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This edited version has been archived due to the length of time since original publication.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: 1012746090753

Ruling

Subject: Genuine Redundancy

Question 1

Are final termination payments made to Case One employees, genuine redundancy payments?

Answer

No.

Question 2

Are final termination payments made to Case Two employees, genuine redundancy payments?

Answer

No.

This ruling applies for the following periods:

For the year ended 30 June 2015.

The scheme commences on:

1 July 2014.

Relevant facts and circumstances

The Employer is a company who employs employees on projects around Australia.

The Employer classes its employees into two separate streams. The first being those who are covered by a relevant enterprise agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009 and who are paid for every hour they work (Weekly Paid Employees). The second being those who are not covered by an enterprise agreement and who are paid an annual salary (Monthly Paid Employees).

The Weekly Paid Employees may be further classified into two relevant cases, being:

It is the Employer's intention that when it hires a Weekly Paid Employee that it will move that employee from project to project if there are ongoing employment opportunities available. However, this is dependent upon the projects that the Employer has bid and won. In this regard:

If a Case Two employee is offered work on another project at the completion of their current project, then the employee enters into a new full time employment contract in relation to the new project.

You provided a sample employment contract. The sample employment contract notes that:

If no further projects can be found for a Case One or Case Two employee, their employment is terminated and they are paid a final termination payment.

The Employer pays out a redundancy accrual as defined in a clause of the Project Specific Terms and Conditions:

You advised that the redundancy payment is made directly to an employee upon termination of employment in the following circumstances:

Relevant legislative provisions

Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 Section 27F.

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 82-130.

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 82-135.

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 83-10.

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 83-85.

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 83-175.

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Subsection 83-175(1)

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Subsection 83-175(2)

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Subsection 83-175(3)

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Subsection 83-175(4)

Reasons for decision

Summary

No part of the employment termination payment made to a Case One employee or a Case Two employee is a genuine redundancy payment. This is because in both situations the employees were employed for a fixed period of employment specified under subparagraph 83-175(2)(a)(ii) of the ITAA 1997.

Furthermore, the amount the employee's receive upon the termination of their employment is no more than the amount they would have received upon voluntarily terminating their employment in accordance with their contract with the Employer.

Detailed reasoning

Genuine redundancy payment

A payment made to an employee is a genuine redundancy payment if it satisfies all the criteria set out in section 83-175 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997).

For a payment to be a genuine redundancy payment it must satisfy paragraph 83-175(2)(a) of the ITAA 1997 which states:

(a) the employee is dismissed before the earlier of the following:

The Commissioner has issued Taxation Ruling TR 2009/2 (TR 2009/2), titled Income Tax: genuine redundancy payments, which provides guidance on the factors to be considered in the interpretation of section 83-175 of the ITAA 1997.

Paragraphs 36 and 38 of TR 2009/2 states:

In relation to project based work TR 2009/2 provides an example at paragraphs 148 to 154, which states:

In this case, Case One and Case Two employees receive an offer of employment from the Employer to work on a specific project. It is the intention of the Employer that when it hires Weekly Paid employees that it will move the employees from project to project. However, this cannot be guaranteed as it is dependent upon the available projects that the Employer has bid and won.

It was clear from the sample contract of employment you provided that the offer of employment is tied exclusively to that specific project and employment would expire on the completion of the particular project, unless the Employer is able find further opportunities with a different project. This was specifically stated in the sample employer contract:

You advised that Case One employee's work on a number of successive projects. However, upon the completion of every project they are given a new contract which sets out the new conditions of employment in addition to a new scope of work i.e. sets out the new project on which the employee will be required to work on.

You advised that Case Two employees only work on one project before their employment is terminated.

In both instances, the final termination payments made to Case One and Case Two employees are made at the completion of their scope of work. That is, the payment is made in accordance with their current contract which limits the period of assignment to the present project.

In particular with Case One employees, even though they may have worked on numerous projects, each project is covered by a separate contract which limits the period of assignment to that current project.

Therefore, any final termination payment made to Case One or Case Two employees is a payment made at the end of a fixed period of employment as specified under subparagraph 83-175(2)(a)(ii) of the ITAA 1997. Therefore, no part of the payment is a genuine redundancy payment in accordance with section 83-175 of the ITAA 1997.

The payment exceeds what would have been received in consequence of the voluntary termination of employment

Whilst it has already been considered that the final termination payment would not form part of a genuine redundancy payment, it is also relevant to note that subsection 83-175(1) of the ITAA 1997 requires the payment exceeds the amount that an employee could reasonably be expected to receive in consequence voluntarily terminating their employment.

This subsection states:

Paragraphs 61 to 63 of TR 2009/2 further state:

As you advised that the redundancy payment calculated in accordance with the Project Specific Terms and Conditions made to an employee whose termination is initiated by the Employer is the same amount received by an employee who voluntarily terminate their employment, then then the final termination payments made to Case One and Case Two employees would not meet the requirements of subsection 83-175(1) of the ITAA 1997.

Consequently, the final termination payments made to both Case One and Case Two employees are not considered to be made in circumstances of a genuine redundancy, and are not in excess of the amount that could reasonably be expected to be received in consequence of a voluntary termination.


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).