for informal ATO requests without first advising on whether to answer voluntarily, or where the notice may be a contempt of current proceedings: raise that first.

## How AI may be used

Lawyer-led. AI may index, de-duplicate and organise the documents and build the response schedules. It must not write the answers given to the Commissioner or decide any privilege claim.

**AI may:**

- Index, de-duplicate and number the documents and populate the document index (Schedule C) from metadata
- Map documents to Notice items as a draft for the lawyer to check
- Flag documents that may be privileged, such as communications with lawyers, as candidates for lawyer review
- Draft the reasons for an extension request from the lawyer's notes

**AI must not:**

- Must not draft the substantive answers in Schedule B: they are statements to the Commissioner, and a false or misleading statement can be an offence
- Must not decide that a document is or is not privileged, or finalise Schedule D
- Must not process the client's documents or tax file numbers in a tool not approved for confidential client data
- Must not set or change the compliance date in the matter diary

**The lawyer checks:**

- Every privilege claim reviewed document by document by a lawyer: the ATO's LPP protocol says computer-assisted processes alone are not a reasonable basis for a claim
- Every answer in Schedule B checked with the client and against source records, and the client confirmation signed
- Nothing produced falls outside the Notice, and every redaction is marked and explained
- The compliance date, any agreed extension and the transfer method confirmed in writing with the ATO officer

## Authorities

- [Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth) Sch 1 s 353-10 (Commissioner's power to require information, evidence and documents)](https://www.legislation.gov.au/C1953A00001/latest/text)
- [Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth) s 8C (failure to comply with requirements)](https://www.legislation.gov.au/C1953A00001/latest/text)
- [Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth) s 8K (false or misleading statements)](https://www.legislation.gov.au/C1953A00001/latest/text)
- [Daniels Corporation International Pty Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission 2002 HCA 49; (2002) 213 CLR 543](https://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases-and-judgments/judgments/judgments-1998-current/daniels-corporation-international-pty-ltd-v-australian-competition-and-consumer-commission)
- [Glencore International AG v Commissioner of Taxation 2019 HCA 26](https://www.hcourt.gov.au/sites/default/files/eresources/2019/HCA/26.pdf)
- [ATO, Compliance with formal notices: claiming legal professional privilege in response to formal notices (LPP protocol, June 2022)](https://www.ato.gov.au/law/view/document?DocID=SGM/LPP-FINAL)
- [ATO, Our formal notice powers (guidance)](https://www.ato.gov.au/about-ato/commitments-and-reporting/information-and-privacy/information-management/our-approach-to-information-gathering/our-formal-notice-powers)

## Official form

[Official form](https://www.ato.gov.au/about-ato/commitments-and-reporting/information-and-privacy/information-management/our-approach-to-information-gathering/our-formal-notice-powers)

## Full text and drafting notes

The full text and the drafting notes are not part of this public page. Signed-in firm accounts can read them at https://ailawframework.com/precedents/taxation/ato-information-notice-response and through the signed-in MCP connector https://ailawframework.com/mcp/firm.

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*