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This edited version has been archived due to the length of time since original publication.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 your private ruling

Authorisation Number: 1012006314132

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. If you have any concerns about this ruling you wish to discuss, you will find our contact details in the fact sheet.

Ruling

Subject: Fringe benefits tax: in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit

Question 1

Does the reimbursement of the expenses incurred by your employees or their associates constitute an expense payment fringe benefit for the purposes of section 20 of the Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 (FBTAA)?

Answer

Yes

Question 2

If the answer to Question 1 is "Yes", is the taxable value of any resultant expense payment fringe benefit calculated under subsection 22A(2) of the FBTAA an in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit?

Answer

Yes

Question 3

If the answer to Question 2 is "Yes", is the taxable value under subsection 22A(2) of the FBTAA determined in accordance with section 48 of the FBTAA?

Answer

Yes

Question 4

If the answer to Question 2 is "Yes", will the taxable value of the in-house residual expense payment fringe benefits be included in the sum of the taxable values of the fringe benefits to which the reduction in section 62 of the FBTAA applies?

Answer

Yes

This ruling applies for the following periods:

Year ended 31 March 2012

Year ended 31 March 2013

Year ended 31 March 2014

Year ended 31 March 2015

Year ended 31 March 2016

The scheme commences on:

1 April 2011

Relevant facts and circumstances

You are a distribution company.

You are associated with a retail company.

You are also associated with companies that manufacture the product that you distribute.

There are other unrelated manufacturers and retailers who operate in the market.

You allow your employees to salary sacrifice an amount per year towards the reimbursement of the costs incurred in purchasing the product you distribute.

The employees may purchase the product from the associated retailer. However, they may purchase the product from a retailer that is not an associate.

Relevant legislative provisions

Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 Section 20

Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 Subsection 22A(2)

Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 Section 45

Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 Section 46

Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 Section 48

Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 Section 62

Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 Subsection 136(1)

Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 Section 149

Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 Section 318

Reasons for decision

1. Does the reimbursement of the expenses incurred by your employees or their associates constitute an expense payment fringe benefit for the purposes of section 20 of the Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 (FBTAA)?

Section 20 of the FBTAA states:

As you will reimburse your employees (or associate) for the cost of their expenses the benefit will be an expense payment fringe benefit under paragraph 20(b) of the FBTAA.

2. If the answer to Question 1 is "Yes", is the taxable value of any resultant expense payment fringe benefit calculated under subsection 22A(2) of the FBTAA as an "in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit?

Subdivision B of Division 5 of the FBTAA provides two alternative methods for calculating the taxable value of an expense payment fringe benefit. The appropriate method depends upon whether the fringe benefit is:

What is an 'in-house expense payment fringe benefit'?

Subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA defines an in-house expense payment fringe benefit as:

Both of these terms are also defined in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA. In broad terms:

As the expenditure did not involve the purchase of goods the relevant definition to consider is that of an 'in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit'.

Is the payment or reimbursement an 'in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit'?

Subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA defines an in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit, in relation to an employer to mean:

Therefore an 'in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit' requires that:

These criteria are discussed below.

(a) Will the fringe benefit be an expense payment fringe benefit?

As discussed previously the reimbursement will be an expense payment fringe benefit.

(b) Will the employee's expenditure be incurred on the provision of a residual benefit?

For the benefit to be an in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit the expenditure must relate to a residual benefit which is defined in section 45 of the FBTAA to be a benefit that is not a benefit by virtue of any provision of Subdivision A of Divisions 2 to 11 inclusive of the FBTAA.

As set out above, the expenditure incurred by the employees (or associate) will be in respect of a residual benefit.

(c) Is the provider of the residual benefit the employer or an associate of the employer, or did the residual benefit provider purchase the benefit from the employer or an associate of the employer?

For this requirement to be satisfied either:

Is the provider of the residual benefit the employer, or an associate of the employer?

The "residual benefit provider" is the person who provides the benefit to the employee.

This will either be an associated company, or an unrelated company that is not an associate.

Therefore, in considering whether the reimbursement is an in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit it is necessary to consider paragraph (b) of the in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit definition if the employee has purchased the product from the associated retailer and paragraph (c) for the other retailers.

Are the requirements of subparagraph (b) of the definition of 'in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit satisfied in relation to the product provided to an employee by the associated retailer?

The reimbursement of the cost of the product purchased by an employee from the associated retailer will be an in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit if the associated retailer at the comparison time carried on a business that consisted of or included the provision of identical or similar benefits principally to outsiders.

Does the associate retailer carry on a business?

Guidance for considering whether EEQ is carrying on a business is provided by Taxation Ruling TR 97/11 Income tax: am I carrying on a business of primary production?

Paragraph 13 of TR 97/11 lists the following indicators that are relevant in determining whether the activities constitute the carrying on of a business:

In view of the information provided it is accepted that the associated retailer satisfies these requirements.

Is the product provided principally to outsiders?

The meaning of 'principally' is also not defined in the FBTAA. However, at page 52 in the ATO publication Income tax guide for non-profit organisations (NAT 7967-3.2007) 'principally' is stated to mean 'mainly or chiefly' and that 'less than 50% is not principally'. Therefore, under such guidance, 'principally' may be regarded to mean 'more than 50%' or, alternatively, 'more than half, of the time'.

'Outsider' is defined in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA as being:

(d) an associate of an employee to whom any of the preceding paragraphs apply.

Therefore, an 'outsider' is someone who is not an employee of the relevant employer, not an employee of an associate of that employer, not an employee of someone who provides benefits to the employees of either that employer or that employer's associate under an arrangement between them and also not to any associates of these latterly mentioned employees.

On the basis of the information provided it is accepted that these requirements are met.

Therefore, paragraph (b) of the definition of in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit will be satisfied in relation to the reimbursement of expenses incurred by an employee in purchasing the product from the associated retailer.

Are the requirements of subparagraph (c) of the definition of 'in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit satisfied in relation to the product provided to an employee by the other retailers?

As the other retailers are not the employer, or an associate of the employer the relevant requirements to consider are those contained in paragraph (c) of subsection136 (1) of the FBTAA which defines "in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit".

Paragraph (c) contains two subparagraphs that must be satisfied. Reference is made to paragraphs 34 to 39 of Class Ruling CR 2011/71 Fringe benefits tax: NSW State Owned Electricity Corporations that reimburse their employee's domestic electricity expenses which state:

For the same reasons as set out in this extract, it is accepted that the other retailers purchase the product that is provided to the employees from an associate of the employer. Therefore, it is accepted that subparagraph (c)(i) will be satisfied.

Subparagraph (c)(ii) states:

This subparagraph requires a consideration of whether the 'residual benefit provider' and the 'seller':

The 'residual benefit provider' will be the retailer that provided the electricity to the employee.

'Seller' is defined in subparagraph (c)(i) as being the employer or associate from which the "residual benefit provider" purchased the benefit. This will be the State owned corporations that sold the electricity on the NEM.

Do the associated manufacturers and the other retailers carry on a business that consists of the provision of identical or similar benefits principally to outsiders?

On the basis of the information provided it is accepted that the associated manufacturers and the other retailers carry on a business that consists of the provision of identical or similar benefits principally to outsiders.

Therefore, the requirements in both subparagraphs of paragraph (c) are met in relation to the product purchased by an employee from the other retailers.

(d) Will documentary evidence of the employee's (or associates) expenditure be obtained from the employee?

Documentary evidence is defined in subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA as:

This requirement will be met as employees seeking reimbursement of their costs will be required to provide evidence of the expenditure incurred.

Therefore, as each of the conditions contained within the definition of in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit are satisfied the reimbursement of the employee's (or associates) expenses will be an in-house residual expense payment fringe benefit.

3. If the answer to Question 2 is "Yes", is the taxable value under subsection 22A(2) of the FBTAA determined in accordance with section 48 of the FBTAA?

Subsection 22A(2) of the FBTAA states (as relevant here):

In calculating what would have been the taxable value if the benefit had been a residual benefit the valuation rules in section 48 are used where the benefit is a non-period benefit. If the benefit is a period benefit the valuation rules in section 49 are used.

Section 149 of the FBTAA provides the test which is used to determine whether a benefit is provided during a period. Subsection 149(1) states:

However, subsection 46(2) of the FBTAA states that where residual benefit (not being a residual benefit constituting either a lease or a licence in respect of property) is provided on a regular billing basis and identical benefits are provided to the public in the ordinary course of the provider's business, the provision of the residual benefit during each billing period constitutes a separate benefit deemed to have been provided at the time the payment in respect of each billing period becomes due and payable.

As the residual benefits are provided on a regular billing basis the provision of the benefits during each billing period will be deemed to have been provided at the time the payment in respect of the billing period becomes due and payable.

As the relevant benefits are not period benefits, they cannot be "in-house period residual fringe benefit".

Therefore, the relevant method for valuing the benefits is that contained within section 48 of the FBTAA.

Section 48 states;

The relevant benefits will be valued under section 48 of the FBTAA as "in-house non-period residual fringe benefits" as all the necessary requirements are met.

4. If the answer to Question 2 is "Yes", will the taxable value of the in-house residual expense payment fringe benefits be included in the sum of the taxable values of the fringe benefits to which the reduction in section 62 of the FBTAA applies?

Subsection 62(1) of the FBTAA states:

The term 'eligible fringe benefits' is defined under subsection 62(2) of the FBTAA to mean 'an in-house fringe benefit or an airline transport fringe benefit".

An 'in-house fringe benefit is defined under subsection 136(1) to mean:

As the reimbursement is an in-house expense payment fringe benefit the taxable value will come within section 62 of the FBTAA.

Miscellaneous Taxation Ruling MT 2044 discusses whether the reduction of the taxable value available under section 62 of the FBTAA applies to associates.

Paragraph 5 of MT 2044 states:

Paragraph 6 concludes that in view of the above the reduction available under section 62 applies in respect of the total benefits provided to each employee and their associates. However, it should be noted that where an employee and their associates receive more than one eligible benefit the reduction is not applied to each benefit. Rather, the reduction applies to the total value of the eligible fringe benefits provided to an employee and their associates.


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).