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This edited version has been archived due to the length of time since original publication.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: 1012158556166

Ruling

Subject: Fringe benefits tax and acquisition of dwelling on relocation

Question 1

Is the reimbursement of a bank fee incurred by your employee that is applied by the bank to acquire mortgage insurance a benefit that is exempt under section 58C of the Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986?

Answer

Yes

This ruling applies for the following period:

Year ended 31 March 2012

The scheme commences on:

December 2011

Relevant facts and circumstances

This ruling is based on the facts stated in the description of the scheme that is set out below. If your circumstances are materially different from these facts, this ruling has no effect and you cannot rely on it. The fact sheet has more information about relying on your private ruling.

At the time you offered your employee employment with you, the employee was living at her/his usual place of residence overseas.

Your employee relocated to Australia. Your employee purchased and occupied a place of residence in Australia. The date of the purchase was approximately six months from commencement of employment.

Your employee will be selling the residence overseas. The employee is aware of the requirement to sell the former residence within two years of commencing employment.

You reimbursed your employee's expense incurred in paying a bank fee which is applied by the bank to acquire mortgage insurance for itself with no benefit to the borrower.

The borrower's loan application confirmed that the former family home has significant equity however this will not be realised until it is sold. This meant that the borrowers did not have the funds at the time of purchase of the residence in Australia to contribute 20% of the purchase price from their own resources.

In circumstances where a borrower does not contribute 20% of the purchase price of the home, the bank offers loan funds on terms which include a condition that the borrower pays a bank fee. That bank fee can be comprised of a range of components and in where the borrowers do not contribute 20% of the purchase price the fee includes a component that reflects that the bank will obtain mortgage insurance for itself in connection with the transaction.

The borrowers sought to negotiate the quantum of the bank fee however the bank's position is not subject to negotiation. The provision of finance by the bank for the purchase of the home in Australia was strictly conditional on the borrowers paying this fee to the bank at or before the advance of the funds at settlement of the purchase.

The borrowers have no contact or communication with the providers of mortgage insurance as this is exclusively a transaction between the bank and their provider. The mortgage insurance contract solely benefits the bank.

According to a document from the bank, the fee is taken from the credit made available to the borrower and is payable to the bank. It is described as being 'in relation to credit fees and charges'.

Your employee has entered into a salary sacrifice arrangement whereby an amount per fortnight will be sacrificed until the total amount of the reimbursement is satisfied.

Relevant legislative provisions

Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 Section 58C,

Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 Subsection 136(1) and

Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 Section 141A.

Reasons for decision

While these reasons are not part of the private ruling, we provide them to help you to understand how we reached our decision.

In order for the provision of a benefit to be exempt under section 58C of the Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 (FBTAA), a number of preconditions must be met in subsection (1):

Your employee owns a home overseas in which the employee was living at the time when you first made notification that to commence employment with you. Your employee intends to sell this place of residence. Therefore the preconditions in subsection 58C(1) of the FBTAA are satisfied.

Further conditions in subsection 58C(3) of the FBTAA must be satisfied for benefits in connection with the acquisition of a property to be exempt. That subsection states:

Where:

Your employee has purchased a residence in Australia as a result of employment with you. Your employee purchased that residence approximately six months after commencing employment with you and lives there. Therefore paragraphs (a) to (c) and (d) of subsection 58C(3) of the FBTAA are satisfied.

You will also satisfy paragraph 58C(3)(ca) of the FBTAA as:

Please note: if the employee fails to sell their old dwelling within two years of commencing employment, the benefit will become fringe benefits tax liable in the year of tax in which the period of two years since commencing employment expires.

You have reimbursed the expense your employee incurred in paying a bank fee. The reimbursement is an expense payment benefit. In order to determine if paragraph 58C(3)(e) of the FBTAA is satisfied we need to consider whether your employee's expenditure was incidental to the acquisition of the residence.

Under paragraph 141A (1)(b) of the FBTAA expenditure will be expenditure that is incidental to the purchase of a residence if the expenditure is in respect of any of the following matters:

According to paragraph 141A(1)(c) it does not include:

Out of the credit provided by the bank to your employee, an amount was deducted by the bank which is described as being in relation to credit fees and charges. Your employee thus incurred this expense.

Although it is for the purposes of the bank obtaining mortgage insurance, it is still considered to be an expense of borrowing as it is of a capital nature and your employee was required to pay it in order to obtain the loan from the bank.

Therefore paragraph 58C(3)(e) of the FBTAA is satisfied.

Paragraph 58C(3)(f) of the FBTAA does not apply, however paragraph 58C(3)(g) of the FBTAA does. It is satisfied because your employee provided you with documentary evidence of the expense prior to the declaration date, being 21 May 2012.

The final condition to be considered is in paragraph 58C(3)(h) of the FBTAA.

In subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA the expression 'non-arm's length arrangement' is defined to mean an arrangement other than an arm's length arrangement. The term 'arm's length arrangement' is not defined in the FBTAA. However subsection 136(1) of the FBTAA defines 'arm's length transaction' to mean a transaction where the parties to the transaction are dealing with each other at arm's length in relation to the transaction.

The expression 'at arm's length' is defined in The CCH Macquarie Concise Dictionary of Modern Law , 1988, CCH Australia Ltd/ Macquarie Library Pty Ltd, Sydney, as meaning that the parties to a transaction are not connected in such a way as to bring into question the ability of one to act independently of the other.

In Granby Pty Ltd v. FCT (1995) 30 ATR 400; 95 ATC 4240, where the expression 'dealing with each other at arm's length' in section 160ZH of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 was in question, Lee J said (at ATR 403; ATC 4243):

Although you and your employee are not at arm's length, this alone does not mean that the benefit was not provided under a non-arm's length arrangement.

Your employee changed residence to Australia in order to perform duties of employment with you. The expense incurred was in order to purchase a place the residence in Australia. The provision of the benefit is a result of this, which is considered an arm's length transaction. Consequently, paragraph 58C(3)(h) of the FBTAA is satisfied.

Since all of the relevant conditions in subsection 58C(3) of the FBTAA and the preconditions in subsection 58C(1) of the FBTAA have been met, the reimbursement of the expense incurred by your employee will be exempt.


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).