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This edited version has been archived due to the length of time since original publication.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: 1012519565181

Ruling

Subject: Are payments to a retired religious practitioner gifts.

This ruling applies to:

A religious institution

Question 1

Is the payment of $X in four bi-annual instalments to a retired minister of religion with the Rulee to assist them to enjoy post-employment housing free of encumbering, a gift and therefore not subject to PAYG withholding pursuant to section 12-47 of the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (TAA)?

Answer

Yes

Question 2

Is the payment of $X in four bi-annual instalments as a gift to a retired minister of religion with the Rulee to assist them to enjoy post-employment housing free of encumbering, a benefit as defined in section 136(1) of the Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986, and is the benefit an exempt benefit under section 57 of the FBTAA 1986?

Answer

No

Question 3

Is the payment of $X in four bi-annual instalments as a gift to a retired minister of religion with the Rulee to assist them to enjoy post-employment housing free of encumbering, an Employment Termination Payment pursuant to section 82-130 of the ITAA 1997?

Answer

No

This ruling applies for the following periods:

Year ended 30 June 2014

Year ended 30 June 2015

The scheme commences on:

01 July 2013

Relevant facts and circumstances

The Rulee is a registered religious institution which was incorporated in Australia under the Associations Incorporation Act 1985.

As a religious institution it is established and operates in Australia.

The Rulee is proposing to provide an unsolicited non expectant gift to one of its retired ministers of religion purely on charitable grounds based on their current financial position and outstanding current mortgage on their residence, to enable the retired minister to enjoy post-employment housing free of encumbrance.

The Rulee is currently endorsed as a Tax Concession Charity (TCC) on the basis of being a Religious Institution.

The Rulee, a not for profit organisation, claims the provision of the proposed payment as a gift is within its powers and incidental to its objects and intentions as a religious institution. The amount is paid to ensure retired ministers are not financially disadvantaged and can maintain suitable housing.

The Rulee has its own constitution which includes its primary objectives

to be the following:

The Rulee, in their submission, also states that neither during the employment the recipient of the payment as a full time minister of the rulee, nor after their retirement had or has any contractual obligation or is bound to make the proposed payment for housing relief.

Rather the decision by the current Management Committee of the Rulee was made at its own volition and reasonably regarded as incidental to the performance of the Rulee's proper functions, that it would be appropriate in the circumstances to provide the needed support to a retired minister in respect of housing assistance by way of a gift which was unsolicited, non obliged, and non expectant of the recipient.

To support their argument that the proposed payment is a 'gift for charitable purpose' the Rulee made reference to a number of case decisions relating to the provision of support, aid, and relief for clergy, such as making provision for transport to assist retired clergy, and other forms of aid and assistance.

The Rulee also made reference to the general principles as expressed in Taxation Ruling IT 2674 Income tax: gifts to missionaries, ministers of religion and other church workers - are the gifts income? and Taxation Ruling TR 2003/13, Income tax: eligible termination payments (ETP): payments made in consequence of the termination of any employment: meaning of the phrase 'in consequence of'; where the circumstances and factors as to whether the making of a gift give rise to assessable income or an employment termination payment, are relied on.

The Rulee claims that the capacity and the way the gift is made, together with the argued position that it is voluntary, not solicited, non obliged, non expectant and not a common incident of the recipient's calling or occupation, is not followed as an effect or result of the termination of their employment, but rather can be traced to gratitude engendered as a gift from the Rulee to the recipient because of their financial circumstances.

In response to the Commissioner's request to provide explanations and details relating to recording, accountability and the basis of the ex employee making a specific donation to the Rulee and incurring some costs, the following was provided:

Rulee's contentions

The Rulee argues the payment is based on its motive for reliance to provide a comfortable way of life to the recipient and is a gift and not income or benefit of any kind, as it does not relate to any income producing activity or as a result of an expected Employment Termination Payment.

In respect to a position that may be adopted by the Commissioner relating to the payment being regarded as being connected to employment of the ex-employee as a Minister of Religion, either as assessable income or Employment Termination Payment, the Rulee then relies on the application of section 57 of the FBTAA 1986 to treat the payment as a benefit as defined in section 136 (1) of the FBTAA 1986 and treat the benefit as an exempt benefit accordingly as all the requirements of section 57 would be met.

The Rulee, in its submission, claims that the provision of financial support to the retired minister, is a gift for a charitable purpose, because it is provided to give support, aid and relief to them, as an unsolicited, non-expectant amount and is not connected to their previous employment with the Rulee.

Question 1

Summary

The payment is in the nature of a gift and not subject to PAYG withholding.

Detailed reasoning

Is the payment of certain amount in four bi-annual instalments to a retired minister of religion with the Rulee to assist him to enjoy post employment housing free of encumbering, a gift and therefore not subject to PAYG withholding pursuant to section 12-47 of the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (TAA)?

Section 995-1 of the ITAA 1997 defines "assessable income" to have the meaning given by sections 6-5, 6-10, 6-15, of the ITAA 1997.

Division 12 of Part 2-5 of the TAA covers Pay as You Go (PAYG) withholding and payments from which amounts must be withheld.

Subdivision 12-B of the TAA covers payments for work and services and in particular section 12-47 of this Act covers payment to religious practitioners.

Section 12-47 of the TAA reads:

Section 6-5, of the ITAA 1997 relates to the inclusion of "ordinary income" in the assessable income of an Australian resident and or of a foreign resident from Australian source.

Section 6-15 of the ITAA 1997 relates to the inclusion of "statutory income" in the assessable income, where amount are not included in ordinary income, but are included by provisions of assessable income. Although statutory income is included in assessable income under a provision of the ITAA Act 1997, it may be exempt or non-assessable income under another provision, i.e. per section 6-20 and section 6-23.

Since the payment relates to a matter involving the payer in its capacity as a former employer and the recipient of the payment as a former employee in their capacity as religious practitioner, it is necessary to consider whether the proposed payment has the character of a payment which relates to work and services provided in the past, for the purposes of the application of section 12-47 of the TAA and the need for the Rulee to treat the payment being subject to PAYG withholding.

If the proposed payment is considered to be a payment connected to work and services provided in the past and subject to PAYG withholding, then such payments would be included in the payment summary to issue to the recipient and have the character of "ordinary income" per section 6-5, of the ITAA 1997, which will then be included in his "assessable income" per section 995-1 of the ITAA 1997.

It is noted the Rulee is already endorsed as a Tax Concession Charity on the basis of being a religious institution.

The recipient of the payment is an Australian resident.

The recipient of the payment is a former employee as a Religious Practitioner.

The recipient of the payment is no longer an employee and he no longer provides services to the employer under an employment arrangement or obligation. Therefore it is only necessary to consider whether the proposed payment to the former employee as and when made:

Principles - Ordinary Income

There have been a number of cases which determine what is considered to be ordinary income.

In general, if the amount received does not have the character of income in the hands of the recipient it will not be ordinary income: for example, Scott v. FC of T (1966) 117 CLR 514 at 526 per Windeyer J. Parsons takes up the specific point of gifts in his magisterial Income Taxation in Australia at Proposition 8: 'A gain which is a mere gift does not have the character of income' (paragraphs 2.132-2.157). He accepts that the voluntary nature of a payment is not enough to give a non-income character, hence his emphasis on mere gift. As Hill J said in First Provincial Building Society Ltd v. FC of T 95 ATC 4145 at 4149:

Gifts to persons who are not employees but which are related to services which they have rendered, such as to tips to a waiter, a railway porter or a taxi cab driver, or a jockey, have been held to be income.

In FC of T v. Squatting Investments Co. Ltd (1954) 88 CLR 413 and Federal Coke Co Pty Ltd v. FC of T 77 ATC 4255 at 4264 per Bowen CJ, an additional payment was made by the Government to a wool grower, who had previously submitted wool for appraisal and been paid for it. The additional payment by the Government, whilst discretionary, was related to the amount of wool supplied and was held to be in a real sense a product of the business of wool growing carried on by the recipient and to be income in its hand.

The voluntary nature of payments has not been enough on its own to show they do not have an income character for the recipients. That is, the fact that a gift is made voluntarily is not sufficient to show it is not income.

The facts and circumstances relating to the connection between the recipient as a former employee and the payer as the former employer, that may relate to or connected to income producing activities or entitlements, were considered in line with the original submission together with subsequent additional information provided, to determine whether:

As the significance of the motive depends upon the circumstances [Federal Coke Co Pty Ltd v. FC of T 77 ATC 4255 at 4273 per Brennan J] the Information provided and claim made that the recipient is not an employee, the payment does not relate or is connected to any of the past employment or services provided by the recipient to the Rulee, but rather is purely made for personal reasons and as a member of the community, for altruistic purposes to help him in difficult time due to poor financial position, it supports a conclusive decision that the motive of the proposed payment is purely an unsolicited gift and does not relate to any past, current or future income producing activity or services rendered.

Therefore the proposed payment is accepted to be a genuine gift and will not be income or a payment from which the payer must withhold an amount.

Taking into account the above, the result is consistent with the views expressed by Parsons, Hill J in First Provincial, that a mere gift will not be income.

If it is a genuine gift then the facts that make it so would also be consistent with the lack of a sufficient link with income producing activities.

The basis and reason for the payment as provided by the Rulee, support the position that there in no sufficient link between the payments and income producing activities.

Furthermore the "Principle - periodical receipts" as illustrated by the decision in Harris 80 ATC 4238, where a series of periodical payments by a bank to former employees was considered, were held not to be income.

Gifts which are voluntary donations or contributions of that kind, do not have the usual characteristics of income, remuneration for services, the proceeds of a business, or other revenue producing activity.

This is also supported by paragraph 20 of Taxation Ruling IT 2674 Income tax: gifts to missionaries, ministers of religion and other church workers - are the gifts income? which expresses the Commissioner's view when gifts are not assessable income.

Paragraph 20 of IT 2674 states:

On the basis of the Rulee's submission and claim that:

it is accepted the payment is in the nature of a gift and not subject to PAYG withholding. As such is does not have the character of ordinary income and should not form part of the recipient's assessable income.

Question 2

Summary

The payment is in the nature of a gift for altruistic purposes and is not considered to be a fringe benefit.

Detailed reasoning

The Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986 (FBTAA 1986) is quite separate from the ITAA 1936 and ITAA 1997.

The FBTAA 1986 imposes tax on the taxable value of the fringe benefits and establishes the rules for assessment and collection of the tax.

The FBTAA 1986 contains subsection 136(1) under Part XII -Interpretation, which covers various definitions for the purposes of the application of the Act.

Subsection 136(1) amongst others, includes and defines the following:

employee means:

(a) a current employee;

(b) a future employee; or

(c) a former employee.

employer means:

(a) a current employer;

(b) a future employer; or

(c) a former employer;

(d) but does not include:

(e) the Commonwealth; or

(f) an authority of the Commonwealth that cannot, by a law of the Commonwealth, be made liable to taxation by the Commonwealth.

arrangement means:

(a) any agreement, arrangement, understanding, promise or undertaking, whether express or implied, and whether or not enforceable, or intended to be enforceable, by legal proceedings; and

(b) any scheme, plan, proposal, action, course of action or course of conduct, whether unilateral or otherwise

Since the making of the payment relates to an arrangement involving the payer in its capacity as a former employer and the recipient of the payment as a former religious practitioner in their capacity as a former employee, it is necessary to consider whether:

Having regard to the reasons and nature of the payment to the recipient and the decision reached relating to questions 1 and 3, that it is made to the recipient as a gift for altruistic purposes and not connected to their past employment; the gifted payment does not fall within the meaning of a benefit or a fringe benefit under subsection 136(1), of the FBTAA 1986.

As the payment is not a fringe benefit the application of section 57 of the FBTAA 1986 is not relevant.

Conclusion.

The payment is considered to be a gift for altruistic purposes and not connected to the former employee's employment. Therefore it is not a fringe benefit for the purposes of the FBTAA1986

Question 3

Summary

The payment is in the nature of a gift and not an Employment Termination Payment.

Detailed reasoning

Section 82-130 (1) of ITAA 1997 What is an employment termination Payment? states: 

Furthermore, section 82-135 Payments that are not employment termination payments states:

The payment to the recipient does not fall into any of the categories contained within these sections as the payment is considered to be a gift for altruistic purposes, and is not connected to the former employee's employment. It is therefore not considered to be an Employment Termination Payment pursuant to section 82-130 of the ITAA 1997.


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).