Essential vs Comprehensive vs Defensible vs Scenario Review, compared.

Prismi has four fixed-fee tiers: Essential from $1,495 + GST (single methodology) for simple CGT events; Comprehensive from $3,995 + GST (dual methodology) for restructures and related-party transfers; Defensible Valuation File from $8,995 + GST (triple methodology) for ATO-dispute risk; and Valuation Range & Scenario Review from $12,995 + GST for multi-outcome planning. Tier is set by risk and complexity, not budget.

The four tiers side by side

Choose by situation, not by price

The fastest way to pick a tier is to start from what is actually happening in the business, not from the price list. Below is the reasoning we apply at intake — the same logic a senior reviewer uses when a job is scoped.

• ·Simple CGT event (sole trader or single company, one asset class, clean records, no related parties) → Essential. A single well-evidenced methodology is proportionate to the risk.
• ·Restructure under Subdiv 328-G or a related-party transfer with more than one class of interest → Comprehensive. Two methodologies give a cross-check that a restructure rollover claim typically warrants.
• ·Related-party or Division 7A transaction where the position is commercially favourable to a party, or the entity has prior ATO contact → Comprehensive at minimum, Defensible if the amounts are material or a prior review has occurred.
• ·Known or suspected ATO dispute risk — the valuation is being prepared because a position is already being questioned, or the transaction is large enough to attract review → Defensible Valuation File. This is the tier built to be handed to a reviewer.
• ·Planning a sale, succession or structuring decision where the outcome depends on more than one possible pathway (e.g. sell now vs. sell in two years, restructure vs. hold) → Valuation Range & Scenario Review. This tier is priced for comparing outcomes, not just stating one.
• ·Family law, shareholder dispute, or any matter heading toward litigation or expert-witness use → Defensible Valuation File as the floor, discussed at intake — some matters need engagement terms beyond any standard tier.

What actually moves a job from Essential to Comprehensive

Owners often ask what the practical trigger is between the two most common tiers. It comes down to four concrete factors, any one of which is usually enough on its own: (1) more than one class of ownership interest (ordinary and preference shares, unit classes, options) — a single methodology cannot reliably value each class; (2) related-party transactions in the last two years that need to be normalised out of maintainable earnings; (3) the valuation feeds a restructure rollover or small business CGT concession claim, where the ATO's guidance expects methodology cross-checks, not a single calculation; (4) the entity holds a mix of trading operations and material passive assets (property, investments), which usually needs both an earnings-based method and an adjusted Net Asset Value check. If none of these apply, Essential is not a compromise — it is the correctly scoped report. This page describes valuation scope and fees only — it is not tax advice; whether a CGT event, rollover or concession applies to your situation is a matter for your registered tax agent.

The honest trade-off: what Essential does not cover

Essential is a genuine fixed-fee product, not a stripped-down version of something else — but it has real boundaries and we say so before you commission it. It applies a single methodology, so there is no built-in cross-check between an earnings-based and an asset-based conclusion. It is not suited to contested matters, family law property settlements, shareholder disputes, or any transaction where you already know the ATO is likely to review the position. It does not include a formal Valuation Position Analysis of the kind a reviewer would expect on a disputed file. If any of those apply to your situation, the cheaper tier is the wrong choice regardless of budget — not because Essential is thin, but because the situation calls for more evidence than a single methodology can supportably provide.

When to genuinely downgrade a tier

A credible comparison recommends down as readily as up. If you have been quoted or are considering Comprehensive or Defensible and any of the following apply, Essential is very likely sufficient: a single company or trust with one class of units or shares; no related-party transactions in the last two years; the valuation is for a routine CGT event (e.g. a straightforward asset sale or a single small business CGT concession claim) with no indication of ATO interest; records are complete and the business has stable, unadjusted earnings. Paying for triple-methodology depth on a file that has none of these complexities does not buy additional protection — it buys a longer turnaround and a larger invoice for evidence the situation does not require. We will tell you this at the scoping call rather than let the quote default upward.

How pricing scales beyond the base tier

Two add-ons apply across all four tiers: an additional retrospective (historical) valuation date adds $495, and each extra entity in a group structure adds $750; a rush turnaround, where the timeline genuinely needs to compress, adds 30% to the base fee. All four tiers are fixed at engagement once scope is confirmed, so there are no surprise invoices mid-job. None of these add-ons change the methodology depth of the tier you have chosen — they change scope (more dates, more entities, more speed), not rigour.