Is Capital Gains a Step Closer

On Thursday 20th September 2018 the Tax Working Group issued a progress report on its review of the New Zealand tax system. We have provided links below to the report and its supporting data for your information.

Future of Tax: Interim Report

Charts and Data – Future of Tax: Interim Report

 

The following press release was issued along with the report.

Press Release

 

 

Avoiding issues with Property Transactions

GST issues relating to Partial Use

We commonly come across errors around accounting for GST on property transactions and their financial impact can be significant for the parties involved. Following on from our discussion around whether there is GST or not on property transactions let us now look at the GST impact around partial use when purchasing property.

By law, GST is charged on all land sales and claimed on all land purchases. Exceptions being when that property is used for making non-taxable supplies such as Residential accommodation or the transaction is compulsory zero-rated.

From 1st April 2011 new apportionment rules were introduced requiring suppliers of land or supplies that include land to charge GST on the supply at the rate of zero percent where the purchaser intends to use the land to make taxable supplies.

However, what happens in the case of transactions where there is both a residential and economic activity component to the property transaction. Inland Revenue allows for the apportionment into two distinct supplies for GST Purposes. Each component must be valued separately and be considered independently to determine what GST is payable or receivable.

Let’s consider the following example:

Sarah purchases a new building for $5 million on 30th October 2017. Sarah has a balance date of 31st March. There is no GST included in the supply as it is subject to the zero-rating rules.

Where both the vendor and purchaser are registered for GST AND the purchaser declares on Schedule 2 of the ADLS/REINZ Sale and Purchase Agreement (S&PA) that they intend to use the building for making taxable supplies AND the purchaser does not intend at the time of settlement to use the property as a principal place of residence. Then under Clause 15 of the S&PA it will become compulsory for the transaction to be zero rated for GST purposes.

Sarah intends the building to be mixed use and to lease the ground and first floor of the building to commercial tenants, and the 2nd floor of the building will be leased to residential tenants.

On acquisition Sarah applies the rules in section 20(3I) of the GST Act 1985.

  1. Calculate the nominal tax component that would be chargeable on the value of the supply if subject to the standard rate of GST.

$5m x 15% = $750,000

2. Determine the extent to which the building will be used for making taxable supplies.

a.Sarah determines that the building will be used 66.7% for making taxable supplies (rent to commercial tenants) and 33.3% in making exempt supplies (rent to residential tenants).

3. Sarah now needs to account for the proportion of the nominal GST component that relates to the non-taxable use of the goods as output tax on the acquisition of the building.

a.$750,000 x 33.3% = $249,750

4. On the acquisition of the building, Sarah will need to account for output tax of $249,750.

The same principals would apply to transactions where there is both a residential and economic activity as in the case of Farms (Rural farms, lifestyle farms, and orchards), Vacant land where residential use is planned, land used for a Dairy, or hotels and motels where the owner or manager lives onsite.

The rules require the taxpayers to make a fair and reasonable estimate on the intended taxable and non-taxable components of the initial transaction. In subsequent periods after the initial tax deduction claimed the taxpayer may be required to make further adjustments if the actual taxable use of an asset was different to its intended taxable use.

The first adjustment period runs from the date of acquisition (30th October 2017) to the persons first balance date after acquisition or to the person’s first balance date that falls at least 12 months after the date of acquisition. In Sarah’s example, this would either be 31st March 2018 or 31st March 19. Subsequent adjustment periods would run annually from this point.

In our example, Sarah elects to go with option 1 the period 30th October 2017 to 31st March 2018. Her second adjustment period will run from 1st April 2018 to 31st March 2019. There is no limit to the number of adjustment periods in relation to land.

Using our example, Sarah would be required to keep records showing the usage for both the taxable and non-taxable portions. These logs form the basis to make an annual adjustment if the percentages differ or there is a change in use.

This document has been written as a general guide and should not be used or relied upon as a substitute for specific professional advice.

 

The Brave New World – What changes are likely from our Labour / New Zealand First Government

The past three months has taken New Zealand on a political roller coaster with the result being a new minority government with a new policy and social agenda for the next three years.  In our view, it was always a strong possibility that New Zealand First would go with Labour, and the exclusion of the Greens from the government is political suicide as they sit once again outside of the government and will have little to show for the same level of support that New Zealand First gives to Labour.

Labour identified a number of priorities it would be addressing in its first 100 days and is set to wind back much of the deregulation National introduced. Change is coming and what is going to be interesting is what does this change mean for you as typically a business owner in the context of the post-election New Zealand.

 Taxation
  • The promised tax cuts will not occur.
  • We would expect the top marginal individual rate and the top trust rate to increase to at least 36% and be aligned.
  • The Brightline test for residential property will extend from 2 to 5 years. What will be interesting is which properties this applies to, ie existing own properties or those bought after the law change is made.
  • A tax working group will be put together and involved in public consultation. Its report back will affect taxes from 2021 on.  It will focus on no increases in taxes, and no inheritance tax or other taxes on the family home.  That still does leave the door open for inheritance tax or other taxes on other assets and investments.  We think capital gains is unlikely as a tax, but time will tell.
  • A 12.5% tax back incentive for research and development.
  • Continued focus on multi-nationals. Nothing changes from the old government here and the BEPs programme will continue.
  • A key one will be the removing of the ability to use negative gearing losses. The question is exactly who this will apply to, ie company groups or just individuals claiming the losses in their tax returns?
  • An Auckland regional fuel tax for the Auckland Council and is expected to be implemented within 6 months.
Land
  • Foreign ownership of land is to be subject to greater restrictions and greater involvement of the OIO. The concern here is the OIO is already significantly overloaded and has to date been largely a rubber-stamping exercise anyway.
  • A rent to own scheme for low-income workers to assist them to buy their first home.
Other
  • Expect labour law reforms. Now is a good time to get rid of underperforming staff while you are still able to.
    • The 90-day trial periods, introduced by National in March 09, will be replaced with new trial periods and will require reasons for dismissal and justification.
    • Reinstatement will be the primary remedy for employment grievances.
  • The increase in the minimum wage to $16.50 from 1 April 18 and expectations for it to be moved to over $20 within the next 3 years.
  • Changes to paid parental leave increasing to 26 weeks per year, taking effect from 1 July 18.
  • Immigration restrictions targeting students and low skilled workers.
  • Superannuation to remain at age 65. With the Government resuming contributions to the New Zealand Superannuation Fund to help safeguard Universal Superannuation at 65.
  • Buy Kiwi made preference by the government.
  • Focus on regional development and rail networks, both within Auckland and in the wider sense.
  • A review of the reserve bank with an aim to lowing the New Zealand dollar.
  • Expect inflation to increase with particularly the increase in costs as a result of some of these and the added burden of the increase in the minimum wage. It can only push inflation up.

 

On the whole however, there is much for business and our clients to be happy with and excited by in terms of what Labour and New Zealand First have promising.  It creates opportunities in itself and you need to quickly focus on these to understand where they will be.

If we couple this with the trust law reform, which will still come into effect next year, even under a Labour government, it is going to be a busy year or two as we all get used to significant change in our existing environment.

As always, the Covisory team is happy to talk to you about your needs, now and going forward.  If there is anything we can do to help, please call us.

Please note that the information in this article is for informative purposes only and should not be relied on as legal advice. 

Australian Federal Budget Brief – A NZ perspective of what you need to know about the 2017-18 Federal Budget

Some Important Information for Kiwis from Tuesday’s Australian Federal Budget.

On Tuesday 9th May, the Australian Federal Government released its latest budget. It was an attempt to squeeze more blood out of a stone and to try to balance its books.
Kiwi’s seem to have recently borne the brunt of the Australian Government’s attempts to balance its books with the removal of subsidised Australian university education as an example. The budget yesterday takes this a few more steps further and there are a couple of very important points that our clients need to be aware of:

1. Depreciation restrictions – it is proposed that for properties acquired subsequent to the budget, it will no longer be possible to depreciate plant and equipment apportioned out of the purchase price i.e. chattel split out. Previously there has been an ability to apportion out a part of the purchase price for a commercial property or commercial residential property and claim depreciation on the chattels at higher depreciation rates than building rates. In New Zealand, we continue to be able to depreciate these even though we cannot claim building depreciation.

Existing properties in Australia will be grandfathered. In future where a building is acquired, it will no longer be possible to apportion out the property, plant and equipment. However, where a property owner does spend money on these actual capital items, then they will still be entitled to depreciation.

2. Foreign residents and foreign temporary migrants – individuals who are foreign residents or foreign temporary migrants residing in Australia will no longer be eligible for the principal family home exemption from capital gains tax. When New Zealanders enter Australia, they generally enter as foreign temporary migrants (refer our “Tax Free Sunshine” paper on our Covisory website for the full background).
For foreign residents and temporary migrants moving to Australia from today’s date or acquiring a property after this date, they will no longer be eligible for the exemption. Those already in Australia with existing properties will be grandfathered until June 2019. However, it is not clear whether at June 2019 the properties will then be subject to capital gains tax from that point on subject to a valuation or the whole of the gain up to that point in time will fall to be subject to capital gains tax. More details to follow.

Naturally as Kiwi’s enter Australia as foreign temporary migrants, they are effectively permanently temporary. There is no comment yet from the Australian Government about whether New Zealanders will be specifically excluded from the removal of the principal residence exemption.

We will be arranging to have one of our Australian colleagues come to New Zealand in the next few months to run some specific updates for clients that are affected. In the meanwhile, if you are affected by these changes, please do not hesitate to contact us.

KYC – Know Your Client

The AML Act imposes obligations to ensure NZ businesses, NZ Banks and financial services are not helping facilitate criminal activity. Instead of taking people at face value we now need to know our clients. Are they who they say they are and where did their wealth come from?

  1. All parties to the transaction need to be correctly identified.
  2. This includes verifying identification documents such as a passport, drivers licence or other government-issued identification document.
  3. Other documents that provide proof of the address of the applicant must also be verified.
  4. Identify the source of wealth of the funds being used in the transaction.

 

For our KYC Form please click on this link.

For our Source of Wealth Form please click on this link.

 

 

AML – Are You Ready?

In 2013, the laissez-faire world of New Zealand business as we knew it came to an end with New Zealand playing catch up with the rest of the world.  Phase 1 of the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act 2009 (“the Act”) introduced new laws to tackle money laundering and terrorist financing.

The Ministry of Justice estimates $1.3 billion of proceeds from illegal activities are laundered through New Zealand businesses each year. The new rules have added in an extra level of regulation that has taken some people in New Zealand by surprise.  However, many countries around the world have already adopted these rules and New Zealand was late to the party.  On a positive note, the rules New Zealand adopted are more robust than many other countries.

As you will know by now under the new laws Banks, Casinos and a range of Financial Service Providers had “practical measures” imposed on them to protect New Zealand businesses and reduce the ability of criminals to benefit from illegal activity. It has taken awhile for these organisations to come to grips with the amount of information (read mountains of paperwork) required to comply with these measures.

In short, every customer’s identity needs to be verified and their source of wealth determined to ensure there is no criminal activity involved.

Phase 2 will see the Bill, when it is passed mid-2017, extend this requirement to real estate agents and conveyancers, many lawyers and accountants, businesses that deal in expensive goods and betting on sports and racing.  The law will come into effect in stages between July 2018 and July 2019 allowing these businesses to prepare for the changes.

One result of the introduction of these new rules is that when applying for an Inland Revenue Department (“IRD”) number for a non-resident/off-shore individual is that you either need to supply a New Zealand bank account number or have completed customer due diligence on the applicant.  In our experience, New Zealand banks are not interested in opening bank accounts for non-residents if it does not result in ongoing income for them, which is the case for most non-resident applicants.  This only leaves one option and that is to have a reporting entity as defined by the Act, carry out full know your client (“KYC”) checks on the applicant.  The process of opening a bank account also takes a considerable amount of time and paperwork compared to previously.

Covisory Trust Services is a reporting entity for the purposes of the Act and governed by the Department of Internal Affairs.  In our capacity as a reporting entity we regularly carry out independent KYC checks for non-resident applicants for IRD numbers and provide the appropriate sign-off for the IRD to allow the application to proceed without having to open a New Zealand bank account.  Assuming the KYC checks do not throw up any untoward results they can be completed relatively quickly.  This is a bonus when the IRD application is urgent.

If you are interested in using this service or just want to talk about anti-money laundering and its possible impact on your business please contact either Marcus Diprose or Nigel Smith (www.covisory.com)

RETENTION OF TRUST RECORDS

We have seen a few cases recently where trust records such as trustee resolutions, financial statements etc have been disposed of. It appears these records have been destroyed along with the tax records for the trust after the 7 year retention period under the Tax Administration Act has finished. We want to remind everyone that apart from tax records all trust documents need to be retained for the trust, including all financial statements for the trust.

This is necessary especially if there are any queries about decisions taken by trustees in the past. Under the new anti-money laundering rules we are also seeing banks and other financial institutions request information about the original source of wealth transferred into the trust and this is hard to supply if all of the trust records have been destroyed.

Please contact Marcus Diprose if you need to discuss this further.

Insight | Cash for Dividends or Growth?

In the last year we have received several question from families debating whether they should have a policy around the amount of dividends that are paid.
There is often a conflict between family members working in the business who can see the growth opportunities for it, and therefore want to see cash retained, and on the opposing side, family members who are typically not working in the business, want more dividends because they then can use that cash to support their lifestyle or personal investments outside of the family dynasty.
Sadly, there are no right answers to these questions but it is good for the family to have a discussion and more importantly for there to be an agreed minimum level of dividends set as a percentage of profits.

Insight | New two year bright line tests for land

Just a quick reminder that the new land rules are in effect. These will tax the sale of a residential property within 2 years unless it was a personal residence, subject also to a few other exceptions.

 
The more problematic parts of this have been that:
1. All land owning trusts must be registered with the IRD and obtain an IRD number.
2. In the case of a trust that is an offshore person, the trust must have a bank account in New Zealand.

 
There have been some problems at a practical level obtaining both IRD numbers and opening bank accounts. There have been significant delays in these and consequentially it is important not to leave these to the last minute.

 
If you don’t comply with the new rules and provide IRD numbers or bank accounts, then land transfers cannot be registered. Also, they will effectively become self-policing for the IRD. Sales and purchases will basically be able to be electronically trawled to give the IRD lists of transactions to look at. The problem is that the banks may not actually want these clients as in excuse the IRD is simply forcing them to do its anti-money laundering checks.

 
The final step will be the withholding regime that will apply to offshore persons who dispose of properties within the two years. The proposed amount of withholding tax will be the lesser of:
1. 33% (or 28% in the case of a company) x (the difference between the sale price and the purchase price of the property); and
2. 10% of the purchase price;
3. The net land proceeds after secured creditors are repaid.

 
The purchaser will be required to hold these funds through their lawyer and to remit the money to the New Zealand Inland Revenue Department.

Insight | Taxable! New Zealand Inland Revenue considers proceeds from the sale of gold and silver bullion

The IRD recently released a statement on its view on whether proceeds from the sale of gold and silver are taxable. The Commissioner’s view is that gold bullion bought as an investment will necessarily be acquired for the purposes of disposal. Consequently, any amounts derived on its disposal will be income. The Commissioner considers that the very nature of the asset leads to the conclusion that it was acquired for the purposes of ultimately disposing of it.
Central to the IRD’s view is that gold and silver as a commodity do not provide annual returns of income while being held. They have no use or value in other terms like for instance art where they have an aesthetic value. Such investments are therefore considered to have been acquired for the purpose of disposal, so the proceeds are considered by the IRD to be taxable under section CP 4 of the Income Tax Act 2007.
While there is logic to the IRD’s view, in a world of negative interest rates, it could be argued that perhaps gold does offer a return because it holds its capital value.

If you would like to discuss the possible impact for you – please contact Nigel Smith