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.
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?
- All parties to the transaction need to be correctly identified.
- This includes verifying identification documents such as a passport, drivers licence or other government-issued identification document.
- Other documents that provide proof of the address of the applicant must also be verified.
- 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.
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)
With another 31st December rolling on by Covisory turned 10 years old. Over the holidays my youngest 20+ child quizzed me on whether I had any resolutions for 2017. This led to some interesting conversations on the concept of reflection.
I’m not one of those people who each year makes resolutions. I freely admit that the cynic in me watches to see how long the resolutions of others will last in the coming year. We all know the routine firstly you fall for the line that it’s a new year so you need to make resolutions. You start with good intentions but as life encroaches, those resolutions either drift off into the too hard basket or are just forgotten.
These easy to make, on the spur of the moment, influenced by what is the latest trends are doomed to fail. Why? New Year Resolutions have on the most part no meaning. People expect to fail with them, there are no consequences on them if the result is not achieved.
Making resolutions is not the problem it is the built-in expectation to fail. If we live our business and personal lives without reflecting on our past experiences, we are bound to make the same mistakes. We cannot break through barriers by doing more of the same. Not only must we invest in action we also should work on deep and sustained reflection on an ongoing basis and not just once a year. Reflecting will not solve all the problems but it will help move you a tiny bit closer.
Let’s face it life is busy these days. We are all guilty of spending a lot of our time chasing the immediate reward, the near-term “goal” — in short, the expedient and the convenient. We are all obsessed with doing. What we are not so good at is stopping and taking a hard look at Why and What we are doing. Reflection may be a tool talked about in education but there is little application when we move into the workforce. Why not – are we afraid of what we will find?
If a business is not doing well it is easier to cast blame for problems on difficult customers or an investor. Alternatively, maybe we look to blame the government bodies regulating the industry, or competitors and who hasn’t blamed the computer or an application for our failures? We do not automatically ask in a situation what am I doing wrong or right? How could I improve? Our culture allows us to avoid personal responsibility – we are guilty of not owning problems or to finding ways to solve them.
If we do not take time out of our week, month or year to make room for the deep questions and thinking we fail to grow. We opt for the distracting items that fill our time. It is not about working harder. We need to work smarter and this means having the time for reflection so that we can make changes and improve on past performance.
Breakthroughs to a product, a company, a market or industry do not come from being busy and jumping between multiple tasks. Change comes from an opportunity to have structured periods of reflection. We need time to ponder, to question, to model, and to research. Reflection drives experimentation and sparks innovation. By reviewing the processes and results we add to our understanding, gain insight and allow companies to respond to change. By taking the opportunity to reflect we can make our businesses radically better.
In today’s culture, we as individuals and businesses are engineered to Do, we have not been encouraged to reflect. To add reflection to our lives allows us to embed concepts and theories into our practices. It fosters constant thought and innovation that provides the means to allow us to grow as both individuals and professionals.
Within Covisory ‘Reflection’ is a core component of how we operate both internally and when we work with customers. If you need assistance, we are always happy to support you with this process. Please Contact Us. With a new year before us let 2017 be the year to not only learn from our experiences but regularly reflect on those experiences.
I will leave you with the words of Margaret J. Wheatley an American writer and management consultant:
“Without reflection, we go blindly on our way, creating more unintended consequences, and failing to achieve anything useful.”
My personal resonance with the above statement conjures up images of a goose-stepping John Cleese, one of the hilariously gifted Monty Python members and a skit entitled ‘The Funniest Joke in the World’. The joke was so funny that it was deadly. It ended up used as a weapon delivered across enemy lines by khaki-clad foot soldiers.
There are those reading this that will resonate with me – maybe a chuckle or two for old times’ sake. There are those who will have no resonance at all – either through a disregard for Monty Python’s slapstick humour or of an age where Monty Python is a reference accessed on You Tube.
It would not take Sherlock Holmes to determine that the author of this article is in the 50+ age bracket. As an age group, we should be applauded for surviving and prospering through 3 decades of unparalleled transformation and change. While empathy is scant from our finger tapping Facebook using Twitter communicating 20+ children the evidence of change is mind blowing.
My first steps in the noble profession of accounting were in the employ of a small accounting and audit firm in Oxford Circus in London. Computers were largely non-existent. Accounting was done through the manual entry of relevant numbers in aesthetically pleasing leather bound ledger books. These books were works of art. The first days of any new job were spent extrapolating the numbers from the ledger on to 8 column stationery. You became skilled in identifying where your Trial Balance didn’t balance. Gaining a thorough understanding of double entry and the picture the numbers were creating.
A particular memory was of a practitioner called Harry. Harry seemed ancient to us being in the 50+ age bracket back then. He only had one suit; identifiable by the biscuit stains that permeated the left lapel of the cross thread tweed. Harry looked after all the Chinese restaurants. The records arrived in boxes and in Chinese. He translated them to double entry and English. He delivered an accounting story that was accepted by the Revenue authorities. He was a skilled professional and worth a fortune to his clients. Harry made me realise that our noble profession is more about artistry and interpretation than computation and certainty.
From the leather bound ledgers of not so long ago to where we are today. Memories of collecting information in strict sequence to be delivered to a computational beast that took the place of balancing the Trial Balance. Moving onto the first laptop, the floppy disk (what happened to them?), the internet to cloud-based accounting packages like Xero. The way we do things has inextricably changed for the better. Making a trial balance was numerically satisfying but a poor and expensive use of human resource.
The art of accounting has not changed. At a fundamental level accounting is about the concepts of communication and value. Conventions have been developed to try and standardise how we communicate the interpretation of value. But it can never entirely succeed, it can never be standard. In fact, it is arguable that this standardisation has made things less understandable not more.
Value is dictated by circumstance. A major asset in your balance sheet can easily become a major threat to your business e.g. a large debtor develops financial problems. Business is done through the interaction of human beings using the language of money measured by numbers. It is not the compilation of the numbers that is important but the interpretation. It is being able to communicate well the business story the numbers are telling. Technology is doing the compiling to allow us to do the interpreting.
You cannot separate numbers from the human aspects of operating a business. We come in all shapes, sizes, personalities, belief systems and values. Human beings will never come standard. Over the years there have been many theoretically valid generic products that have failed due to the human element. The most valuable professionals engender trust through values of integrity and objectivity. They understand and relate on a human level while communicating their skills.
I have no doubt that Harry would be as valuable today as he was in his day. His thorough understanding and personal skills would just be engaged more productively. If we could bring Harry back, he would probably think that this modern day way of carrying on was nothing more than ‘The Funniest Joke in the World’….
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.
New Zealand has been rated as the second best place in the world to do business according to Forbes Magazine’s 2015 survey. New Zealand, improved on its 3rd place in the 2014 survey by one place with Denmark taking the top spot.
Reaching these conclusions Forbes graded 144 nations on 11 factors including property rights, innovation, taxes, technology, corruption and stock market performance.
The report finds that New Zealand offers a transparent and stable business climate that encourages entrepreneurship.
For the full article Forbes Magazine 2015 Survey
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.
There has been some interesting recent dialogue in Australia around whether large private companies should disclose the amount of income tax they pay. Proposed legislation would have required private companies with revenue over $100m to disclose their tax contribution. Public companies already have to do this.
The counter debate against this was that it would make the family members vulnerable to kidnapping and being held to ransom. However, interestingly, Dick Smith (former owner of the now defunct retail electronics chain), argued that these families do this already by their ostentatious displays of wealth. Simply saying how much they paid in tax was confirming what people always suspected, ie they had lots of money and probably paid little tax!.
For now, the proposal has been scrapped, but it was an interesting debate.