Disclaimer
This edited version has been archived due to the length of time since original publication. It should not be regarded as indicative of the ATO's current views. The law may have changed since original publication, and views in the edited version may also be affected by subsequent precedents and new approaches to the application of the law.

You cannot rely on this record in your tax affairs. It is not binding and provides you with no protection (including from any underpaid tax, penalty or interest). In addition, this record is not an authority for the purposes of establishing a reasonably arguable position for you to apply to your own circumstances. For more information on the status of edited versions of private advice and reasons we publish them, see PS LA 2008/4.

Edited version of private ruling

Authorisation Number: 1011902129369

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: Building Grant

Question:

Does State Treasury ('ST') make a creditable acquisition within the meaning of Division 11 of the A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 ('GST Act') when ST provides a Building Grant ('BG') to a grant recipient.

Answer:

No, ST does not make a creditable acquisition within the meaning of Division 11 of the GST Act when ST provides a BG to a grant recipient.

Relevant facts and circumstances:

In its State Budget the State Government announced the BG.

The terms of the BG will be governed by a new act of the State Parliament which is yet to be introduced into the State Parliament. The facts stated in this ruling are based on the Application Guide, Application Form and a list of Frequently Asked Questions ('FAQ') issued by ST.

Frequently Asked Questions:

The FAQ states:

Application Form and Application Guide:

Part A of the Application Form must be filled out by all applicants. Section 1 in Part A is an Eligibility Checklist which states:

and comprises eleven questions to be answered 'YES' or 'NO' by the applicant. At the foot of the questions a paragraph entitled 'Determination of Eligibility' states that an applicant who answers 'YES' to questions 1 to 6 and 'NO' to questions 7 to 11 'may' be eligible to receive the BG 'subject to the written decision being made by the Commissioner'. Question 6 in the Eligibility Checklist asks:

The Application Guide defines 'eligible transaction' as:

and Item 4 in Section 5 ('Eligibility Requirements') of the Application Guide states:

Section 2 in Part A of the Application Form deals with the applicant's details (including whether the applicant is a natural person, a company, or a trust). Section 3 in Part A deals with property and transaction details, including whether the relevant transaction is a contract of sale for the purchase of a home, a comprehensive home building contract, an owner builder, or a contract of sale for a purchase off the plan.

Section 4 of Part A of the Application Form deals with payment of the BG. If the applicant is not applying through an 'Approved Lodger' the applicant provides bank account details and ST pays the BG by electronic funds transfer into the nominated bank account. If the applicant is applying for the BG through an Approved Lodger (i.e. an organisation authorised by State Revenue to submit applications for the BG) then the Approved Lodger completes section 6 of Part A of the Application Form (in which the Approved Lodger agrees to receive the BG and hold it on trust exclusively on behalf of the Commissioner of State Revenue pending settlement of the contract of sale for the purchase of a home or payment of the scheduled first progress payment for a contract to build a new home and to apply the BG exclusively for the purpose of effecting settlement of the contract of sale or payment of the first progress payment).

Section 5 of Part A of the Application Form contains a declaration to the signed by the applicant in the presence of a qualified witness. Section 5 includes the following declarations:

The Application Guide defines 'notifiable event' follows:

(The Application Guide defines 'relevant date' to include the date on which an applicant becomes aware that the occupation/eligibility requirement will not be complied with.)

In addition to completing Part A of the Application Form, an applicant must also complete one other Part of the Application Form which is relevant to the particular transaction, i.e. Part B (contract to buy a new home), Part C (contract to build a new home), Part D (applicant is an owner builder), or Part E (applicant has agreed to buy a new home off the plan).

Ruling request:

The ruling request referred to the matters which section 11-5 of the GST Act requires to be satisfied in order for an entity to make a creditable acquisition. It was submitted that ST will make a creditable acquisition in relation to the BG only if there is a supply of something to ST which is a taxable supply (paragraph 11-5(b)) and the BG is provided as 'consideration for the supply' (paragraph 11-5(c)). This submission relied on Goods and Services Tax Ruling GSTR 2000/11 (Para 9):

It was submitted ('Argument 1') that there is no supply from a grant recipient to ST and therefore no 'supply of the thing to you' in terms of paragraph 11-5(b) of the GST Act. The ruling request referred to Proposition 6 ('supply' usually, but not necessarily, requires something to be passed from one entity to another') in Goods and Services Tax Ruling GSTR 2006/9 and set out the following submission (p. 17):

In the alternative it was submitted ('Argument 2') that if a grant recipient did make a supply to ST, there is no nexus between the BG and that supply and the BG paid by ST is not 'consideration for' a supply made by the grant recipient in terms of paragraph 11-5(c). The ruling request referred to the test in GSTR 2000/11 (Paras 79 and 89):

and to Paras 83 to 87 of GSTR 2000/11 which state that a nexus does exist between a grant and a supply by a grant recipient where the grant recipient enters into an obligation to use the grant in a manner which goes to the purpose for which the grant is made. It was submitted that this does not occur because ST acquires no right to use the new homes for the purpose of the BG, ST acquires no right to derive income from the construction or occupation of new homes, and (p. 19):

It was further submitted ('Argument 3') that, if there was a supply, the grant recipient does not 'make' that supply to ST in terms of Proposition 5 (to make a supply an entity must do something) in GSTR 2006/9 because the grant recipient does not take any action to cause ST to provide the BG. It was submitted that a grant recipient does not do anything to cause ST to provide the BG, rather the relevant statute effects the provision of the BG. The ruling request distinguished Re Hornsby Shire Council v Commissioner of Taxation [2008] AATA 1060 where it was held that a landowner did 'make' a supply of land by way of entry into an obligation and the surrender of the land when the land owner issued a notice, pursuant to a statue, requiring Hornsby Shire Council to compulsorily acquire the land. It was submitted (p. 22):

Reasons for decision:

Summary:

When a grant recipient signs the declaration on the Application Form the grant recipient makes a supply of entry into an obligation to do anything but the BG is not consideration for that supply because that obligation is not something that goes to the purpose for which the grant is made.

Detailed reasoning:

The relevant test:

The application of GST to grants of financial assistance is dealt with in Goods and Services Tax Ruling GSTR 2000/11 which states (Para 9):

and (Para 14) that there are three questions which are relevant to the issue of whether there is a 'supply for consideration' in relation to a grant:

Is there a supply?

In relation to this question, subsection 9-10(1) of the GST Act provides that a supply is any form of supply whatsoever and paragraph 9-10(2)(g)(i) provides that 'supply' includes entry into an obligation to do anything.

In the ruling request it was submitted ('Argument 1') that there was no supply by a grant recipient to ST (p. 17):

In our view this submission is contradicted by the Application Form. Section 1 in Part A of the Application Form indicates that the mere satisfaction of eligibility requirements does not automatically entitle an applicant to receive the BG. Section 1 in Part A commences:

and at the foot of the 11 questions in the eligibility checklist which the applicant is required to answer 'YES' or 'No' to:

It is clear from the extract from Section 1 of Part A of the Application Form set out above that, even where the applicant answers 'YES' to questions 1 to 6 and 'NO' to questions 7 to 11, entitlement to receive the BG is 'determined' by the Commissioner and 'subject to the written decision being made by the Commissioner' and therefore is not 'automatic' as submitted in the ruling request.

Furthermore, the Commissioner requires a 'completed application' prior to determining eligibility, which means that the applicant is required to make the declarations in Section 5 in Part A of the Application Form before the Commissioner determines eligibility. Those declarations include:

These provisions contradict the submission in the ruling request that 'nothing passes from the grant recipient to ST'. By signing the declaration in Section 5 in Part A of the Application Form, a grant recipient enters into 'an obligation to do anything' in terms of paragraph 9-10(2)(g) (i) of the GST Act, i.e. an undertaking to notify the Commissioner of State Revenue and repay the BG to ST in the event that the home is not occupied as a place of residence for a period of at least 3 months during the year after completion of the 'eligible transaction'.

In relation to a supply of entry into an obligation, GSTR 2006/9 refers (Para 36) to Paras 26 to 36 of GSTR 2000/11 which discuss transactions which are supplies of rights or obligations. GSTR 2000/11 states (Paras 33, 34 and 36):

In our view an applicant who signs the Application Form makes a supply of entry into an obligation which binds the parties, as required by GSTR 2000/11 - the applicant specifically undertakes in Section 5 of Part A of the Application Form to notify ST and repay the BG if the home is not occupied as a residence for at least three months (whether or not continuous) during the year after completion of the eligible transaction.

The ruling request also included a submission ('Argument 3', p. 22) that an applicant for a BG does not do something and therefore does not 'make' a supply, relying on Proposition 5 in GSTR 2006/9, 'to make a supply an entity must do something'. GSTR 2006/9 states (Para 74) that an entity 'makes' a supply 'if the entity takes some action to cause a supply to occur' and rejects the proposition that Westley Nominees Pty Ltd v. Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Ltd 2006 ATC 4363 held that a supply can be brought about by operation of law in the absence of an entity taking positive action.(Para 78):

Thus the ATO considers (per GSTR 2006/9, Para 78) that that there is a supply where an entity does something as a consequence of a legal requirement and where an action by an entity results in obligations arising by operation of law. As noted above, Section 1 in Part A of the Application Form states that the Commissioner of State Revenue determines eligibility for the BG after receiving a 'completed application', i.e. after the applicant has signed Section 5 in Part A in which the applicant specifically declares that the applicant gives the undertaking in item 2:

In our view the applicant gives this undertaking as a consequence of a legal requirement of the BG scheme. Furthermore it is clear from Item 8 in Section 5 in Part A that the action by the applicant of giving that undertaking results in an obligation arising by operation of law:

Is there consideration?

The second question in GSTR 2000/11 (Para 14) is whether there is consideration. Paragraph 11-5(c) of the GST Act provides that an entity makes a creditable acquisition if that entity provides, or is liable to provide, consideration for the corresponding taxable supply. Section 195-1 of the GST Act provides that 'consideration' means any consideration within the meaning given by section 9-15 in connection with the acquisition and subsection 9-15(1) provides that consideration includes any payment in connection with a supply of anything and in response to or for the inducement of a supply of anything. We consider that the BG is a payment and therefore consideration. The ruling request did not appear to dispute this, but included a submission that the BG was not consideration 'for the supply'.

Is the supply made for consideration of the grant?

The ruling request included a submission ('Argument 2', p. 19) that there was no nexus between the BG and a supply as:

We agree with that submission.

Paragraph 11-5(c) of the GST Act requires an entity to provide 'consideration for the supply' in order to make a creditable acquisition. GSTR 2000/11 discusses (Para 71) the requirement in paragraph 9-5(a) that, in order to make a taxable supply, an entity must make 'the supply for consideration' and states that there must be some nexus between supply and consideration.

GSTR 2000/11 (Paras 85 to 88) discusses the nexus test where a grant recipient supplies an entry into an obligation and states that a grant will have a sufficient nexus with such a supply if the obligation is something which goes to the purpose for which the grant is made:

In the present case the FAQ indicates the purpose for which the BG is made:

A Budget Paper included in the State Budget provides further insight:

and a Ministerial Media Statement issued by the State Premier in 2011 refers to boosting the housing construction sector and boosting jobs.

In our view these documents support the submission in the ruling request (p. 19) that the object of the BG is to provide a boost to [ ]'s housing construction sector.

The obligation entered into by a grant recipient (i.e. the undertaking in Section 5 in Part A of the Application Form to notify the Commissioner of State Revenue and repay the BG in the event that the home is not occupied as a place of residence for a period of at least 3 months during the year after completion of the 'eligible transaction') appears to be intended to ensure that the BG generates jobs in that housing construction sector. In our view, however, that obligation is not something which goes to the purpose for which the grant is made in the sense required by GSTR 2000/11 (Para 86).

As stated above, the purpose of the BG is to boost the housing construction sector. The BG would be 'consideration for' a supply made by the grant recipient if the grant recipient gave an undertaking to apply the BG to the cost of purchasing or constructing home because such an obligation would be something which goes to the purpose for which the grant is made. However the Application Form does not suggest that a grant recipient enters into such an obligation. Where a grant recipient applies directly to the Office of State Revenue for the BG the grant recipient completes Section 4 in Part A and the BG is paid by electronic funds into the grant recipient's nominated bank account and it will be up to the grant recipient to determine how to spend the funds received. Where an application for a BG is made through an Approved Lodger, the BG is paid to the Approved Lodger who holds it on trust on behalf of the Commissioner of State Revenue and must apply it exclusively to settlement of the contract of sale for the purchase of a home or the first progress payment for a contract to build a home (Section 6, Part A, Application Form). In our view these provisions in the Application Form are designed to ensure that the BG remains separate from the Approved Issuer's assets in the event of the Approved Issuer's insolvency and to ensure that the Approved Lodger applies the BG to the grant recipient's benefit at the earliest opportunity. We do not consider that these provisions in the Application Form create an obligation which goes to the purpose for which the grant is made in the sense required by GSTR 2000/11.

For the reasons set out above we consider that the BG is distinguishable from Example 2 in GSTR 2000/11(Paras 110-111) which sets out a case where a grant recipient does enter into an obligation that goes to the purpose for which the grant is made:

In Example 2 the grant recipient enters into an obligation to spend the grant developing and presenting dance performances, which goes to the purpose of the grant (i.e. fostering of the arts). In the case of the BG, a grant recipient does not enter into an obligation to spend the grant in a way which boosts the housing construction sector.


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).