2018 FEDERAL BUDGET – KEY ANNOUNCEMENTS

PERSONAL TAXATION

Personal tax rates: staged seven-year reform plan starting from 2018–2019

In the 2018–2019 Budget, the Government announced staged tax relief for low and middle income earners. The Government is proposing a major seven-year, three-step plan to reform personal income tax.

Step 1 will see a new, non-refundable low and middle income tax offset from 2018–2019 to 2021–2022, designed to provide tax relief of up to $530 for each of those years. The offset will be delivered on assessment after an individual submits their tax return, and will be in addition to the existing low income tax offset (LITO).

The low and middle income tax offset will provide a benefit of up to $200 for taxpayers with taxable income of $37,000 or less. Between $37,000 and $48,000 of taxable income, the value of the offset will increase at a rate of three cents per dollar to the maximum benefit of $530. Taxpayers with taxable incomes from $48,000 to $90,000 will be eligible for the maximum benefit of $530. From $90,001 to $125,333 of taxable income, the offset will phase out at a rate of 1.5 cents per dollar.

Step 2 will increase the top threshold of the 32.5% tax bracket from $87,000 to $90,000 from 1 July 2018. In 2022–2023, the top threshold of the 19% bracket will increase from $37,000 to $41,000 and the LITO will increase from $445 to $645. The increased LITO will be withdrawn at a rate of 6.5 cents per dollar between incomes of $37,000 and $41,000, and at a rate of 1.5 cents per dollar between incomes of $41,000 and $66,667. The top threshold of the 32.5% bracket will increase from $90,000 to $120,000 from 1 July 2022.

Step 3: from 1 July 2024, the top threshold of the 32.5% bracket will increase from $120,000 to $200,000, removing the 37% tax bracket completely. Taxpayers will pay the top marginal tax rate of 45% from taxable incomes exceeding $200,000 and the 32.5% tax bracket will apply to taxable incomes of $41,001 to $200,000.

The Government says this means that around 94% of all taxpayers are projected to face a marginal tax rate of 32.5% or less in 2024–2025.

Medicare levy, 2017–2018 tax rates unchanged

The Government had proposed to increase the Medicare levy from 2% to 2.5% from 1 July 2019, but has decided not to proceed with this. Presumably the Bills to do this, which are currently before Parliament, will be removed. In an address on 26 April 2018 to the Australian Business Economists in Sydney, the Treasurer said that, due to the improving economy and fiscal position, the Government is “now in a position to give our guarantee to Australians living with a disability and their families and carers that all planned expenditure on the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) will be able to be met in this year’s Budget and beyond without any longer having to increase the Medicare levy”.

At the same time, it has been reported that Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen has announced that Labor will not proceed with its proposal to increase the Medicare levy by 0.5% (to 2.5%) on those earning above $87,000.

The tax rates and thresholds for the 2017–2018 year remain unchanged.

BUSINESS TAXATION

$20,000 instant asset write-off for SBEs extended by 12 months

The Government will extend the current instant asset write-off ($20,000 threshold) for small business entities (SBEs) by 12 months to 30 June 2019. This applies to businesses with aggregated annual turnover less than $10 million.

The threshold amount was due to return to $1,000 on 1 July 2018. As a result of this announcement, SBEs will be able to immediately deduct purchases of eligible depreciating assets costing less than $20,000 that are acquired between 1 July 2017 and 30 June 2019 and first used or installed ready for use by 30 June 2019 for a taxable purpose. Only a few assets are not eligible for the instant asset write-off or other simplified depreciation rules (eg horticultural plants and in-house software).

Assets valued at $20,000 or more (which cannot be immediately deducted) can continue to be placed into the general small business pool (the pool) and depreciated at 15% in the first income year and 30% each income year thereafter. The pool can also be immediately deducted if the balance is less than $20,000 over this period (including existing pools).

The current “lock out” laws for the simplified depreciation rules (which prevent small businesses from re-entering the simplified depreciation regime for five years if they opt out) will continue to be suspended until 30 June 2019.

The instant asset write-off threshold and the threshold for immediate deductibility of the balance of the pool will revert to $1,000 on 1 July 2019.

While the extension of the write-off will be welcomed, SBEs of course need to have the cash-flow to enable them to spend the $20,000 in the first place.

Anti-avoidance rules: family trust circular distributions

The Government will extend specific anti-avoidance rules that apply to other closely held trusts that engage in circular trust distributions to family trusts.

Currently, where family trusts act as beneficiaries of each other in a round-robin arrangement, a distribution can ultimately be returned to the original trustee in a way that avoids any tax being paid on that amount. The measure will allow ATO to pursue family trusts that engage in these arrangements and impose tax on such distributions at a rate equal to the top personal rate plus the Medicare levy.

This measure applies from 1 July 2019.

Deductions disallowed for holding vacant land

The Government will disallow deductions for expenses associated with holding vacant land. Where the land is not genuinely held for the purpose of earning assessable income, expenses such as interest costs will be denied. It is hoped this measure will reduce the tax incentives for land banking which limit the use of land for housing or other development.

The measure will apply to both land held for residential and commercial purposes. However, the “carrying on a business” test would generally exclude land held for a commercial development. It will not apply to expenses associated with holding land that are incurred after:

  • a property has been constructed on the land, it has received approval to be occupied and available for rent; or
  • the land is being used by the owner to carry on a business, including a business of primary production.

Disallowed deductions will not be able to be carried forward for use in later income years. Expenses for which deductions will be denied could be included in the cost base if it would ordinarily be a cost base element (ie borrowing costs and council rates) for CGT purposes. However, if the denied deductions are for expenses would not ordinarily be a cost base element, they cannot be included in the cost base.

This measure applies from 1 July 2019.

Partnerships: enhancing integrity of concessions

Partners that alienate their income by creating, assigning or otherwise dealing in rights to the future income of a partnership will no longer be able to access the small business capital gains tax (CGT) concessions in relation to these rights.

The Government said this measure will prevent taxpayers, including large partnerships, inappropriately accessing the CGT small business concessions in relation to their assignment to an entity of a right to the future income of a partnership, without giving that entity any role in the partnership.

There are no changes to the small business CGT concessions themselves. The concessions will continue to be available to eligible small businesses with an aggregated annual turnover of less than $2 million or net assets less than $6 million.

These measures will apply from 7:30PM (AEST) on 8 May 2018.

TAX COMPLIANCE AND INTEGRITY

No tax deduction for non-compliant PAYG and contractor payments

Measures will be enacted to ensure that taxpayers will not be able to claim deductions for payments to their employees such as wages where they have not withheld any amount of PAYG from these payments, despite the PAYG withholding requirements applying.

Similarly, the Government intends to remove deductions for payments made by businesses to contractors where the contractor does not provide an ABN and the business does not withhold any amount of PAYG (again despite the withholding requirements applying).

These measures were recommended by the Black Economy Taskforce.

The revenue expectations linked with this expenditure is quite modest – “a small unquantifiable gain to revenue over the forward estimates period”.

The measures will commence on 1 July 2019.

Cash payments limit: payments made
to businesses

The Government will introduce a limit of $10,000 for cash payments made to businesses for goods and services.

This measure will require transactions over a threshold to be made through an electronic payment system or by cheque. Logically it would seem that this threshold amount should be $10,000, but this is not spelt out in the Budget papers or the media release.

The rules will not apply to transactions with:

  • financial institutions; or
  • consumer-to-consumer non-business transactions.

This measure was recommended by the Black Economy Taskforce. It is designed to support other measures designed to counter the black economy. There is no revenue impact associated with it.

The limit will apply from 1 July 2019. The Government will consult further as part of the implementation process.

Reportable payments system extended: security providers, road freight transport and computer design

The Government will extend the taxable payments reporting system (TPRS) to the following industries:

  • security providers and investigation services;
  • road freight transport; and
  • computer system design and related services.

This will extend the TPRS requirements already applying to the building and construction industry. The TPRS requirements will also be extended, from 1 July 2018, to the cleaning and courier industries under measures contained in the Treasury Laws Amendment (Black Economy Taskforce Measures No 1) Bill 2018.

The reporting requirements will apply from 1 July 2019, with the first annual report required in August 2020.

SUPERANNUATION

SMSF member limit to increase from four to six

The Budget confirmed that the maximum number of allowable members in new and existing self managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) and small APRA funds will be expanded from four to six members from 1 July 2019. This measure was originally flagged on 27 April 2018 by the Minister for Revenue and Financial Services, Kelly O’Dwyer.

The proposed increase to the maximum number of SMSF members seeks to provide greater flexibility for large families to jointly manage retirement savings. Given the growth in the sector to date, Ms O’Dwyer said the measure will ensure SMSFs remain compelling retirement savings vehicle. The Government is expected to ask the ATO to work with industry on the design and implementation of this measure. It is not expected to have a revenue impact.

Extra SMSF members to provide flexibility

Currently, s 17A(1)(a) of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SIS Act) requires an SMSF to have fewer than five members. In addition, each member must be a trustee of the fund (or a director of the corporate trustee). This seeks to ensure that all members are fully involved and equally responsible for fund decisions and investments.

The Government’s proposal to allow up to six SMSF members may assist those with larger families to implement intergenerational solutions for managing long-term, capital intensive investments, such as commercial property and business real property. For example, allowing an extra two members provides an opportunity to improve a fund’s cash flow by using the contributions of the younger members to make pension payments to the members in retirement phase, without needing to sell a long-term investment.

As each member must be a trustee of the fund, a decision to add extra members should not be taken lightly as it can add complexity to the fund’s management and investment strategy. A change to the membership of an SMSF will alter the trustee arrangements which can impact who controls the fund in the event of a dispute. This is especially relevant in the event of the death of a member, as the surviving trustees have considerable discretion as to the payment of the deceased’s super benefits (subject to any binding death benefit nomination).

Labor’s dividend imputation policy

Allowing up to six SMSF members may assist some SMSFs to implement strategies to guard against Labor’s proposal to end cash refunds of excess franking credits from 1 July 2019. SMSFs in tax-exempt pension phase are expected to feel the brunt of Labor’s proposal, although an exemption was subsequently announced for SMSFs with at least one Government pensioner or allowance recipient before 28 March 2018.

To avoid wasting non-refundable franking credits, Labor’s proposal would create an incentive for SMSFs in pension phase to add additional accumulation phase members (eg adult children) who could effectively make some use of the excess franking credits within the fund. That is, the excess franking credits would be used to absorb some of the 15% contributions tax in relation to the accumulation members. For example, the proposal to increase the maximum number of SMSF members from four to six would enable a typical two-member fund in pension phase to admit up to four adult children as members. If those adult children are making concessional contributions up to the maximum of $25,000 per year, the fund could use the excess franking credits to offset up to $15,000 (four x $25,000 x 15%) in contributions tax each year for the adult children.

This strategy would essentially replicate, to the extent possible, the position of large APRA funds under Labor’s policy. APRA funds typically have more contributing members and diverse income sources (beyond franked dividends) that can usually fully absorb the franking credits.

As already noted, a decision to add additional members to an SMSF may add complexity to the management and control of the fund. This would require professional advice for the specific circumstances of the fund and its members.

Superannuation work test exemption for contributions by recent retirees

The Government will introduce an exemption from the work test for voluntary superannuation contributions by individuals aged 65–74 with superannuation balances below $300,000 in the first year that they do not meet the work test requirements.

Currently, the work test in reg 7.04 of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Regulations 1994 (SIS Regulations) restricts the ability to make voluntary superannuation contributions for those aged 65–74 to individuals who self-report as working a minimum of 40 hours in any 30-day period in the financial year. The measure will give recent retirees additional flexibilities to get their financial affairs in order in transition to retirement. It will apply from 1 July 2019.

SMSF audit cycle of three years for funds with good compliance history

The annual audit requirement for SMSFs will be extend to a three-yearly cycle for funds with a history of good record-keeping and compliance.

The measure will apply to SMSF trustees that have a history of three consecutive years of clear audit reports and that have lodged the fund’s annual returns in a timely manner.

This measure will start on 1 July 2019. The Government said it will undertake consultation to ensure a smooth implementation.

Super fees to be capped at 3% for small accounts, exit fees banned

Passive fees charged by superannuation funds will be capped at 3% for small accounts with balances below $6,000, while exit fees will be banned for all superannuation accounts from 1 July 2019. These measures form part of the Government’s Protecting Your Super Package.

The Minister for Revenue and Financial Services, Kelly O’Dwyer, said there were around 9.5 million super account with a balance less than $6,000 in 2015–2016. To avoid these small accounts from being eroded, the Government will cap the administration and investment fees at 3% annually, Ms O’Dwyer said.

The Government will also ban exit fees on all superannuation accounts. Exit fees of around $37 million were charged to members in 2015–2016 to simply close an account with a super fund. The proposed ban on exit fees will also benefit members looking to rollover their super accounts to a different fund, or who hold multiple accounts and see exit fees as a barrier to consolidating accounts.

 

With nearly two million low and inactive accounts belonging to women, the Minister said these measures will help to protect the hard-earned super savings of women from undue erosion. These changes will take effect from 1 July 2019.

Superannuation insurance opt-in rule for younger and low-balance members

The Government will change the insurance arrangements for certain cohorts of superannuation members from 1 July 2019. Under the proposed changes, insurance within superannuation will move from a default framework to be offered on an opt-in basis for:

  • members with low balances of less than $6,000;
  • members under the age of 25 years; and
  • members with inactive accounts that have not received a contribution in 13 months.

These changes seek to protect the retirement savings of young people and those with low balances by ensuring their superannuation is not unnecessarily eroded by premiums on insurance policies they do not need or are not aware of. The Minister for Revenue and Financial Services, Kelly O’Dwyer, said around 5 million individuals will have the opportunity to save an estimated $3 billion in insurance premiums by choosing to opt-in to this cover, rather than paying for it by default.

The changes also seek to reduce the incidence of duplicated cover so that individuals are not paying for multiple insurance policies, which they may not be able to claim on in any event. Importantly, these changes will not prevent anyone who wants insurance from being able to obtain it. That is, low balance, young, and inactive members will still be able to opt in to insurance cover within super.

In addition, the Government said it will consult publicly on ways in which the current policy settings could be improved to better balance the priorities of retirement savings and insurance cover within super.

The changes will take effect on 1 July 2019. Affected superannuants will have a period of 14 months to decide whether they will opt-in to their existing cover or allow it to switch off.

$20,000 instant asset write-off

This tax time, your small business clients with a turnover of less than $10 million can write off assets costing less than $20,000 each in their 2016-17 return. All simplified depreciation rules will apply to assets when choosing this method.

To use simplified depreciation rules correctly you must:

  • write off eligible assets costing less than $20,000 each
  • pool most other depreciating assets that cost $20,000 or more
  • write off the small business pool balance if it is less than $20,000 at the end of an income year
  • only claim a deduction for the portion of the asset used for business or other taxable uses.

The $20,000 write-off threshold now applies until 30 June 2018.

Reference: https://www.ato.gov.au/Tax-professionals/Newsroom/Income-tax/Applying-the-$20,000-instant-asset-write-off-/

 

Client Alert Explanatory Memorandum (March 2018)

CURRENCY:

This issue of Client Alert takes into account developments up to and including 14 February 2018.

Bill to implement housing affordability CGT changes

As part of the 2017–2018 Budget, the Federal Government announced a range of reforms intended to reduce pressure on housing affordability. Legislation – the Treasury Laws Amendment (Reducing Pressure on Housing Affordability Measures No. 2) Bill 2018 – has now been introduced into Parliament. It proposes to:

  • remove the entitlement to the capital gains tax (CGT) main residence exemption for foreign residents; and
  • modify the foreign resident CGT regime to clarify that, for the purpose of determining whether an entity’s underlying value is principally derived from taxable Australian real property (TARP), the principal asset test is applied on an “associate inclusive” basis.

When the Bill has passed, both of these measures will apply from 9 May 2017. At the time of writing, the Bill is before the House of Representatives.

Main residence exemption

The main residence exemption disregards a capital gain or loss for CGT purposes if the taxpayer is an individual and the gain or loss came from selling or disposing of a dwelling that was their main residence throughout the ownership period. A partial exemption is available if the dwelling was their main residence for only part of the period or was also used in part to produce assessable income.

For this exemption, a dwelling includes:

  • a building (eg a house) or part of a building (eg an apartment or townhouse) that consists wholly or mainly of accommodation;
  • a caravan, houseboat or other mobile home; and
  • any land immediately under the unit of accommodation; and
  • adjacent land that, together with the land under the dwelling, does not exceed two hectares, and adjacent structures (eg a storeroom, shed or garage) used mainly for domestic or private purposes.

The main residence exemption may also apply to:

  • an individual beneficiary in, or entity that is a trustee of, the deceased estate of a person who used the dwelling as a main residence; and
  • the trustee of a special disability trust where the dwelling was the main residence of the individual principal beneficiary of the trust, or the main residence of another beneficiary who inherited the dwelling upon the principal beneficiary’s death.

Principal asset test

Under the foreign resident CGT regime, a capital gain or capital loss that a foreign resident makes in respect of a membership interest is disregarded unless both the non-portfolio interest test and the principal asset test are satisfied for the interest.

The principal asset test’s purpose is to determine when an entity’s underlying value is principally derived from TARP. A membership interest that a foreign resident holds in another entity will pass the principal asset test if the total market value of the entity’s TARP assets is greater than the total market value of its non-TARP assets.

Capital gains discount for affordable housing

The Bill also proposes to amend the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) and the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (TAA 1953) to provide an additional discount on CGT for affordable housing. The discount of up to 10% will apply if a CGT event happens to an ownership interest in residential premises that has been used to provide affordable housing.

This measure will apply to capital gains that investors realise from CGT events that occur on or after 1 January 2018, for affordable housing tenancies that start before, on or after 1 January 2018.

Changes to small business CGT concessions

Treasury has released draft legislation aimed at ensuring that taxpayers will only be able to access the small business capital gains tax (CGT) concessions for assets that are used (or held ready for use) in the course of a small business or are an interest in a small business.

This measure was announced in the 2017–2018 Federal Budget. The amendments include additional conditions that must be satisfied from 1 July 2017 to apply the small business CGT concession for capital gains that arise in relation to a share in a company or an interest in a trust (the “object entity”).

Broadly, these conditions require that:

  • if the taxpayer does not satisfy the maximum net asset value (MNAV) test, the relevant CGT small business entity must have carried on a business just before the CGT event;
  • the object entity must have carried on a business just before the CGT event;
  • the object entity must either be a CGT small business entity or satisfy the MNAV test (applying a modified rule about when entities are “connected with” other entities); and
  • the share or interest must satisfy a modified active asset test that looks through shares and interests in trusts to the activities and assets of the underlying entities.

The consultation period for the exposure draft ends on 28 February 2018.

Maximum net asset value test

To satisfy the MNAV test, the total net value of CGT assets owned must not exceed $6 million just before the relevant CGT event. The limit is not indexed for inflation.

When calculating the total, you must include the net value of CGT assets owned by the taxpayer, any connected entities, any of the taxpayer’s affiliates and entities connected with the affiliates.

Asset values contribute to the total only if the assets are used (or held ready for use) in a business carried on by the taxpayer or a connected entity. An asset doesn’t count towards the total if it is used in the business of an entity that is connected with the taxpayer only because of the taxpayer’s affiliate.

Bill to change residential property GST arrangements

A Bill has been introduced to amend the A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 (GST Act) and related legislation, requiring purchasers of new residential premises and new subdivisions of potential residential land to remit the GST on the purchase price directly to the ATO as part of the settlement process. Under the current law, the supplier of the property (eg the developer) is responsible for remitting the GST to the ATO upon lodging a business activity statement (BAS) up to three months after settlement.

The new measure was announced in the 2017–2018 Federal Budget to deal with developers dissolving their business and setting up a new entity to avoid paying GST to the ATO. In late 2017, the ATO reported that it had identified more than 3,700 people using this type of “phoenixing” activity to avoid their tax obligations over the previous five years.

When the Bill is passed, GST withholding by purchasers will commence on 1 July 2018. There is a two-year transition window for contracts that were executed before that date and will settle before 1 July 2020. After that date, GST withholding will apply to all residential sales.

The withholding amount is 1/11th of the contract price for fully taxable sales (reduced to 7% for margin scheme sales). Settlement adjustments are ignored and the withholding is based on the stated contract price only.

Purchasers will have two options in relation to the withheld GST:

  • remit it to the ATO on or before settlement; or
  • give the vendor a bank cheque on settlement (made out to the ATO).

All vendors of residential premises/residential land (including developers, investors and private home owners) will need to provide a notice to the purchaser before settlement advising whether GST withholding applies. Failure to do so will be a strict liability offence, attracting a fine of $21,000 for individuals and $105,000 for companies.

At the time of writing, the Treasury Laws Amendment (2018 Measures No. 1) Bill 2018 is before the House of Representatives.

Moving to combat the black economy

The black economy includes people who don’t correctly report and meet their tax obligations, and people who operate entirely outside the tax and regulatory system. The Government and the ATO consider the black economy a significant economic and social problem. The Australian Bureau of Statistics estimated in 2012 that the black economy could be as large as 1.5% of Australia’s gross domestic product, or around $25 billion.

The Black Economy Taskforce

The Federal Government established the Black Economy Taskforce in 2017 “to develop an innovative, forward-looking whole-of-government policy response to combat the black economy in Australia, recognising that these issues cannot be tackled by traditional tax enforcement measures alone”. In its Interim Report (released May 2017) the taskforce noted that a range of trends, vulnerabilities and other considerations suggest that the black economy could be larger today, and made a number of initial recommendations based on the experience of foreign jurisdictions, extensive consultation with stakeholders and the anecdotal evidence that the taskforce received.

The Government has now introduced the Treasury Laws Amendment (Black Economy Taskforce Measures No. 1) Bill 2018 into Parliament. It proposes to combat the black economy by:

  • prohibiting the production, distribution and possession of sales suppression tools;
  • prohibiting the use of electronic sales suppression tools to incorrectly keep tax records; and
  • requiring entities that have an ABN and that provide courier or cleaning services to report to the ATO (from 1 July 2018) information about transactions that involve engaging other entities to undertake those services for them.

At the time of writing, the Bill is before the House of Representatives.

Sales suppression tools

One of the taskforce’s recommendations for immediate action was to prohibit sales suppression technology and software. The Government announced its acceptance of this move in the 2017–2018 Federal Budget’’.

Transaction data recorded by point-of-sale (POS) systems is a key component of sales and accounting systems for modern business. This data provides a clear record of transactions against which accounts and tax returns can be audited. The importance of POS systems data for tax auditing has led to some people developing and using tools – known as ‘electronic sales suppression tools –’ that facilitate tax evasion by suppressing or falsifying POS records of transactions.

Currently, Australia’s tax law (namely the Taxation Administration Act 1953 [TAA 1953]) contains a variety of offences and penalties related to tax evasion and incorrect recordkeeping. These include penalties for providing false or misleading information to the ATO and for incorrectly keeping records with the intent of misleading the ATO.

Although these offences may apply to businesses that use electronic sales suppression software to incorrectly keep their records, the Government believes the TAA 1953 penalties aren’t high enough to reflect the seriousness of using tools to intentionally misrepresent a business’s tax position.

The Criminal Code in Sch 1 to the Criminal Code Act 1995 (CCA 1995) also contains offences related to forgery and providing false documents. Manufacturing electronic sales suppression tools may come under the offence for possessing, making or adapting a device for making forgeries, which can be punishable by imprisonment for up to 10 years. However, for the CCA 1995 provisions to apply, the device must be possessed, made or adapted specifically with the intention to commit forgery. The provisions also only apply to Commonwealth documents; this means, broadly, a document purporting to be made by a Commonwealth entity or official.

These requirements can be difficult to satisfy in the case of electronic sales suppression tools. Electronic POS records generally aren’t Commonwealth documents. And even where an electronic sales suppression tool that was developed overseas is used to falsify records kept for Australian tax purposes, it’s likely to be difficult to demonstrate that the tool was made or supplied with the intention of defrauding the Commonwealth specifically.

Third-party reporting

Another of the taskforce’s recommendations for immediate action was to extend the taxable payments reporting system (TPRS) to apply to contractors in the courier and cleaning industries. The Government also announced its acceptance of this move in the 2017–2018 Federal Budget.

The TPRS is a transparency measure that currently applies to the building and construction industry. It requires businesses in that industry to report to the ATO all payments that they make to contractors for building and construction services. The TPRS appears to have improved tax compliance in this area, and has the potential to do the same for the courier and cleaning industries, which are similarly high-risk sectors where tax evasion is concerned. 

Corporate tax avoidance: latest ATO targets

The ATO has provided a comprehensive update on its latest compliance projects and focus areas aimed at mitigating corporate tax avoidance.

Manipulation of thin cap rules

The ATO is investigating the possible manipulation of the thin capitalisation rules by 27 taxpayers in relation to asset revaluations totalling $78 billion.

The ATO had anticipated the amount of debt deductions disallowed would increase as a result of the safe harbour debt test thresholds reducing from 75% to 60% in 2014. However, it suspects that some taxpayers have responded by undertaking revaluations of certain assets to increase the value of their total assets. This has limited the impacts of the safe harbour thresholds reductions.

Intellectual property offshore

The ATO is investigating arrangements that result in the migration or artificial allocation of intangible assets, and rights in those assets, to offshore related parties by multinationals. These arrangements present a risk as multinationals implement non-arm’s length arrangements that:

  • migrate or artificially allocate Australian generated intangibles to offshore related parties;
  • involve the use of intangible rights or assets, where the value of these rights and assets is derived from, or maintained by, the activities and operations of Australian entities – particularly research and development (R&D) activities; and/or
  • dispose of or allocate Australian generated intangible assets to offshore related parties and subsequently grant rights in these assets back to Australian entities.

Oil and gas industry

The ATO’s main focus in the oil and gas industry is on the treatment of labour costs (revenue versus capital) associated with the construction of high-value assets. The ATO is seeing taxpayers challenge the capital treatment of these costs. It is also concerned about the treatment of other “general” indirect costs associated with the construction of assets.

Pharmaceutical industry

The ATO will examine arrangements to determine whether Australian subsidiaries and their offshore related parties are operating under arm’s length conditions, such that the income declared reflects the economic contribution of the Australian operation to the Australian and global value chain. The ATO has refined its tax risk concerns to reflect the intricacies of the Australian pharmaceuticals industry and its subdivisions; for example, patented pharmaceuticals, generic pharmaceuticals, medical devices and over-the-counter vitamins and supplements.

Tax professionals and promoters

The ATO is also working to identify tax professionals and advisers who are promoting unacceptable tax planning. It is taking steps to deal with some advisers, including those who seek to cloak the promotion of unacceptable tax planning via inappropriate claims for legal professional privilege.

E-commerce

In the e-commerce industry, the ATO finalised 11 cases in 2017, issued amended assessments worth over $1 billion, collected tax of over $800 million and estimated future company tax revenue effects of over $500 million. It is still looking at another 20 major e-commerce players.

Social security means testing of lifetime retirement income streams

The Department of Social Services (DSS) has released its proposed means testing rules for pooled lifetime retirement income streams.

The pension standards in the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Regulations 1994 (SIS Regs) were amended from 1 July 2017 to allow for a broader range of tax-exempt lifetime superannuation income stream products that enable the pooling of risk to manage longevity risk. Lifetime pensions and annuities that meet these new standards qualify for concessional tax treatment.

It is proposed that such pooled lifetime income streams would be assessed for social security means test purposes as follows:

  • income test: 70% of all income paid from such products; and
  • assets test: 70% of the nominal purchase price of the product until life expectancy at purchase, and 35% from then on.

The DSS says this approach should still provide a sufficient incentive to support take-up of lifetime products. It is expected that pensioners who allocate a proportion of their superannuation (eg up to 30%) to a pooled lifetime product will experience a similar outcome under the income test in the early years of retirement, compared to holding an account-based income stream and drawing the minimum payments.

Compared to the current means test rules for lifetime products, the DSS believes that assessing 70% of the nominal purchase price until life expectancy balances the up-front concessionality with a more consistent asset test assessment over time. It is also considered that maintaining this asset value until life expectancy will help mitigate the risk of lifetime products being used to shield assets from assessment. Once a person reaches life expectancy (as measured at the time they purchased the product), the assessable asset value will be reduced to 35%. DSS says this will help to address the risk of punitive asset test outcomes later in life, while still recognising an asset value for the product.

Deferred income streams

The new rules propose that deferred superannuation income stream products will receive the same asset test assessment as products that commence payments immediately. However, the proposed income test rules will only assess deferred products once payments commence.

Death and surrender values

Where new products offer surrender values or death benefits above the limits imposed by the “capital access schedule” in the SIS Regs, the assets test will assess the maximum value of:

  • the amount determined under the proposed new rules (70% of the purchase price until life expectancy age, and then 35%);
  • the value of the lump sum amount that is payable if a person withdraws from the product; or
  • the highest death benefit payable under the product.

ATO now issuing excess transfer balance determinations

The ATO has advised that is now sending out excess transfer balance (ETB) determinations to individuals who have exceeded their superannuation transfer balance cap and not rectified the excess.

Transfer balance cap

The transfer balance cap, which has applied from 1 July 2017, is a new limit on the total amount of superannuation that can be transferred into the retirement phase. An individual can continue to make multiple transfers into the retirement phase as long as the total amount transferred remains below the cap.

The transfer balance cap has initially been set at $1.6 million, and will be indexed periodically in $100,000 increments in line with the consumer price index (CPI). The amount of indexation an individual is entitled to will be calculated proportionally based on the difference between their transfer balance total and the cap amount. If an individual’s transfer balance meets or exceeds the cap, they will not be entitled to indexation.

Excess transfer balance tax

Self managed superannuation fund (SMSF) members that had exceeded their transfer balance cap by $100,000 or less on 1 July 2017 had until 31 December 2017 to commute the excess capital. If they didn’t do so by that date, they will have to commute the excess capital and excess transfer balance earnings, and also pay excess transfer balance tax.

If an SMSF member receives an ETB determination from the ATO and the trustee has not already reported information to the ATO for that member, they must do so promptly so the ATO has all the required information about the member’s circumstances. The member can request an extension of time if needed, but should do this as soon as possible. The sooner the member removes the amount set out in the ETB determination from retirement phase, the lower the amount of excess transfer balance tax they will pay.

Windfarm grant was an assessable recoupment

The Full Federal Court has dismissed a taxpayer’s appeal and held that a Commonwealth grant of almost $2.5 million for the establishment of a windfarm was an assessable recoupment: Denmark Community Windfarm Ltd v FCT [2018] FCAFC 11.

Background

In May 2011, the taxpayer was given a renewable energy grant in respect of 50% of the project costs it had incurred in constructing two wind turbines. The grant was payable in instalments on the completion of identified project milestones.

The ATO issued a private ruling stating that the grant would be assessable income under s 20-20(2) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997). In response, the taxpayer argued that the grant was:

  • not assessable under s 20-20(2) because it was not received by way of an “indemnity”; and
  • not an assessable recoupment within the meaning of subs 20-20(2) or s 20-20(3) because those provisions required the relevant deduction to have been claimed for a “loss or outgoing”, which, it said, was not the case for deductions claimed for depreciation.

At first instance the Federal Court held that the grant was an assessable recoupment under subs 20-20(2) and 20-20(3). The primary judge found that the grant was received as compensation for an “expense” the taxpayer had incurred, which fell within the meaning of “indemnity”.

Decision

The Full Federal Court dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal and held that the amounts received under the grant were assessable recoupments under s 20-20(2) of ITAA 1997. The Full Court rejected the taxpayer’s argument that the depreciation deductions it claimed were not “for the loss or outgoing” under s 20-20(2)(b). Rather, the Full Court considered that the phrase “for the loss or outgoing” was sufficiently broad to pick up a depreciation deduction under Div 40 or Subdiv 328-D where the relevant outgoing was the cost of the depreciating asset. In such circumstances, the depreciation deduction may properly be regarded as a deduction “for the loss or outgoing”.

Thomson Reuters would like to hear from you

Subscribers are invited to submit topics for articles for future publication. Information should be sent to:

Publisher – Client Alert

Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited ABN 64 058 914 668
PO Box 3502, Rozelle NSW 2039

Tel: 1800 074 333

Email: contentfeedback@thomsonreuters.com

Website: www.thomsonreuters.com.au

Client Alert (March 2018)

Bill to implement housing affordability CGT changes

As part of the 2017–2018 Budget, the Federal Government announced a range of reforms intended to reduce pressure on housing affordability. Legislation has now been introduced into Parliament that proposes to:

  • remove the entitlement to the capital gains tax (CGT) main residence exemption for foreign residents; and
  • modify the foreign resident CGT regime to clarify that, for the purpose of determining whether an entity’s underlying value is principally derived from taxable Australian real property (TARP), the principal asset test is applied on an “associate inclusive” basis.

The Bill also proposes to amend the tax law to provide an additional discount on CGT for affordable housing. The discount of up to 10% will apply if a CGT event happens to an ownership interest in residential property used to provide affordable housing.

TIP: The main residence exemption means that CGT doesn’t apply for a capital gain or loss that an individual makes from selling their main residence. A CGT discount applies if the dwelling was their main residence for only part of the time they owned it, or they partly used it to produce assessable income.

Changes to small business CGT concessions

Treasury has released draft legislation to make sure that taxpayers will only be able to access the small business CGT concessions for assets that are used (or held ready for use) in the course of a small business or are an interest in a small business.

The draft also proposes additional conditions to be satisfied from 1 July 2017 when applying the small business CGT concession for capital gains related to a share in a company or an interest in a trust.

TIP: A range of tax concessions are available for small businesses. Talk to us to find out how your business could benefit.

Bill to change residential property GST arrangements

A Bill has been introduced into Parliament that, when passed, will require purchasers of new residential premises and new subdivisions of potential residential land to pay the goods and services tax (GST) on the purchase directly to the ATO as part of the settlement process from 1 July 2018.

TIP: Under the current law, the supplier of the property (eg the developer) is responsible for paying the GST to the ATO when lodging a business activity statement (BAS). This can happen up to three months after settlement.

The new measure was announced in the 2017–2018 Federal Budget. It is intended to speed up the GST payment process, and to deal with the problem of some developers dissolving their business and setting up a new entity to avoid paying GST (a form of “phoenix” tax avoidance).

Moving to combat the black economy

The Black Economy Taskforce was established in 2017 “to develop an innovative, forward-looking whole-of-government policy response to combat the black economy in Australia, recognising that these issues cannot be tackled by traditional tax enforcement
measures alone”. In May 2017 the taskforce made a its initial recommendations, which it based on foreign jurisdiction experiences, consultation with stakeholders and anecdotal evidence it had received.

TIP: The black economy includes people who don’t correctly report and meet their tax obligations, and people who operate entirely outside the tax and regulatory system.

The Government accepted a number of the taskforce’s recommendations, and has now introduced a Bill into Parliament, proposing to combat the black economy by:

  • prohibiting the production, distribution and possession of sales suppression tools, which are typically used to remove or alter transaction information recorded by point-of-sale (POS) systems;
  • prohibiting the use of electronic sales suppression tools to incorrectly keep tax records; and
  • requiring entities that have an ABN and that provide courier or cleaning services to report to the ATO (from 1 July 2018) information about transactions that involve engaging other entities to undertake those services for them.

Corporate tax avoidance: latest
ATO targets

The ATO has provided an update on its latest focus areas and the compliance projects it is undertaking to reduce corporate tax avoidance. These include:

  • investigating possible manipulation of the thin capitalisation rules, including 27 taxpayers’ asset revaluations totalling $78 billion;
  • looking into arrangements that move intellectual property assets and rights offshore to multinational entities’ related parties;
  • focusing on the treatment of oil and gas industry labour costs associated with high-value asset construction;
  • examining the arm’s length conditions operating in pharmaceutical industry arrangements;
  • identifying tax professionals and advisers who are promoting unacceptable tax planning; and
  • looking at the tax affairs of various major
    e-commerce players.

Social security means testing of lifetime retirement income streams

The Department of Social Services (DSS) has released its proposed means testing rules for pooled lifetime retirement income streams.

The pension standards were amended from 1 July 2017 to allow for more tax-exempt lifetime superannuation income stream products that enable pooling risk to manage longevity risk. Lifetime pensions and annuities that meet these new standards qualify for tax concessions tax treatment.

The DSS proposes to consider the following amounts when assessing such pooled lifetime income streams as part of social security means testing:

  • income test: 70% of all income paid from the income stream product; and
  • assets test: 70% of the purchase price of the product until the person reaches the age of their life expectancy at the time they made the purchase, and 35% from then on.

TIP: Under the new rules, deferred super income stream products would receive the same asset test assessment as products where payments begin immediately.

ATO now issuing excess transfer balance determinations

The ATO has advised that is now sending out excess transfer balance (ETB) determinations to individuals who have exceeded their superannuation transfer balance cap and not taken steps to remove the excess amount.

TIP: The transfer balance cap, currently set at $1.6 million, is a limit on the total amount of super that can be transferred into retirement phase. You can make multiple transfers as long as the total amount transferred remains below the cap.

Self managed superannuation fund (SMSF) members that had exceeded their transfer balance cap by $100,000 or less on 1 July 2017 had until 31 December 2017 to remove the excess capital from retirement phase. If they didn’t do so, they will now have to remove the excess capital and ETB earnings, and also pay ETB tax.

Windfarm grant was an assessable recoupment

The Full Federal Court has dismissed a taxpayer’s appeal and held that a Commonwealth grant of almost $2.5 million for the establishment of a windfarm was an assessable recoupment (Denmark Community Windfarm Ltd v FCT [2018] FCAFC 11).

In May 2011, the taxpayer was given a renewable energy grant for 50% of the project costs it incurred in constructing two wind turbines. The grant was paid in instalments on the completion of identified project milestones.

The ATO made a private ruling that the grant would be assessable income. The taxpayer argued against the ruling, but the Full Federal Court dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal.

Law Society External Examiners’ Report

Please note that all the Law Society Trust Account Examiners had to be reaccredited in NSW in order to perform Trust Account Audits by 31st March 2018.

Please note that the following extract is from The Law Society of NSW.

Please take note that External Examiner’s Reports after 30 June 2017 can only be provided by those External Examiners who have successfully undertaken the mandatory course as approved under the Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW).

The External Examiners Course has been running since January 2017 and a further course is proposed for April 2018.

Although emails have been sent to all External Examiners accredited under the Legal Profession Act, 2004, notifying of the requirement for re-accreditation under the Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW), it is noted that there has been a substantial shortfall of take-ups for the re-accreditation.

Unfortunately, the Trust Department has been unable to update the Law Society Website in relation to the list of External Examiners until the courses have been substantially completed and the External Examiners re-accredited.

So that there are no last-minute complications in arranging external examinations for the period to 31 March 2018 it would be to all law practices’ benefit to contact their External Examiners and ask them if they have been re-accredited under the Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW). If they have not been re-accredited or registered for re-accreditation and wish to do so they can contact Professional Development at education@lawsociety.com.au and ask to be added to the list for the next available course which has been proposed for early April.

To assist in this process the Trust Department will ensure that an ‘Interim List’ of External Examiners is available on the Law Society Website by 28 February 2018.

Please note, all appointments held by an External Examiner under the Legal Profession Act, 2004 will roll over into the Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW) upon successful completion of the re-accreditation course by the Examiner. There will be no requirement for law practices to reappoint their re-accredited Examiner.

Please also note that in 2017 the deadline for the submission of External Examiners’ Reports was 15 May 2017.

Our firm has been reaccredited and will be available for Trust Account Audit as at 31 March 2018. Please note that the lodgment date for the Trust Account Audit is now 31 May 2018.

 

Client Alert Explanatory Memorandum (February 2018)

ATO rethink on guidelines for profit allocation within professional firms

In reviewing its guidelines on Everett assignments and the allocation of profits within professional firms, the ATO has become aware that the guidelines are being misinterpreted in relation to certain arrangements that go beyond the guidelines’ scope. The ATO has found a variety of arrangements that exhibit high risk factors are not specifically addressed within the guidelines, including the use of related-party financing and self managed superannuation funds (SMSFs).

As a result, the ATO has suspended the application of the guidelines with effect from 14 December 2017.

Practitioners contemplating entering into new arrangements after the cut-off date should pursue an “early engagement discussion” with the ATO under its private rulings processes.

Practitioners who have entered into arrangements before the cut-off date that comply with the guidelines and do not exhibit high risk factors can rely on those guidelines. Pre-14 December 2017 arrangements that exhibit any of the high risk factors may be subject to review. The ATO says it encourages anyone who is uncertain about how the law applies to their existing circumstances “to engage with us as soon as possible”.

The ATO will consult with interested stakeholders on replacement guidelines and the application of any required transitional arrangements.

Housing affordability measures now law

Legislation to implement the 2017–2018 Federal Budget measures aimed at improving housing affordability has now been passed.

The Treasury Laws Amendment (Reducing Pressure on Housing Affordability Measures No 1) Act 2017 and the First Home Super Saver Tax Act 2017 implement the following measures (both of which start on 1 July 2018):

  • the First Home Super Saver (FHSS) Scheme, which provides concessional tax treatment for amounts released from superannuation in order to purchase or construct a first home (starting from 1 July 2018); and
  • an exemption for “downsizing” super contributions up to $300,000 when individuals aged 65 and over sell a home that they have owned for at least 10 years.

Note that as result of a Senate amendment during passage of the legislation, an exemption from meeting the “first home” requirement is now available. The exemption will apply if the ATO determines that the taxpayer has suffered financial hardship (the circumstances of which will be determined by regulation). It is envisaged that regulations would refer to circumstances where a taxpayer has limited savings, is currently renting and had an interest in a home many years ago that was in a cheaper real estate market or when the taxpayer was in a relationship that has since broken down. Taxpayers will still be limited to one withdrawal of their voluntary superannuation in their lifetime and it must be for their only home.

Fringe benefits tax: determining private use of vehicles

The ATO has issued employer guidance regarding how to determine an employee’s private use of a vehicle for the purposes of the car-related FBT exemptions.

Draft Practical Compliance Guideline PCG 2017/D14 is the ATO’s response to feedback that the application of the car exemptions is a compliance burden for employers and requires an overly detailed understanding of each vehicle’s use. The draft guideline has been issued to provide more certainty and transparency about the circumstances in which the ATO will not apply compliance resources to determine if private use of a vehicle meets the car-related FBT exemptions.

Eligible employers who rely on the guideline do not need to keep records to prove that an employee’s private use of a vehicle is minor, infrequent and irregular, and the ATO will not devote compliance resources to reviewing the employers’ access to car-related exemptions for that employee.

Eligible employers

An employer can rely on the guideline if:

  • the employer provides an eligible vehicle to an employee for performance of their work duties;
  • the employer takes all reasonable steps to limit private use of the vehicle and has measures in place to monitor such use;
  • the vehicle has no non-business accessories;
  • when the vehicle is acquired, its GST-inclusive value is under the luxury car tax threshold;
  • the vehicle is not provided as part of a salary packaging arrangement, and the employee cannot elect to receive additional remuneration in lieu of using the vehicle; and
  • the employee uses the vehicle to travel between home and work, and
  • any diversion adds no more than 2 km to the ordinary length of that trip;
  • no more than 750 km of travel in total for each FBT year for multiple journeys is for a wholly private purpose; and
  • no single, return journey for a wholly private purpose exceeds 200 km.

Employers will need to assess their eligibility to rely on the guideline on a yearly basis.

Examples included in the guideline involve:

  • incidental travel (regularly stopping at a newsagent) and wholly private travel (taking a relative to school 10 times during the FBT year) – the employer can rely on the guideline;
  • travel to attend seasonal weekly football training, which adds more than 2 km to the journey from home to work – the employer cannot rely on the guideline;
  • an employee who travels a total of 20,000 km and whose private use of the vehicle involves taking domestic rubbish to a tip (100 km return trip) and moving house three times (200 km in total) – the employer can rely on the guideline; and
  • private travel, including a single return trip of 300 km – the employer cannot rely on the

When it is finalised, the guideline will apply to car and residual benefits provided from the 2017-18 FBT year, ie from 1 April 2017.

ATO ruling: tax consequences of trust vesting

The ATO has issued a long-awaited ruling which sets out its views about the vesting of a trust, changing the trust’s vesting date and the income tax consequences of vesting (Draft Taxation Ruling TR 2017/D10).

A trust’s “vesting date” is the day on which the beneficiaries’ interests in the trust property become “vested in interest and possession”. The trust deed will specify the vesting date and the consequences of that date being reached (eg that the trust property will be held from that date for the takers on vesting in equal shares absolutely). The ATO notes that vesting does not, of itself, ordinarily cause the trust to come to an end or cause a new trust to arise. In particular, the underlying trust relationship will continue while the trustee holds property for the takers on vesting.

The key points made in the draft ruling are that:

  • before vesting, it may be possible to extend the vesting date (by applying to a court or by the trustee exercising a power to nominate a new vesting date);
  • it is too late to change the vesting date once it has passed (and the ATO says it is unlikely that a court would agree to do so); and
  • continuing to administer a trust in a way that is inconsistent with the vesting terms can have significant tax consequences (eg potentially, CGT event E1, creation of a new trust).

Capital gains tax consequences of trust vesting

The draft ruling considers whether various CGT events may occur on vesting or  after vesting, noting that the terms of the trust deed are particularly relevant. The ATO says the following:

  • CGT event E1 (creation of a new trust) “need not happen merely because a trust has vested”, as vesting does not, of itself, cause the trust to come to an end and settle property on the terms of a new trust. However, E1 may occur if the parties to a trust relationship subsequently act in a manner that results in a new trust being created by declaration or settlement (see the example below).
  • CGT event E5 (beneficiary becoming absolutely entitled) may occur if the vesting results in the takers becoming absolutely entitled as against the trustee to CGT assets of the trust.
  • CGT event E7 (disposal to a beneficiary to end a capital interest) may happen on actual distribution of CGT assets to beneficiaries, but it will not occur to the extent that the beneficiaries are already absolutely entitled to the CGT assets as against the trustee.

Taxation of trust net income after the vesting date

The draft ruling notes that, in the income year of vesting, different beneficiaries may be presently entitled to trust income derived before and after the vesting date. For example, the trustee of a discretionary trust may, prior to vesting, exercise a discretion to appoint pre-vesting income among those entitled to benefit under the trust. By contrast, the takers, on vesting, will be presently entitled to post-vesting income (usually in proportion to their vested interests in the trust property). In this situation, the ATO will accept a “fair and reasonable” allocation of trust income into pre-vesting and post-vesting trust income.

The draft ruling also states that:

  • in the income year after vesting, all of the trust income will flow to the takers on vesting according to their entitlements, so the trustee will not be assessed on any net income; and
  • a post-vesting payment or other purported distribution by the trustee will be void if it is not consistent with the vested beneficiaries’ fixed interests, and the deemed present entitlement rules in ss 101 and 95A(1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (ITAA 1936) will not apply.

Example

A discretionary trust holding several rental properties had a vesting date of 30 September 2016.

On 1 June 2017, the trustee became aware that the vesting date had passed and, with the acquiescence of the takers on vesting, continued to manage the trust as if the trust had not vested.

On 29 June 2017, the trustee executed a deed of extension that purported to extend the trust’s vesting date to 30 September 2057.

This subsequent execution of a deed of extension is void and ineffective to change a vesting date that has already passed. Any power of the trustee to extend the vesting date ceased on 30 September 2016.

If, once it is realised that the deed of extension is ineffective to change the trust’s vesting date, all of the takers on vesting agree that the trust assets should continue to be held on a new trust on the same terms as the original trust, and this is effective to create such a new trust over the assets by declaration or settlement, CGT event E1 would happen in relation to trust assets.

Disclosure of business tax debt information to credit agencies

The Federal Government has released draft legislation and a draft legislative instrument that, if passed, will authorise the ATO to disclose businesses’ tax debts to registered credit reporting bureaus (CRBs) where the businesses have not effectively engaged with the ATO to manage their debt.

The draft legislation intends to place tax debts on a similar footing as other debts, to encourage timely payment or engagement with the ATO for businesses that want to avoid having their debt information affect their creditworthiness. Disclosure to CRBs will only be permitted if the ATO has given the taxpayer at least 21 days’ notice beforehand.

The draft legislative instrument specifies the following criteria for the type of taxpayer that can be subject to the new disclosure arrangements:

  • registered on the ABR;
  • has a tax debt, and at least $10,000 of the debt is overdue for more than 90 days;
  • is not a deductible gift recipient, not-for-profit entity, government entity or complying superannuation entity;
  • is not effectively engaging to manage the tax debt; and
  • the ATO has taken reasonable steps to confirm that the Inspector-General of Taxation does not have an active complaint from the entity.

According to the draft legislative instrument, an entity is not effectively engaging to manage its tax debt unless any of the following conditions are met:

  • it has entered into an arrangement with the ATO to pay the debt by instalments;
  • it has objected against a taxation decision to which the tax debt relates;
  • it has applied to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for review or appealed to the Federal Court against a decision made by the Commissioner to which the tax debt relates.

The disclosure provisions will apply in relation to records and disclosures of information on or after the first 1 January, 1 April, 1 July, or 1 October to occur after the day the Bill receives assent (regardless of when the information was acquired).

Tax treatment of dividend equivalent payments under employee share schemes

The ATO has stated that a dividend equivalent payment made under an employee share scheme (ESS) is assessable to an employee as remuneration when they receive the payment in respect of services they provide as an employee, or where the payment has a sufficient connection with the recipient’s employment (Determination TD 2017/26).

The term “dividend equivalent payment” refers to a cash payment made by a trustee of a trust to an employee participant of an ESS (who is also a beneficiary of the trust), where the payment is funded from dividends (or income from other sources) on which the trustee has been assessed in previous income years because no beneficiary of the trust was presently entitled to the income. See below for an example taken from the determination.

A trustee that makes such a dividend equivalent payment is required to withhold an amount from the payment (even though the trustee is not an employer of the employee who receives the payment).

The ATO regards the following factors as indicative of a dividend equivalent payment being for, or in respect of, services as an employee:

  • it is agreed that the payment is consideration for services rendered by the employee;
  • the payment arises from a contract, an arrangement or a plan established by the employer to enable or facilitate the delivery of employment benefits (eg ESS interests) to the employee;
  • the employer is able to make the payment;
  • the payment is conditional on the employee meeting individual or specific employment-related targets;
  • the payment depends on the employee’s continued employment with the employer and is forfeited on cessation of employment; or
  • the payment is provided at the discretion of the employer or trustee (based on the employer’s direction or recommendations).

However, the determination offers a safe harbour from such payments being treated as remuneration where all of the following conditions apply:

  • the trustee is not an associate of the employer;
  • the payment is made because the employee is a beneficiary of the trust;
  • the trustee exercises its power under the trust deed to make the payment, independent of any direction or wishes of the employer;
  • the payment is not made in relation to:
  • the employee’s continued employment with the employer;
  • the employee meeting individual employment-related targets; or
  • termination, redundancy or retirement;
  • the payment does not arise from a contractual agreement to which the employee and employer are party;
  • the payment cannot be made by the employer, in lieu of the trustee making the payment; and
  • the trustee was assessed on the dividends (or other trust income) that the payment is calculated on in the income year the dividends or other income were received.

Example

A Co is an Australian resident company that carries on a business.

A Co establishes a trust for the purpose of providing shares (ESS interests) under an ESS to eligible Australian resident employees.

A Co makes a contribution to the trustee of the trust so the trustee can purchase and hold shares in A Co under the terms of the trust deed, plan handbook and invitation to the employees (together ESS agreement).

Under the terms of the ESS agreement an eligible employee is a beneficiary of the trust and has an interest in the trust that is a right to acquire the shares being held by the trustee. This interest does not entitle the employee to any income generated by the shares over the course of the ESS until such time as the employee satisfies certain conditions set by A Co that are specific to the employee’s performance and their continuous employment with A Co being three years (performance conditions).

Upon satisfying the performance conditions the employee is entitled to own the shares held by the trustee of the trust. In addition, the employee is entitled to receive from the trustee an amount reflecting the dividends (post-tax) the employee would have earned had the employee owned the shares from the day the employee received their interest in the trust. The trustee funds this payment from trust capital. According to the ESS agreement, this payment can be made by the trustee or the employer.

As the dividend equivalent payment will be made to the employee because the employee has satisfied certain performance conditions, these payments are made to the employee for, or in respect of, services provided by the employee (they are, in substance, a reward for performance). They are assessable to the employee under s 6-5 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997. While the quantum of the payment reflects a dividend equivalent that may have been received had the employee acquired the shares at the outset of the arrangement, this is merely a calculation mechanism and does not reflect the character of the payment in the recipient’s hands. The character of the payment in the employee’s hands is remuneration.

Before TD 2017/26 was issued, it had been industry practice to treat the employee as not being assessable on a dividend equivalent payment, on the basis that the trustee had borne the tax under s 99A of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (ITAA 1936). The ATO apparently considers that this practice was adopted on the basis of an inappropriate reliance on Class Ruling CR 2013/151. While noting that CR 2013/151 applied only to the entities specified in that ruling, the ATO has effectively conceded that TD 2017/26 constitutes a change in its view on the issue, and has allowed limited grandfathering in its application.

The determination applies to dividend equivalent payments paid under the terms and conditions attached to ESS interests granted on or after 1 January 2018. Where a taxpayer is granted an ESS interest before that date and the terms and conditions attached to the interest include eligibility to receive a dividend equivalent payment, the ATO’s general administrative practice will be to treat such dividend equivalent payments as not assessable as ordinary or statutory income. This is conditional on the dividends or other income (that the dividend equivalent payment is calculated on) being assessed to the trustee under s 99A of ITAA 1936 in the income year when the dividends (or other income) were received.

Superannuation: progress on new integrity measures

The Government has released a consultation paper and exposure draft legislation to give effect to the following superannuation taxation integrity measures it announced in the 2017–2018 Federal Budget:

  • the non-arm’s length income (NALI) rules in s 295-550 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) for related-party superannuation fund transactions will be expanded from 1 July 2018 to also include expenses not incurred that would normally be expected to apply in a commercial arm’s length transaction (eg reduced interest expenses, brokerage, accountancy fees or legal costs); and
  • a member’s share of the outstanding balance of a limited recourse borrowing arrangement (LRBA) will be included in the member’s “total superannuation balance” (TSB) for new LRBAs entered into on or after 1 July 2018.

The measures are designed to ensure that related-party transactions with super funds and LRBAs cannot be used to circumvent the reduced contribution caps operating from 1 July 2017. The changes should generally not affect LRBAs entered into with unrelated third parties for commercial rates of interest (and other expenses).

Non-arm’s length income to include expenses not incurred

The current NALI rules address non-commercial arrangements that could potentially shift income from a related party to a super fund (where the amounts would be taxed concessionally). The new non-arm’s length expense rules aim to prevent an increase in a fund’s capital by not incurring arm’s length expenses.

Under the proposed amendments to s 295-550 of ITAA 1997, non-arm’s length expenses incurred by a superannuation fund in gaining or producing assessable income would result in such income being taxed as NALI, at the top marginal rate of 45%. This will be the case for expenses of a capital or revenue nature.

Example

A self managed super fund (an SMSF) acquired a commercial property from a third party at its market value of $1 million on 1 July 2015. The SMSF derives rental income of $1,500 per week ($78,000 per annum) from the property. The SMSF financed the purchase of the property under an LRBA from a related party on terms consistent with s 67A of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SIS Act).

The LRBA was entered into on terms that include no interest, no repayments until the end of the 25-year term and borrowing of the full purchase price of the commercial real property (ie 100% gearing). The SMSF was in a financial position to enter into an LRBA on commercial terms with an interest rate of approximately 5.8%.

The proposed amendments to s 295-550 of ITAA 1997 would make it clear that, as the SMSF has not incurred expenses that it might have been expected to incur in an arm’s length dealing in deriving the rental income, that income will be NALI. The income (less deductions attributable to the income) will form part of the SMSF’s non-arm’s length component and would be taxed at 45%.

For the NALI rules to apply to non-arm’s length expenses, there must also be a sufficient nexus between the expenses and the income. That is, the expenditure must have been incurred “in” gaining or producing the relevant income. The amendments are also likely to require some sort of determination as to the expenses that a fund “might have been expected to have incurred” if the parties had been dealing with each other at arm’s length.

LRBAs to count towards total super balance

An individual’s TSB is used to determine eligibility for various super concessions, including the $1.6 million balance cap for making non-concessional contributions, transfer balance account reporting (TBAR) and whether an SMSF can apply the segregated method.

The definition of “total superannuation balance” in s 307-230 of ITAA 1997 will be amended to take into account the outstanding balance of an LRBA entered into by an SMSF.

An individual member’s TSB will be increased by the share of the outstanding balance of an LRBA related to the assets that support their superannuation interests. This proportion would be based on the individual’s share of the total superannuation interests supported by the asset that is subject to the LRBA. This will ensure that SMSF members who have attained a condition of release cannot circumvent the caps by withdrawing lump sums and re-contributing the funds as a loan.

For an LRBA-related increase in the individual’s TSB, the SMSF must have used the borrowing to acquire one or more assets, and any such assets must support the superannuation interests of an individual at the time at which the total superannuation balance is determined.

This asset–member interest connection is determined by considering the way the fund has allocated its assets to meet its current and future liabilities in relation to each member’s interests. This test will require the SMSF trustee to determine which of its LRBA assets support which members’ interests, as well as the extent to which those interests are supported.

The outstanding balance of an LRBA is the amount still owing under the LRBA. Where an individual has a superannuation interest that is supported by an asset that is subject to an LRBA, the increase to their TSB is based on their share of this outstanding balance.

Including the proportion of the outstanding balance in a member’s TSB seeks to prevent double-counting of the outstanding balance from occurring where more than one member has an interest supported by an asset that was acquired through an LRBA. While an individual’s TSB can generally be measured “at a time”, it is generally only relevant at the end of a particular income year on 30 June.

Example

Laura is the sole member of her SMSF, which holds $2 million in accumulation phase. Laura takes a lump sum of $500,000 from the SMSF on 1 June 2019, which reduces her TSB as at 30 June 2019 to $1.5 million. On 30 June 2019, Laura lends the $500,000 on commercial terms back to her SMSF under an LRBA. The SMSF uses $1 million of its existing assets and the borrowed $500,000 to acquire a $1.5 million investment property.

Under the current law, Laura’s TSB as at 30 June 2019 is $1.5 million, comprising the net value of the property of $1 million ($1.5 million purchase price less the $500,000 LRBA) as well as the other assets valued at $500,000. As her TSB is below $1.6 million, Laura can make further non-concessional contributions of up to $100,000 in the year ending 30 June 2020. As the SMSF repays the LRBA, the net value of the fund will increase and Laura’s TSB will approach the $1.6 million threshold. However, just prior to reaching the $1.6 million threshold, she could withdraw another lump sum and enter into a new LRBA to acquire another income-producing asset. This would reduce her TSB again, allowing more contributions to be made to the SMSF.

Under the changes proposed in the Draft Bill, Laura’s TSB at 30 June 2019 will be $2 million, comprising the net value of the property of $1 million, the other assets valued at $500,000 and the $500,000 outstanding loan balance under the LRBA. As her TSB exceeds $1.6 million, Laura would not be able to make non-concessional contributions in the year ending 30 June 2020. Entering into a new LRBA arrangement with the SMSF would no longer increase Laura’s capacity to make non-concessional contributions for that year. The trustee could continue to repay the LRBA but could not use non-concessional contributions to do so.

Guidance for self managed super funds on reporting transfer balance events

The ATO has released further guidance on when self managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) need to report events affecting their members’ transfer balance accounts (by making a transfer balance account report, or TBAR) for the purposes of the $1.6 million pension cap.

Transfer balance account reporting timeframes

From 1 July 2018, SMSFs that have any members with a total superannuation balance (TSB) of $1 million or more must report events impacting that member’s transfer balance account (TBA) within 28 days after the end of the quarter in which the event occurs.

SMSFs in which all the members have TSBs less than $1 million can choose to report events which impact their members’ transfer balances at the same time that the fund lodges its annual return.

If an SMSF member was receiving a pre-existing income stream on 30 June 2017 (and it has continued in retirement phase on or after 1 July 2017), a TBAR must be lodged with the ATO by 1 July 2018. TBAR events that that occur during 2017–2018 should be reported at the same time the first TBAR form is due. That is, by:

  • 28 October 2018 (for those reporting quarterly); or
  • at the time the SMSF annual return is lodged (for those reporting annually where all of the SMSF members have total super balances less than $1 million).

Testing the $1 million threshold

The $1 million total threshold will be tested as at 30 June in the financial year before a fund’s first TBAR becomes due. If an SMSF member was receiving a retirement phase superannuation income stream from the fund just before 1 July 2017, the members’ TSB is measured at 30 June 2017.

If an SMSF member enters retirement phase for the first time after 1 July 2018, the ATO says that the SMSF will need to assess its position, in relation to the $1 million threshold, on 30 June immediately before the start of the relevant income stream. If the $1 million threshold is triggered at the first time an SMSF member starts an income stream, the SMSF will be locked into the quarterly TBAR reporting regime. A fund will not move between annual and quarterly TBAR reporting due to subsequent fluctuations to any of its members’ balances.

It would appear that if one member of an SMSF has TSBs of $1 million or more across all their funds (not just the SMSF), all of the other SMSF members will be dragged into the into the quarterly TBAR reporting net.

Reporting events

Superannuation funds are required to report events for retirement phase income streams that result in a credit or debit in an individual’s TBA. Common reportable events include:

  • income streams that a member was receiving just before 1 July 2017 (and that continued to be paid on or after 1 July 2017 in the retirement phase);
  • new retirement phase income streams (including death benefit income streams);
  • commutations of retirement phase income streams (partially or fully); and
  • converting a transition to retirement pension into a retirement phase superannuation income stream.

Events to be reported sooner

If a member exceeds their transfer balance cap of $1.6 million, they must report the following events sooner:

  • commutations (in response to an excess transfer balance determination issued by the ATO to an SMSF member) must be reported 10 business days after the end of the month in which the commutation occurs; and
  • commutation authorities – the response must be reported within 60 days of the date the commutation authority was issued.

Client Alert (February 2018)

ATO guidelines: profit allocation within professional firms

The ATO has become aware that its guidelines on Everett assignments and the allocation of profits within professional firms are being misinterpreted for some higher-risk arrangements, including the use of related-party financing and self managed superannuation funds (SMSFs).

The guidelines have been suspended from 14 December 2017 to allow the ATO to consult with stakeholders on replacement guidelines.

Anyone considering new arrangements beginning after the cut-off date should contact the ATO to discuss the arrangement risk profile and the possibility of a private ruling.

Arrangements beginning before the cut-off date that comply with the guidelines and do not exhibit high risk factors shouldn’t require action, but arrangements with high risk factors may be subject to ATO review.

TIP: The ATO encourages anyone who is uncertain about how the law applies to their existing circumstances “to engage with us as soon as possible”.

Housing affordability measures now law

Legislation has been passed to implement the 2017–2018 Federal Budget housing affordability measures. The following will start on 1 July 2018:

  • the First Home Super Saver (FHSS) Scheme, which allows individuals to use specific amounts from their super to buy or construct a first home; and
  • the option for individuals aged 65+ to make “downsizing” contributions of up to $300,000 to their super from selling a home they have owned for at least 10 years.

TIP: An exemption from meeting the FHSS Scheme “first home” requirement will be available for people suffering financial hardship. “Financial hardship” criteria are likely to include circumstances where someone has limited savings, is currently renting and had a past interest in a home that was in a cheaper real estate market or when the person was in a relationship that has since broken down.

Fringe benefits tax: employees’ private use of vehicles

The ATO has issued guidance for employers on determining an employee’s private use of a vehicle.

Draft Practical Compliance Guideline PCG 2017/D14 should provide more certainty and transparency about the circumstances where the ATO won’t apply compliance resources to investigating whether private vehicle use meets the car-related FBT exemptions.

Eligible employers who rely on this guideline won’t need to keep records to prove that an employee’s private use of a vehicle is minor, infrequent and irregular.

TIP: The guideline includes specific eligibility conditions for employers and their employees’ vehicle use. Talk to us about whether the new guidance applies to your FBT circumstances.

Tax consequences of trust vesting

The ATO has issued a long-awaited ruling on trust vesting, including changing a trust’s vesting date and the CGT and income tax consequences of vesting.

TIP: A trust’s “vesting date” is the day when the beneficiaries’ interests in the trust property become fixed. The trust deed will specify the vesting date and the consequences of that date being reached. Vesting does not, of itself, ordinarily cause the trust to come to an end or cause a new trust to arise. In particular, the underlying trust relationship continues after vesting while the trustee still holds property for the takers.

The key points in the draft ruling are that:

  • before vesting, it may be possible to extend the vesting date (by applying to a court or by the trustee exercising a power to nominate a new vesting date);
  • it is too late to change the vesting date once it has passed (and the ATO says it is unlikely that a court would agree to do so); and
  • continuing to administer a trust in a way that is inconsistent with the vesting terms can have significant CGT and income tax consequences.

Disclosing business tax debt information to credit agencies

The Federal Government has released draft legislation and a draft legislative instrument that, when passed, will authorise the ATO to disclose a business’s tax debt to registered credit reporting bureaus where the business has not effectively engaged with the ATO to manage the debt.

The draft legislation intends to place tax debts on a similar footing as other debts, to encourage timely payment or engagement with the ATO for businesses that want to avoid having their debt information affect their creditworthiness. Disclosure to credit reporting bureaus will only be permitted if the ATO has given the taxpayer at least 21 days’ notice beforehand.

Taxing employee share scheme dividend equivalent payments

The ATO has made a new determination that dividend equivalent payments made under an employee share scheme (ESS) are assessable to an employee as income when they receive the payment for or in connection with services they provide as an employee.

A “dividend equivalent payment” is a cash payment to an employee participant and beneficiary an ESS funded from dividends on which the trustee has been assessed in previous income years because no beneficiary of the trust was entitled to the income at the time.

A trustee that makes a dividend equivalent payment under an ESS must withhold an amount from the payment, even though the trustee is not the employee’s employer.

TIP: The ATO offers a safe harbour from such payments being treated as income under specific circumstances. Get in touch with us to talk about whether your situation makes you eligible.

The new determination applies to dividend equivalent payments paid under the terms and conditions attached to ESS interests granted on or after 1 January 2018.

Superannuation integrity changes

The Government has released a consultation paper and exposure draft legislation to give effect to the following superannuation taxation integrity measures it announced in the 2017–2018 Federal Budget:

  • the non-arm’s length income (NALI) rules in s 295-550 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 for related-party superannuation fund transactions will be expanded from 1 July 2018 to also include expenses not incurred that would normally be expected to apply in a commercial arm’s length transaction (eg reduced interest expenses, brokerage, accountancy fees or legal costs); and
  • a member’s share of the outstanding balance of a limited recourse borrowing arrangement (LRBA) will be included in the member’s “total superannuation balance” for new LRBAs entered into on or after 1 July 2018.

The measures are designed to ensure that related-party transactions with super funds and LRBAs can’t be used to circumvent the reduced contribution caps that apply from 1 July 2017. The changes should generally not affect LRBAs entered into with unrelated third parties for commercial rates of interest (and other expenses).

Guidance for SMSFs on transfer balance reporting

The ATO has released further guidance on when SMSFs need to report events affecting their members’ transfer balance accounts (by making a transfer balance account report, or TBAR) for the purposes of the $1.6 million pension cap.

From 1 July 2018, SMSFs that have any members with a total superannuation balance of $1 million or more must report events impacting that member’s transfer balance account within 28 days after the end of the quarter in which the event occurs.

SMSFs where all members have total super balances of less than $1 million can choose to report events which impact their members’ transfer balances at the same time that the fund lodges its annual return.

The guidance also covers reporting requirements for retirement phase income streams and commutations (including commutation authorities).

Taxable payments annual report

Some businesses and government entities need to report each year the total payments they make for services on the Taxable payments annual report. In addition, some government entities also need to report grants paid.

These payments need to be reported to us on the Taxable payments annual report by 28 August each year.

Building and construction:

Businesses in the building and construction industry need to report the total payments they make to each contractor for building and construction services each year.

Government:

Government entities at the federal, state and local levels need to report from 1 July 2017, the total payments they make wholly or partly to businesses for providing services. Some government entities will also need to report grants paid to people or organisations that have an ABN.

Payments you need to report

Report only payments you make to contractors for building and constructions services.

Contractors can be sole traders (individuals), companies, partnerships or trusts.

If invoices you receive include both labour and materials, whether itemised or combined, you report the whole amount of the payment, unless the labour component is only incidental.

The definition of building and construction services is broad – it includes any of the activities listed below if they are performed on, or in relation to, any part of a building, structure, works, surface or sub-surface:

  • alteration
  • assembly
  • construction
  • demolition
  • design
  • destruction
  • dismantling
  • erection
  • excavation
  • finishing
  • improvement
  • installation
  • maintenance (excluding the maintenance, service or repairs of equipment and tools)
  • management of building and construction services
  • modification
  • organisation of building and construction services
  • removal
  • repair (excluding the service or repairs of equipment and tools)
  • site preparation.

Details you need to report

The details you need to report for each contractor includes:

  • ABN (where known)
  • name
  • address
  • gross amount you paid for the financial year (this is the total amount paid including GST)
  • total GST included in the gross amount you paid.

You are required to report the payments you make to contractors in the financial year in which the payments are actually made (cash basis).

The details you need to report are generally contained in the invoices you receive from your contractors.

When you receive an invoice, check the ABN on the invoice matches the ABN on your record for that contractor. Ensure you create a new contractor record if necessary. Where a contractor’s ABN changed during the year, you will need to include the two payee records in your annual report.

You can check your contractors’ details including ABN, name and GST registration to confirm they are correct by using ABN LookupExternal Link on the ABR website or ATO app.

For more information, please contact our consultant on 02 9954 3843.

Reference: https://www.ato.gov.au/Tax-professionals/Newsroom/Lodgment-and-payment/Need-to-lodge-a-taxable-payments-annual-report-/?landingpage

 

 

 

$20,000 instant asset write-off

The write-off threshold of $20,000 has been extended to 30 June 2018.

If you buy an asset and it costs less than $20,000, you can immediately deduct the business portion in your tax return. The $20,000 threshold applied from 12 May 2015 and will reduce to $1,000 from 1 July 2018.

You are eligible to use simplified depreciation rules and claim the immediate deduction for the business portion of each asset (new or second hand) costing less than $20,000 if:

  • you have a turnover less than $10 million, and
  • the asset was first used or installed ready for use in the income year you are claiming it in.

Assets that cost $20,000 or more can’t be immediately deducted. They will continue to be deducted over time using the general small business pool. You write-off the balance of this pool if the balance (before applying any other depreciation deduction) is less than $20,000 at the end of an income year.

For more information please contact us on 02 9954 3843 or email admin@hurleyco.com.au

 

Reference: https://www.ato.gov.au/Newsroom/smallbusiness/Lodging-and-paying/$20,000-instant-asset-write-off/

Legislation makes many accountants responsible for the health and safety of the workers in their organizations. How do you ensure your business is safe?

New Zealand’s workplace health and safety records paint a very grim picture.

Every year, 50 to 60 people are killed in workplace incidents, and hundreds more die as a result of work-related ill health. New Zealand’s fatality statistics are nearly twice as high as Australia’s, and three times as high as those of the UK.

These numbers, and the Pike River Mine Disaster which killed 29 New Zealand men in November 2010, helped prompt the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015. That law made organizations responsible for ensuring they meet health and safety responsibilities.

Essentially, New Zealand adopted the Australian Work Health and Safety Act 2011, which was introduced to harmonize work, health and safety regulations across most Australian states and territories.

Obligations under the new legislation

John Xerri is a partner in Deloitte’s Risk Advisory in Sydney and specializes in work health and safety (WHS). He says the aim of the legislation is to have WHS viewed as normal business practice and to remove the perception that it is merely ancillary.

“Up until the legislative changes, WHS was observed, but generally by someone well down in an organization, while the rest of the business went about what it was meant to be doing – running the business,” he says.

The new law prescribes that the “person conducting a business or undertaking” (PCBU) and its officers, or someone who has influence and control of the PCBU or organization, is responsible for the health and safety of workers.

Says Xerri: “Depending on the structure of an organization, some accountants could now be defined as officers – and all of a sudden they have duties and obligations under the new legislation.”

In the traditional accounting space, Xerri says an accountant’s role in life is o know what the business is doing. Health and safety presents a similar problem, “so the roles are very much aligned”.

Xerri says that under the new laws WHS has certainly achieved a higher profile and gained a lot of boardroom and senior management airplay, as clear obligations are targeted at that senior level.

Hazards and risks

One of the requirements in the legislation is that an organization must understand the nature of business’s hazards and risks.

“And that’s interesting if you have outside directors who have little understanding of what that business is about.”

The key difference between the old and new legislations, Xerri says, is that it took health and safety from being reactive – something that you do when something has gone wrong – to being proactive.

“The legislation now places a duty on an organization to proactively seek and eliminate risk. The legislation is enshrined in that. And prosecutions are now taking place on risk alone. That is the power of the legislation – an incident does not have to occur for the regulator to take action.”

A new approach for NZ

Chris Alderson is a director at PwC New Zealand and leads the Health and Safety consulting practice nationally.

He says while the Pike River mine disaster was definitely a call to action, there was general acknowledgement that New Zealand’s legislative framework needed to come into line with those of the UK, Canada and Australia.

“Some more advanced organizations in New Zealand were already moving to a new approach to health and safety, which focused a lot more on critical risk management rather than the traditional focus on lag-based measures like total recordable injury rates.”

Alderson says accountants need to ask risk questions. “What is the underlying risk that a health and safety initiative is aimed at? How does the spend strengthen the control environment, improve the organization’s culture or facilitate better governance?”

Alderson focuses on the law’s effects on people. “The consequences of a major workplace accident or preventable illness are devastating to the individuals involved, their families, and

have long-term impacts on the organization.”

Alderson says the first prosecutions are only now coming through and that penalties will vary. “An individual worker could be fined as much as NZ$300,000, an officer up to NZ$600,000 – and both categories could also include up to five years in prison. The organization can be fined up to NZ$3 million.” He says this amount cannot be insured against under the act, although legal costs can be.

Keeping safe on a budget

Deaths, jail time and millions of dollars are no trifling matters. So how can a business with budget constraints stay safe? Alderson says it’s all about focus.

“One thing we like to see is an understanding of the potentially hazardous activities that the organization’s workers and contractors regularly undertake.”

“Every business will be different, but if you can identify and acknowledge what these are, then you can prioritize where you need to spend to manage the risk of something going wrong.”

He advises trying to eliminate an activity or substitute it with one that carries a lower risk.

“For example, why send somebody into a confined space when you can send a remote vehicle or drone?

Spending on engineering controls is also a great investment – if you can protect the human from making a mistake with good equipment, then this is money well spent.”

Ultimately, he says, you need to put yourself in the eyes of an independent observer who would ask whether you had done enough to reduce potentially high-risk situations and activities to an acceptable level.

“I think that philosophically, accountants are well-placed. They can bring their critical thinking skills to bear on health and safety conversations within their organizations,” says Alderson.

“They should not feel that it is solely the realm of health and safety professionals or even operational managers.”

 

Reference: Malkovic, T., 2018. Acuity December/January. Health & Safety/Page 76: Acuity.