Edited version of private ruling

Authorisation Number: 1011539717446

This edited version of your ruling will be published in the public Register of private binding rulings after 28 days from the issue date of the ruling. The attached private rulings fact sheet has more information.

Please check this edited version to be sure that there are no details remaining that you think may allow you to be identified. Contact us at the address given in the fact sheet if you have any concerns.

Ruling

Subject: Capital gains tax - compensation receipts

Question 1

Is the equity component of the compensation payment that you received additional capital proceeds?

Answer

Yes.

Question 2

Is the interest component of the compensation amount that you received assessable as income?

Answer

Yes.

This ruling applies for the following period

Year ended 30 June 2009.

Year ended 30 June 2010.

The scheme commenced on

1 July 2008.

Relevant facts and circumstances

Relevant facts

You and your spouse were clients of entity Q and received financial advice from entity Q.

On the advice of entity Q and with entity Q's assistance you applied for a margin loan from entity S' entity X division. The margin loan was approved by entity X and the margin loan was advanced to you. The margin loan was secured by various stocks and investments purchased with the proceeds of the margin loan. The security may have included units in a entity Q branded index fund for which the responsible entity was the entity S or one of its related bodies corporate.

Your investments with entity Q were sold by the bank or its related bodies corporate.

You have, either directly or through your lawyers made a claim against the bank for compensation concerning the circumstances of the margin loan and/or the security and repayment of indebtedness under the margin loan.

The parties have participated in a dispute resolution process known as the entity Q Resolution Scheme (the scheme) on the terms set out in the Borrower Deed.

By participating in the scheme the parties agreed to:

· the payment of the Settlement Sum by the bank to you;

· the closure or variation of the margin loan as set out in the Deed, and

· the releases which are set out in the Deed.

In a letter of a certain date the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (entity S) confirmed details of your entitlement under the settlement deed and enclosed a bank cheque of $((A+B+C+D+E) + (a certain amount representing the Home Loan Offer Amount)).

The Deed provided for a settlement amount of $A+B+C+D+E which comprised:

Relevant legislative provisions

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 6-5,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Subsection 6-5(1),

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Subsection 6-5(2),

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 104-10,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 104-25,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 104-25(1),

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 108-5 and

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 116-20.

Reasons for decision

Question 1

Summary

The equity component of the compensation payment that you received is considered additional capital proceeds.

Detailed reasoning

Capital gains tax (CGT) consequences - equity component

The general CGT provisions are set out in Part 3-1 of the ITAA 1997. Under the CGT provisions a taxpayer will make a capital gain or loss only if a CGT event happens.

To determine if a CGT event happens in respect of a compensation payment it is necessary to consider the nature of the asset to which the compensation payment relates.

The Commissioner's policy on the treatment of compensation payments is set out in Taxation Ruling TR 95/35 (capital gains: treatment of compensation receipts).

TR 95/35 states that the particular asset for which compensation has been received by the taxpayer may be:

· an underlying asset;

· a right to seek compensation; or

· a notional asset in terms of subsection 160M(7) - (section 104-155 of the ITAA 1997).

(TR 95/35 provides legislative reverences that relate to the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 . The equivalent provisions in the ITAA 1997 are cited where appropriate.)

In determining which is the most relevant asset it is often appropriate to adopt a 'look through' approach to the transaction or arrangement which generates the compensation receipt.

In TR 95/35 the term 'underlying asset' is used. The underlying asset is defined in TR 95/35 as:

the asset that, using the 'look-through' approach, is disposed of or has suffered permanent damage or has been permanently reduced in value because of some act, happening, transaction, occurrence or event which has resulted in a right to seek compensation from the person or entity causing that damage or loss in value or against any other person or entity.

If there is more than one underlying asset, the relevant underlying asset is the asset which leads directly to the payment of the amount of compensation. For example, if a taxpayer receives an amount of compensation for the destruction of his or her truck, the truck is the underlying asset.

Taxation Ruling TR 97/3 also discusses compensation and deals with compensation received by landowners from public authorities. It explains at paragraph 2 that it extends the application of TR 95/35 and should be read in conjunction with that ruling.

Paragraphs 4 to 8 of TR 97/3 discuss the compensation received from a public authority for the compulsory acquisition of an easement and states that:-

4. Compensation in respect of an easement created by statute in favour of a public authority cannot be said to have been received for the grant of the easement. The Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW) and similar Acts in other jurisdictions enable public authorities to take land or an interest in land (including an easement) for specified purposes and confer on the affected landowner a right to compensation. In these circumstances, the landowner cannot be said to have created an asset as required for subsection 160M(6) of the Act (now includes 104-35 of the ITAA 1997) to apply. The easement is created by operation of the relevant statute and is vested in the public authority. This constitutes a compulsory acquisition of the easement.

5. The compensation received by a landowner from a public authority that compulsorily acquires an easement is not excluded from the scope of TR 95/35 by paragraph 2 of that Ruling which states that:

'This Ruling does not consider:

amounts received for the grant of easements, profits a prendre and licences - these are covered in detail in Taxation Ruling IT 2561 and in Taxation Determinations TD 93/235 and TD 93/236'.

6. A strict application of Part IIIA would require the compensation received from a public authority to be treated as consideration in respect of the disposal by the landowner of the right to compensation. However, TR 95/35 focuses on the asset to which the compensation receipt most directly relates. In the case of easements acquired under statute and the consequential disposal of the right to compensation, the most relevant asset is the landowner's pre-existing land with its rights of ownership including, for example, a right to exclude all others. This right to exclude all others is forfeited in part when the easement comes into existence. The loss of part of this right constitutes the disposal of part of the underlying asset (the land) for Part IIIA purposes (paragraph 160M(3)(b) (now 104-25(1) of the ITAA 1997), subsection 160M(1) (now 104-10(2) and 109-5(1) of the ITAA 1997) and section 160R (now 108-5(2)(a) of the ITAA 1997).

7. Paragraph 4 of TR 95/35 states that:

If an amount of compensation is received by a taxpayer wholly in respect of the disposal of an underlying asset, or part of an underlying asset, of the taxpayer the compensation represents consideration received on the disposal of that asset. In these circumstances, we consider that the amount is not consideration received for the disposal of any other asset, such as the right to seek compensation.

8. Applying this approach, an amount of compensation received by a landowner for the loss of part of the rights of ownership is accepted as being consideration received in respect of the part disposal of the underlying asset (the land). The amount is not consideration for disposal of the right to seek compensation.

The ruling also considers a number of other circumstances when a landowner grants an easement on their land and in all but one instance the amount received is treated as consideration in respect of the part disposal of the land.

To the extent that the payment relates to the disposal of an underlying asset, CGT event A1 under section 104-10 of the ITAA 1997 happens.

This case:

You and your spouse were clients of entity Q. You and your spouse applied for and were granted a margin loan from the entity S's entity X division. The margin loan was used to acquire various stocks and investments. It may have included units in a entity Q branded index fund for which the responsible entity was the entity S or one of its related bodies such as entity X.

Some time later the entity S determined that you and your spouse's historical current loan to security ratio had exceeded its historical margin call loan-to-security ratio. The entity S did not sell your investments until after it determined that your loan had exceeded its loan to security ratio.

Either, you and your spouse or through your lawyers you and your spouse have made a claim against the entity S for compensation concerning the circumstances surrounding the margin call and/or the security and the repayment of indebtedness under the margin call. You and your spouse were made an offer by the entity S and in a letter of a certain date the entity S confirmed that it had received your executed Deed of Settlement and all related loan documentation in relation to your acceptance of the Bank's Proposal under the scheme. The settlement deed agreed to pay you and your spouse compensation of $A and interest of $D. You and your spouse were also paid an amount of representing the Home Loan Offer Amount.

On the facts of this case, it is considered that the compensation received had a direct and substantial link with the underlying asset (the investments). Accordingly, in line with the guidelines provided in paragraph 4 of TR 95/35 and TR 97/3 it is considered that the compensation amount was received as part of the underlying asset and it was not received for the disposal of any other asset, such as the right to seek compensation. The amount of $A is therefore accepted as consideration received for the disposal of the underlying assets and CGT event A1 in section 104-10 of the ITAA 1997 occurred when your investments were sold.

Note: As the compensation amount of $A is considered additional capital proceeds you will need to amend any capital gain or capital loss made in relation to the CGT events that happened when your investments were sold by the bank or its related body corporate. You will need to apportion the additional capital proceeds, firstly in line with your ownership interest in the original investments sold by entity Q, (you jointly owned the investments with your spouse) and then secondly on a pro-rata basis to every CGT event that happened. As the CGT events may have occurred in the financial years you may need to request an amendment to the already lodged income tax return for the earlier year to reflect the increase in capital proceeds to any CGT events that happened in that year.

Question 2

Summary

The interest component of the compensation amount that you received is assessable as income.

Detailed reasoning

The second part of this request involves the question of whether the interest paid by the entity S is assessable to the taxpayer. This is discussed in paragraph 26 of TR 95/35 when it states that:-

Interest awarded as part of a compensation amount is assessable income of the taxpayer under the general income provisions. If the taxpayer receives an undissected lump sum compensation amount and the interest cannot be separately identified and segregated out of that receipt, no part of that receipt can be said to represent interest. If the compensation cannot be dissected it is likely that the whole amount relates to the disposal of the right to seek compensation.

In this instance the interest is separately identified and segregated out of the lump sum and as such is assessable income of the taxpayer under the general income provisions in section 6-5 of the ITAA 1997.

Note: The interest amount will need to be apportioned in line with your ownership interest in the original investments sold by entity Q, (i.e. interest income is apportioned between you and your spouse).

Copyright notice

© Australian Taxation Office for the Commonwealth of Australia

You are free to copy, adapt, modify, transmit and distribute material on this website as you wish (but not in any way that suggests the ATO or the Commonwealth endorses you or any of your services or products).