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This edited version has been archived due to the length of time since original publication.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

Authorisation Number: 1012651488667

Ruling

Subject: CGT and Trust changes

Questions and Answers

This ruling applies for the following period(s)

Year ended 30 June 2015

The scheme commences on

1 July 2014

Relevant facts and circumstances

Business G was initially acquired by siblings who are now deceased but descendants of whom now continue the business.

The business is operated partly by Company D and partly by Partnership H.

The assets used in the business are owned in part by each of the following entities:

Historically one sibling controlled Company F and the Trust A while the other sibling controlled Company E and the Trust B. Both trusts are discretionary as to income and capital. Initially the business was conducted by a partnership between the siblings.

The long-term aim of the family has been to concentrate asset ownership so as to cement the agreed proportionate ownership of the underlying assets.

The only function of Company C is to act as trustee of the Trust A, Trust B and Trust I.

The unit holders in the Trust I are identical to the shareholders in Company D and in the same proportion.

The potential beneficiaries of each of the Trust A and the Trust B followed a pattern. The Trust A was set up for the benefit of one sibling's spouse and children and extended family. The Trust B was set up for the benefit of the other sibling's spouse and extended family.

The same individuals are the directors of each company in the group.

The proposed restructure

It is proposed to restructure the group in the following way:

The trust deeds and constitutions of the companies form part of the facts of this ruling.

Relevant legislative provisions

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 104-35

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 104-55

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 104-60

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Subsection 110-25(2)

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 112-20

Reasons for decision

Summary

If you validly amend the deed at trust law the proposed variations to the existing trust deed would be a valid amendment to the trust and will not result in the happening of CGT event E1 or E2.

The cost base of the shares in Company E and Company F given to you will be the market value of the shares at the date of transfer.

Detailed reasoning

Will the proposed amendments to the deeds creating the Trust A and the Trust B either alone or together with the proposed amendments to the constitutions of Company C and Company D trigger any one or more of CGT events E1 or E2 or any other CGT event?

CGT event E1 happens if you create a trust over a CGT asset by declaration or settlement and CGT event E2 happens if you transfer a CGT asset to an existing trust.

Whether changes to a trust create a new trust will depend on particular circumstances. The High Court decision in FCT v Commercial Nominees of Australia Ltd [2001] HCA 33; 2001 ATC 4336; (2001) 47 ATR 220 (Commercial Nominees) there are three main indicia that is of continuity of trust, the trust property and membership. In FCT v Clarke (2011) 79 ATR 550 (Clarke's case) Edmonds and Gordon JJ equally supported the indicia found in Commercial Nominees. The decision in Clarke's case is relevant to the question of the circumstances in which, as a result of changes being made to an existing trust, a new trust comes into existence, triggering CGT event E1.

CGT event E1 is triggered when a trust resettlement occurs, that is, when one trust estate has ended and another has replaced it.

Tax Determination TD 2012/21 sets out the Commissioner's view in respect to trust resettlements and whether or not a resettlement has occurred.

TD 2012/21 asserts that a valid amendment to a trust will not result in the termination of a trust as long as:

If you validly amend the deed at trust law the proposed variations to the existing trust deed would be a valid amendment to the trust and will not result in the happening of CGT event E1 or E2.

Will the transferees' cost base of the shares in Company E and Company F given to them be the market value of the shares at the date of transfer?

Subsection 110-25(2) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 provides that the first element of the cost base of a CGT asset is the total of the money you paid, or are required to pay and the market value of any other property you gave, or are required to give in respect of acquiring the CGT asset.

The market value substitution rule can replace the first element of the cost base with the market value of the CGT asset (at the time of acquisition) if:

You will not incur any expenditure to acquire the shares and CGT event A1 will happen to the other shareholders, therefore the first element of the cost base of the shares you receive will be the market value at the time of acquisition.


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).