Editing Principality of Hutt River (section)

== Status ==
The principality had no legal status as a matter of Australian law. In 2007, the High Court of Australia dismissed an application by Casley for leave to appeal against a judgment against him relating to his son Leonard's failure to file tax returns. Leonard argued that he resided in the "Hutt River Province" and that it is not part of Australia and not subject to Australian taxation law. The court dismissed Casley's application and found that his arguments were "fatuous, frivolous, and vexatious."<ref name="2007 HCATrans 590"/>

The Australian government unequivocally stated on its website that it did not recognise the secession of the principality.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://australia.gov.au/faq/hutt-river-province |work=[[Australian Government]] |title=What is the Hutt River Province? |date=22 February 1999 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140430061134/https://australia.gov.au/faq/hutt-river-province |url-status=dead |archive-date=30 April 2014 |access-date=30 April 2014}}</ref><ref name="gov">{{cite web |url=http://www.uae.embassy.gov.au/abud/huttriver.html |archive-date=3 October 2024 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241003054222/https://uae.embassy.gov.au/abud/huttriver.html |title=Australian Government Does Not Recognise The Hutt River Province |date=23 October 2007|publisher=Australian Embassy, United Arab Emirates |access-date=22 May 2009}}</ref> Passports issued by the principality were not recognised by the Australian government.<ref name="gov" /> Leonard made unverified claims that they have been accepted on some occasions by some unspecified foreign countries,<ref name="ABC" /> but there was a documented instance of a man being arrested in [[Germany]] for attempting to use a Hutt River Province "[[Passport|diplomatic passport]]".<ref name=":0">{{Cite book |url=https://dfat.gov.au/about-us/corporate/freedom-of-information/Documents/dfat-foi-F594-release-2.pdf |title=DFAT FOI documents regarding Hutt River Province |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170213001549/https://dfat.gov.au/about-us/corporate/freedom-of-information/Documents/dfat-foi-F594-release-2.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-date=13 February 2017}}</ref>

Casley claimed that the ATO sent him a tax demand in 2012 to which he simply responded with a document stating that he was a "foreign national and non-resident of Australia".<ref name="Heaton" /> He also repeatedly claimed that he was classed by the ATO as a "non-resident of Australia for income tax purposes" and did not pay tax.<ref name="Heaton" /><ref name="Bloomberg">{{cite news |archive-date=3 October 2024 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20241003054716/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-05-17/micronation-master-prince-leonard-of-hutt-river |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-05-17/micronation-master-prince-leonard-of-hutt-river |url-status=live |url-access=subscription |first=Matt |last=Siegel |title=Micronation Master: Prince Leonard of Hutt River |work=[[Bloomberg Businessweek|Bloomberg]] |date=21 May 2012 |orig-date=18 May 2012}}</ref><ref name="Murphy">{{cite news |url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-04-16/the-royal-showman/400278 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241003055405/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-04-17/the-royal-showman/400278?future=true& |first=Sean |last=Murphy |archive-date=3 October 2024 |url-status=live |title=The Royal Showman |work=ABC News |date=17 April 2010}}</ref><ref>"Now Leonard wants a uni.", by Karen Valenti, 17 February 2003, ''Gold Coast Bulletin'', p. 15.{{better source needed|date=October 2024|reason=No direct URL provided.}}</ref>{{better source needed|date=October 2024|reason=No direct URL provided.}} In 2017, however, Justice Le Miere of the Supreme Court of Western Australia ordered Leonard to pay more than A$2.7&nbsp;million in unpaid taxes, and Arthur Casley to pay more than A$242,000 in unpaid taxes. The judge said that their argument of sovereignty "has no legal merit or substance. Anyone can declare themselves a sovereign in their own home but they cannot ignore the laws of Australia or not pay tax."<ref name="2017 WASC 161">{{cite AustLII|litigants=Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Casley|WASC|161|2017|date=16 June 2017|courtname=auto}}.</ref><ref name=":3">{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-40298433 |archive-date=3 October 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241003055801/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-40298433 |url-status=live |title=Hutt River 'micronation' leaders lose Australian tax battle |date=16 June 2017 |work=BBC News}}</ref> An appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed.<ref>{{cite AustLII|litigants=Casley v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation|WASCA|196|2017|date=20 October 2017|courtname=auto}}.</ref>

Despite this, the principality continued to argue that it was an independent entity within the [[Australian legal system]].<ref name="Hutt" /><ref name="Ryan" /> The principality tried repeatedly to use a document purporting to be a letter from the Commonwealth Department of Territories admitting that the principality was a "legal entity".<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.principality-hutt-river.com/Principality%20Downloads/Historic%20Documents/AUSTEO%20SECRET%20Document.pdf |archive-date=3 October 2024 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241003055951/http://www.principality-hutt-river.com/Principality%20Downloads/Historic%20Documents/AUSTEO%20SECRET%20Document.pdf |title=AUSTEO Secret |work=Department of Territories |author=B.M.W.}}</ref> The Australian government noted that Casley "has used the document in various countries in the past and even sent a copy of it to [[Gareth Evans (politician)|Senator Evans]] in 1993".<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |url=https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/251/response/1040/attach/3/F594%20release%202.PDF.pdf |website=righttoknow.org.au |archive-date=3 October 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241003060237/https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/251/response/1040/attach/3/F594%20release%202.PDF.pdf |url-status=live |title=Diplomatic documents regarding the Hutt River Province released under FOI laws}}</ref> The Australian government also told foreign governments that "We have seen the purported 'Department of Territories Minute' before. The clumsy language, including a Malapropian use of 'a moot point' gives it away for what it is, a poorly attempted forgery."<ref name=":0" />

The principality claimed that all [[Social security in Australia|social security]] benefits were withdrawn from Hutt River's residents at the time of secession by the Australian government. It further claimed that residents did not receive pensions, [[Medicare (Australia)|medical benefits]], educational allowances, [[Child benefit|child endowments]], or benefits normally paid to war veterans. Voting is compulsory by law in Australia, but Casley claimed to have successfully removed the names of Hutt River residents from the Australian [[electoral roll]].<ref name="Heaton" /> Casley admitted that he made annual payments to the [[Shire of Northampton]], the local government authority, although he chose to characterise these payments as "gifts" rather than council rates.<ref name="NYT1">{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/02/world/asia/02australia.html?_r=1 |archive-date=3 October 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241003060617/https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/02/world/asia/02australia.html?_r=1 |url-status=live |title=Rewards for Rebellion: Tiny Nation and Crown for Life |url-access=subscription |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=1 February 2011 |first=Norimitsu |last=Onishi}}</ref> The principality said that it levied its own [[Income tax in Australia|income tax]] of 0.5 per cent on financial transactions by foreign companies registered in the province and personal accounts.

There were some occasions where organisations stated that the province had some sort of sovereignty:

* The [[National Museum of Australia]] contained an exhibition on the theme of "Separation" within Australia which included a Hutt River Province display which stated that Casley "successfully seceded from Australia".<ref name="NMA">{{cite web |url=http://www.nma.gov.au/exhibitions/eternity/separation |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210514122746/https://www.nma.gov.au/exhibitions/eternity/separation |archive-date=14 May 2021 |work=National Museum of Australia |title=Separation |at=Prince Leonard calls for separation from the state |accessdate=27 March 2021}}</ref>
* Judy Lattas, a sociologist at [[Macquarie University]], once stated that "many officials in Western Australia, some quite high up, and even nationally in Australia are happy to play out the myth of Hutt River's sovereignty" by attending Hutt River functions, returning correspondence, and abandoning the claim for tax.<ref name="NYT1" />
* In 2005, the Shire of Northampton listed the principality as having "high historic and social significance as the site of Australia's only independent principality."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://inherit.stateheritage.wa.gov.au/Public/Inventory/Details/7fdbc0c0-acd4-483e-8aa8-b916b262064e# |archive-date=3 October 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241003061240/https://inherit.dplh.wa.gov.au/public/inventory/details/7fdbc0c0-acd4-483e-8aa8-b916b262064e |url-status=live |title=Hutt River Province |author=Shire of Northampton |work=Municipal Heritage Inventory |publisher=[[Heritage Council of Western Australia]] |access-date=15 February 2014}}</ref>

The principality appears on [[Google Maps]], but only as a "tourist attraction".<ref>{{cite web |url=https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/micronations/index.html |quote=The Principality of Hutt River is one of the few micronations that actually shows up on Google Maps. |archive-date=3 October 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241003061413/https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/micronations/index.html |url-status=live |last=Johanson |first=Mark |title=Masters of micronations: meet people who started their own tiny countries |publisher=CNN |date=23 May 2017 |access-date=27 March 2021}}</ref> In 2010, [[Brendon Grylls]], Western Australian Minister for Regional Development and Lands, was asked if his state had a "position" on the principality. He replied, "only that Prince Leonard is an enigma."<ref name="Mouse" />

===Treatment by overseas nations===

From 1984 to 2010, Australian diplomatic missions in 28 countries exchanged 120 diplomatic cables with Australia concerning activities relating to the principality.<ref name=":2" />

In 2008, the [[Council of the European Union]] issued a [[memorandum]] identifying Hutt River passports among known "fantasy passports ... issued by private organisations and individuals" to which a visa should not be affixed.<ref>{{Cite web |publisher=Council Of The European Union |url=http://www.udiregelverk.no/~/media/Images/Rettskilder/Schengen%20rettskilder/Table%20of%20travel%20documents/St16225%20En08_Part%20V_01%2012%202008.ashx |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120309171900/http://www.udiregelverk.no/~/media/Images/Rettskilder/Schengen%20rettskilder/Table%20of%20travel%20documents/St16225%20En08_Part%20V_01%2012%202008.ashx |location=[[Brussels]] |date=1 December 2008 |url-status=dead |title=Information concerning known fantasy and camouflage passports |archive-date=9 March 2012}}</ref>

Hong Kong does not recognise the principality, but its corporate registry did at one point recognise the principality as a place where a company could be incorporated. The Hong Kong Registry, however, were looking at reviewing their list of accredited places for company incorporation after the issue was raised in an adverse manner by Australian media.<ref>{{cite news |title=Hong Kong gives nod to Hutt River |work=[[The West Australian]] |date=28 January 2012 |first=Daniel |last=Mercer |page=23 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20241003062535/https://thewest.com.au/news/australia/hong-kong-gives-nod-to-hutt-river-ng-ya-333745 |archive-date=3 October 2024 |url-status=live |url=https://thewest.com.au/news/australia/hong-kong-gives-nod-to-hutt-river-ng-ya-333745}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.theage.com.au/business/some-like-it-hutt-but-others-beg-to-differ-20120126-1qjku.html |url-access=registration |archive-date=3 October 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241003062224/https://www.theage.com.au/business/some-like-it-hutt-but-others-beg-to-differ-20120126-1qjku.html |url-status=live |title=Some like it Hutt, but others beg to differ |date=27 January 2012 |work=[[The Age]] |last=Wood |first=Leonie}}</ref>

In 2008, a 48-year-old French man who claimed to be an ambassador representing the principality to the [[United Arab Emirates]], his 36-year-old female compatriot and a 28-year-old Pakistani man, were charged by the UAE over issuing travel documents and selling land in the principality to UAE residents under false pretences.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/uae/crime/hutt-river-ambassador-accused-of-conning-people-1.93148 |archive-date=3 October 2024 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20241003062648/https://gulfnews.com/uae/crime/hutt-river-ambassador--accused-of-conning-people-1.93148 |url-status=live |title=Hutt River 'ambassador' accused of conning people |last=Za'za' |first=Bassam |date=26 March 2008 |access-date=23 January 2014 |newspaper=[[Gulf News]]}}</ref> Casley stated the man had no diplomatic standing in the Principality and had only made a single visit to the province.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/man-claims-to-be-hutt-ambassador/2008/03/27/1206207294314.html |archive-date=3 October 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241003062711/https://www.theage.com.au/world/defendant-claims-to-be-hutt-ambassador-20080328-ge6wdd.html |url-status=live |title=Defendant claims to be Hutt ambassador |url-access=registration |work=[[Australian Associated Press|AAP]]/[[Agence France-Presse|AFP]] |date=28 March 2008 |access-date=23 January 2014 |publisher=[[The Age]]}}</ref>

In April 2016, the principality received a letter from [[Queen Elizabeth II]] which communicated the Queen's good wishes on the anniversary of the founding of the principality 46 years before, on 21 April 1970. The letter from Buckingham Palace was signed by Sonia Bonici, Senior Correspondence Officer. It reads in part: "I am to convey Her Majesty's good wishes to you and to all concerned for a most enjoyable and successful celebration on 23rd and 24th of April to mark the forty-sixth anniversary of the Principality of Hutt River." The Queen was replying to a letter from Casley congratulating her on her 90th birthday.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.businessinsider.com.au/australias-oldest-micronation-finally-gets-recognition-from-buckingham-palace-2016-4 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160422045747/http://www.businessinsider.com.au/australias-oldest-micronation-finally-gets-recognition-from-buckingham-palace-2016-4 |first=Chris |last=Pash |url-status=dead |archive-date=22 April 2016 |title=This 46-year-old Australian micronation has finally been recognised by Buckingham Palace |website=Business Insider Australia |date=21 April 2016 |accessdate=27 March 2021}}</ref>