This Sydney councillor calls himself the ‘1 per cent accountant’. Now he’s been caught

When the high-flying, celebrity-loving, self-proclaimed “1 Per Cent Accountant” was introduced on an industry podcast last year, he was praised for his ability to do things “most accountants wouldn’t even consider”.

But Peter Ristevski, an elected councillor at Liverpool, is not a licensed accountant: his registration was terminated six years ago over his reported failures to comply with the code of professional conduct. This week, he was penalised by the government’s tax agent watchdog for providing and advertising his tax agent services without registration, two civil offences that attract maximum fines of up to $82,500 and $16,500.

The penalty comes as Ristevski deals with fires on multiple fronts: a week prior, he lost a Supreme Court case he’d brought against his own council, owing costs. He faces a petition from locals to be removed from his position over a series of comments he made on social media about “radical Islam” in the community, multiculturalism and “cultural terrorism”. It also comes at a perilous time for his council, which is teetering on the brink of administration as its elected officials await the final report of a lengthy public inquiry, expected in June.

The Tax Practitioners Board found Ristevski had lodged tax returns and business activity statements on behalf of clients through another business, and that he had used insolvency arrangements to help clients avoid paying employer tax, GST and superannuation.

He had also helped in the “backdated appointment of straw directors, and changes in share registry records, to redirect potential creditor and director penalty notices to third parties without the means to pay”, the watchdog said, including some who had criminal records, and some who were bankrupt, both of which are automatic disqualifications for being a director.

It also found he had “undertaken deliberate, sophisticated conduct” to obscure the arrangements he was making, including “sophisticated creditor defeating and phoenix-like schemes” that allowed clients to avoid paying tax debts.

He regularly advertised his tax services on YouTube, LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram and other platforms as the “1 per cent accountant” and the “Financial Surgeon”, the board found, despite his being unregistered.

Ristevski said the findings were untrue, calling the Tax Practitioners Board a “kangaroo court” for making a finding without contacting him.

“What these bastards have made me do [is] I’m going to go to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, which I’ll win, because there was no proper process,” he said.

He said he ran a company, Investment Plus, and his staff were licensed to be tax agents (the watchdog’s finding was about his actions).

“My role as a CEO is to go out there, do podcasts, get business. I deal with high net-worth individuals. Every firm, including the big firms, need a supervising agent as a point of call … that’s not me, because I’m not in the office seven and a half hours, five days a week.”

Case against council lost

It was the second negative finding for Ristevski in a week, after he lost a Supreme Court case he had brought against his own council in which he sought to have an order made to ban the sharing of a code of conduct investigation report into him.

He now needs to pay the council’s costs for the action, which council staff estimate to be about $200,000.

In the Supreme Court summons, Ristevski sought an injunction on sharing the report until a NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal matter had been finalised. It is unclear what information the report contained, or the nature of the NCAT matter.

Ristevski has been feuding with Mayor Ned Mannoun for more than a decade, and the pair have filed code of conduct complaints against each other.

The council spent $311,897 in the 12 months to November last year dealing with 138 code of conduct complaints, 101 of which were directed against councillors.

Council awaits public inquiry report

The fragmented nature of the council was revealed this month when a meeting descended into chaos when two councillors got into a heated argument that required the intervention of a security guard and the chamber was left with only a few elected officials at the meeting.

The decision came as the deadline arrived for Counsel Assisting the Office of Local Government to submit the final report to Ross Glover, the commissioner overseeing the inquiry. The deadline for that, and other party responses, was pushed back by a few weeks in May. Glover is now considering his own findings, and it is unclear how long that will take.

The Office of Local Government said: “It is unfortunate the council’s poor conduct occurred while the public inquiry is still being finalised and the commissioner is preparing his report for the minister. If the poor conduct continues, the OLG will reluctantly need to consider its options before the commissioner’s report is complete.”