Legal news
The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) has confirmed in ATOID 2014/23 that a loan from a self managed superannuation fund (SMSF) to a unit trust, where the SMSF and its related entities held less than 10% of the units in the unit trust, and did not otherwise ‘control’ the unit trust, will not be treated as an in-house asset.
The Australian Taxation Office has confirmed in ATOID 2014/22 that an adult child can be a death benefits dependant under the superannuation laws. In the particular facts of the ATOID, the adult child had given up work to care for a terminally ill parent and received no financial support from anyone, other than the parent, during that time. The child was found to be both financially dependent on, and an interdependent of, the child’s mother. Consequently, any death benefits paid to the adult child would be tax free.
Many people in the super industry approach each budget with some trepidation given the number of changes to the superannuation system over the years. This year, however, the industry received a pleasant surprise with only two changes, one being the ability to withdraw excess non-concessional contributions and the second being changes to the increases to the super guarantee rate.
Moving business real property into a self managed superannuation fund (SMSF) can have significant tax advantages. These include concessional tax treatment to the SMSF on rental income of 15%, and capital gains tax on the sale of the property at the rate of 10% (if the property is held for 12 months or more). While if the SMSF is in “pension phase”, the income tax and capital gains tax rates can drop to 0%. In addition, if the member is aged 60+ any payments from the SMSF to the member will be tax free.
The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) has released a private binding ruling extract in which it found that a nil interest limited recourse borrowing arrangement (LRBA) loan triggered the non-arm’s length income rules.
This paper was presented by Phil Broderick to The Eighth Annual Estate Planning Conference Television Education Network, held on 21 March, 2014.
This paper addresses the use of BDBNs and reversionary pensions and the interaction between the two. It also examines a number of strategies relating to their use.
This paper concentrates on the use of BDBNs and reversionary pensions in relation to self managed superannuation funds (SMSFs), although other superannuation funds are looked at, including public offer super funds.
This paper was presented by Phil Broderick on the Television Education Network Webinar held on 12 February, 2014.
The purpose of this paper is to give a broad overview of the law in relation to super fund borrowing (also referred to as limited recourse borrowing arrangements and LRBAs). After a brief review of the background to the introduction to the New Law, this paper will broadly look at the lifecycle of a LRBA.
The Federal Court has overturned one of the few AAT cases that found special circumstances exist for an excess contribution assessment. In FCT v Dowling there were two relevant contributions. First, a non-concessional contribution of $156,142 made by the taxpayer’s husband in the 2009 year for the purposes of increasing his age pension entitlement. This contribution was made as a result of free advice from Centrelink and a public offer super fund. The contribution triggered the bring forward rule for the taxpayer. Second, a $200,000 non-concessional contribution in the 2011 year under a recontribution strategy which caused the taxpayer to exceed her non-concessional cap under the bring forward rule.
The SMSF administrative penalties, rectification directions and education directions regime is now law (via the Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (2014 Measures No. 1) Act 2014). From 1 July 2014, the ATO will have the power to: - issue scaled penalties to SMSF trustees for breaches of the SIS Act (in addition to the power to make a SMSF non-compliant); - order SMSF trustees/directors to attend education courses if they have breached the SIS Act; and - order SMSF trustees to rectify breaches of the SIS Act. The Bill also introduces penalties to deter and penalise persons who promote illegal early release schemes from regulated superannuation funds.
As we previously identified (see http://tinyurl.com/mgl5z7b) the operating standard compelling SMSF trustees to hold their assets separately is a limited obligation due to the wording of the standard in regulation 4.09A of the SIS Regs. The obligation only prevents mixing of the trustee’s personal assets or those held by a standard employer sponsor (or associate of the employer sponsor).
In our previous articles on Stronger Super and SMSFs, we outlined how the SuperStream measures would affect SMSFs and that some of those obligations would commence from 1 July 2014. Subsequently, the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) has released further information, including a letter to SMSF trustees, outlining the SuperStream compliance obligations for SMSF trustees.
The former Government’s first effort at alleviating the harsh operation of the excess concessional contributions (ECCs) regime was firstly introduced with effect from 1 July 2011 (and operated for the 2011/12 and 2012/13 years). Those rules operated so that on the first occurrence of an individual having ECCs, provided such ECCs were $10,000 or less, the individual had a one off choice of having up to 85% of their ECCs refunded where that amount refunded was subject to marginal tax rates (subject to satisfying certain criteria). Given the restrictive nature of this measure, it was roundly criticised as being inadequate.
Collectables, market value reporting, separation of assets, investment strategies and 30% tax on contributions
In our first two articles on stronger super and SMSFs we set out a time line of the various stronger super and other Government changes that have affected self managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) in the last few years. In this article we look at some of those changes that commenced in the 2011/12 and 2012/13 years in more detail.
The director penalty regime has been in place since 1993 and most directors have at least a “working knowledge” of how the provisions operate and when they could become personally liable for the pay as you go (PAYG) withholding tax liabilities of their company. However, from 30 June 2012, the director penalty regime has been significantly expanded to include the superannuation guarantee obligations of the company, as well as restricting the application of some of the statutory defences.
