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This edited version has been archived due to the length of time since original publication.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: 1012402539353

Ruling

Subject: GST and entitlement to input tax credits

Question 1

Is Entity A entitled to a decreasing adjustment under Division 132 of the A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 (GST Act) arising from the sale of the Australian property assets to Entity B calculated in accordance with subsection 132-5(2) of the GST Act?

Answer

Yes, Entity A is entitled to a decreasing adjustment under Division 132 of the GST Act arising from the sale of the Australian property assets to Entity B calculated in accordance with subsection 132-5(2) of the GST Act.

Question 2

Will the Commissioner seek to apply Division 165 of the GST Act in relation to any ITC or decreasing adjustment which arises as a result of the relevant sales referred to in Question 1 above?

Answer

No, the Commissioner will not seek to apply Division 165 of the GST Act in relation to any ITC or decreasing adjustment which arises as a result of the relevant sales referred to in Question 1 above.

Relevant facts and circumstances

· Entity A is registered for the goods and services tax (GST).

· The enterprise activities carried on by Entity A include making input taxed supplies.

· Entity A is the representative member of a GST Group.

· Entity B is a subsidiary of Entity A.

· Entity B is registered for GST.

· Entity A and Entity B are not members of the same GST group.

· Australian property assets are predominantly held within Entity A, the parent company of the economic group of entities.

· Entity A has acquired property assets in relation to which input tax credits have not been claimed in full. GST was payable on the acquisition of the property assets. The restriction on input tax credits arises under section 11-15 of the A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 (GST Act) as those acquisitions relate in part to the making of input taxed supplies by Entity A (and/or the GST Group of which Entity A is the representative member).

· Entity A has identified an opportunity to create a new Property Operating Company model for managing property assets in Australia. The change will provide a more financially effective commercial model for managing assets.

· Entity B, as the Property Operating Company, will be providing property management services to the group of entities and Entity A will pay management fees to Entity B for those services.

· A project team was formed to manage and provide governance around the development of the concept of a centralised property operating model.

· The new operating model will be implemented over a number of phases.

· All property assets currently owned within the group (with the exception of Entity A's leasehold interests) are to be owned by a single entity, namely Entity B.

· The intention of this initiative is to extend this model across the Australian geography for those assets currently held within Entity A and expand the scope of services that Entity B provides to Entity A.

· Under the proposed arrangement, Entity A will make a supply of all the property assets (with the exception of entity A's leasehold interests) held in Entity A to Entity B. The supply will be by way of a sale and will satisfy the conditions of a taxable supply under Division 9 of the GST Act.

· The purchase of the assets by Entity B will be funded through a formal inter-company loan account from Entity A.

· It is anticipated that the assets will be acquired by Entity B at their current written down value.

· The current estimate of the value of the assets to be transferred would result in a decreasing adjustment.

· Entity A is also currently the tenant of leased premises (Entity A's property leases).

· As a result of a risk review, Entity A believes that the objectives of the establishment of a Property Operating Company model and a more cost effective/lower risk implementation can be achieved without assigning the rights under the leases to Entity B.

· Entity A will not assign any of its rights under its property leases. Instead, Entity B will manage Entity A's property leases (including negotiating contracts, maintenance relationships, etc) and occupancy costs as an agent for Entity A.

· There are a number of significant challenges in relation to the property asset portfolio. The most critical is that the structuring of property assets within the group in the past has not necessarily been optimised from a commercial perspective. It is anticipated that this property operating model would provide strategic alternatives for the economic group. Specifically, it will provide:

· It is anticipated that through its management service agreement with Entity A, this arrangement will deliver some savings to the economic group.

· While Entity B can perform property management services for other entities in the group without owning those assets, this does not achieve all the outcomes or objectives of the strategy. For instance, capital optimisation, governance and risk management through a central Board can only be achieved by streamlining the legal entity structure and having a single owner of property assets and services.

· The scope of this ruling request covers property assets held by Entity A or other members of the GST group and Entity A's leases with third party landlords. This ruling does not cover a sale of freehold interest in land.

· The property assets that are the subject of this ruling request are the leasehold improvements, furniture, fittings and other business assets.

· The property assets that are the subject of this ruling request are those assets acquired on and after the introduction of GST on 1 July 2000 on which full input tax credits have not been claimed either upon acquisition or through subsequent adjustments.

Relevant legislative provisions

A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 section 9-5;

A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 Division 132;

A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 subsection 132-5(1);

A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 subsection 132-5(2);

A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 Division 165;

A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 paragraph 165-10(1)(d);

A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 subsection 165-10(2); and

A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 subsection 165-15(1).

Reasons for decision

Question 1

Is Entity A entitled to a decreasing adjustment under Division 132 of the A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 (GST Act) arising from the sale of the Australian property assets calculated in accordance with subsection 132-5(2) of the GST Act?

Summary

Entity A is entitled to a decreasing adjustment under Division 132 of the GST Act arising from the sale of the Australian property assets to Entity B calculated in accordance with subsection 132-5(2) of the GST Act.

Detailed reasoning

Division 132 of the GST Act provides that an entity may have a decreasing adjustment where an entity makes a supply of something that was originally acquired or imported for making financial supplies or for a private or domestic purpose, in the circumstances set out in that Division. If an entity is entitled to a decreasing adjustment under Division 132 of the GST Act, the amount of the decreasing adjustment is calculated using the formula contained in subsection 132-5(2) of the GST Act.

Pursuant to subsection 132-5 (1) of the GST Act, an entity has a decreasing adjustment if the following conditions are met:

An entity makes a taxable supply under section 9-5 of the GST Act if all the following conditions are met:

However, a supply is not a taxable supply to the extent that it is GST-free or input taxed.

Entity A has advised that the supply of the relevant Australian property assets (comprised of leasehold improvements, furniture, fittings and freehold assets) to Entity B will be by way of sale and will be a taxable supply under Division 9 of the GST Act.

The Commissioner's view on the application of Division 132 of the GST Act is contained in Goods and Services Tax Ruling GSTR 2004/8: Goods and services tax: when does an entity have a decreasing adjustment under Division 132? (GSTR 2004/8).

For an entitlement to a decreasing adjustment under Division 132 of the GST Act to arise, an entity needs to have been entitled, at least to some extent, to an input tax credit on the acquisition of the thing, if not for the acquisition or application of the thing being related to making financial supplies or of a private or domestic nature. This entails that at least some GST must have been payable on the supply of the thing to the entity.

The relevant property assets that were acquired by Entity A on and after the commencement of GST were acquisitions in relation to which Entity A has not been entitled to claim full input tax credits. The reason for the denial of full input tax credits was because the acquisitions related in part or in full to the making of financial supplies by Entity A. As such, Entity A will be entitled to a decreasing adjustment under Division 132 of the GST Act when it makes a taxable supply upon selling these property assets. The amount of the decreasing adjustment is calculated using the formula set out in subsection 132-5(2) of the GST Act.

Question 2

Will the Commissioner seek to apply Division 165 of the GST Act in relation to any ITC or decreasing adjustment which arises as a result of the relevant sales referred to in Question 1 above?

Summary

The Commissioner will not seek to apply Division 165 of the GST Act in relation to any ITC or decreasing adjustment which arises as a result of the relevant sales referred to in Question 1 above.

Detailed reasoning

Application of the general Anti-avoidance rule

The object of Division 165 of the GST Act is to deter schemes that give an entity a GST benefit. If the dominant purpose or principal effect of a scheme is to give an entity such a benefit, the Commissioner may negate the benefit an entity gets from the scheme by declaring how much GST or refund would have been payable, and when it would have been payable, apart from the scheme.

Section 165-5 of the GST Act outlines when the Division operates and states:

General rule

Accordingly, for Division 165 of the GST Act to apply to the facts and circumstances you provided in your ruling application and the responses provided to the questionnaire issued by the Commissioner, three elements would need to be satisfied:

Scheme

Subsection 165-10(2) of the GST Act exhaustively defines a "scheme" as:

The arrangement that you have described in your private ruling application would constitute a scheme for the purposes of Division 165 of the GST Act.

The scheme would, in general terms, consist of the following steps:

GST Benefit

Under paragraph 165-10(1)(d) of the GST Act, a GST benefit includes a benefit where:

A GST benefit is obtained in the form of a timing benefit, resulting from the initial decreasing adjustment pursuant to Division 132 of the GST Act, which is mitigated over time through the Entity A's inability to recover ITCs on its acquisition of property management services from Entity B.

Dominant Purpose / Principal Effect

Division 165 of the GST Act must be considered on a case by case basis to determine whether it would be concluded that the dominant purpose or principal effect of the scheme would be to get a GST benefit. This requires an objective assessment of the scheme against the twelve matters set out in subsection 165-15(1) of the GST Act.

The ruling request indicates that there are significant commercial reasons for the implementation of the scheme. Based on the information contained in the ruling request and further information provided to the Commissioner, it is considered that the scheme/arrangement described, with its particular facts and circumstances, in particular relating to:


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).