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This edited version has been archived due to the length of time since original publication.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: 1012926143815

Date of advice: 15 December 2015

Ruling

Subjects: Debt - Equity Rules - Section 177EA - Subdivision 204-D

Question 1

Are the capital notes ('Capital Notes') proposed to be issued by an entity ('Issuer') on or after a date ('Issue Date') classified as equity interests under the debt / equity provisions contained in Division 974 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 ('ITAA 1997')?

Answer to Question 1

Yes

Question 2

Will section 177EA of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 ('ITAA 1936') apply to impose franking debits in the franking account of the Issuer, or while the Issuer is a member of a tax consolidated group ('Group'), the franking account of the Group, in respect of the distributions to be made by the Issuer in respect of the Capital Notes ('Distributions') in a set of income years ('Relevant Period')?

Answer to Question 2

No

Question 3

Will Subdivision 204-D of the ITAA 1997 apply to impose franking debits in the franking account of the Issuer, or while the Issuer is a member of the Group, the franking account of the Group, in respect of the Distributions made in the Relevant Period?

Answer to Question 3

No

This ruling applies for the following periods:

The Relevant Period

Relevant facts and circumstances

The Issuer

Reasons for issuing the Capital Notes

Main features of the Capital Notes

Distribution

Exchange Event

Preference Share Conversion

Noteholder Conversion

IPO

Other

Assumptions

Relevant legislative provisions

Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 Section 177D,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 Section 177EA,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 202-40,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 202-45,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 204-5,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 204-30,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 974-15,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 974-20,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 974-25,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 974-30,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 974-70,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 974-75,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 974-130,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 974-135,

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 974-160, and

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 995-1.

Reasons for decision

Question 1: Are the Capital Notes classified as equity interests under the debt / equity provisions contained in Division 974 of the ITAA 1997?

Summary

The Capital Notes are equity interests under Division 974 of the ITAA 1997 as they meet the equity test but not the debt test, as there is no effectively non-contingent obligation ('ENCO') on the Issuer to provide financial benefits to the Noteholders.

Detailed reasoning

Subsection 974-70(1) of the ITAA 1997 provides that a scheme gives rise to an equity interest in a company if, when the scheme comes into existence:

The term 'scheme' is defined broadly in subsection 995-1(1) of the ITAA 1997 to mean any arrangement, scheme, plan, proposal, action, course of action or course of conduct, whether unilateral or otherwise.

Subsection 974-75(1) provides that a scheme satisfies the equity test in relation to a company if it gives rise to an interest set out in the table in that subsection. The items in the table are:

Subsection 974-75(1) has effect subject to subsection 974-75(2). Subsection 974-75(2) provides that a scheme that would otherwise give rise to an equity interest in a company because of an item in the table in subsection 974-75(1) (other than Item 1) does not give rise to an equity interest in the company unless the scheme is a financing arrangement for the company.

Subsection 974-130(1) of the ITAA 1997 provides that a scheme is a financing arrangement for an entity if it is entered into or undertaken:

Section 974-15 in Subdivision 974-B provides that a scheme gives rise to a debt interest in an entity if the scheme, when it comes into existence, satisfies the debt test in section 974-20 of the ITAA 1997.

Subsection 974-20(1) provides that a scheme satisfies the debt test in relation to an entity if:

Section 974-25 of the ITAA 1997 provides certain exceptions to the debt test in respect of short-term credit arrangements, which are not applicable in the current circumstances.

Section 974-160 of the ITAA 1997 provides that financial benefit includes the following, even if the transaction that confers the benefit on an entity also imposes an obligation on the entity:

Subsection 974-30(1) of the ITAA 1997 provides that the following do not constitute the provision of a financial benefit by an entity or a connected entity of the entity:

An issue of an equity interest for the purposes of subsection 974-30(1) can be an equity interest in a trust. Subsection 820-930(2) of the ITAA 1997 provides that a scheme satisfies the equity test in relation to a trust if it gives rise to an interest set out in the table in that subsection. Item 1 of that table provides that an equity interest in the case of a trust is an interest as a beneficiary of the trust.

Subsection 974-135(1) of the ITAA 1997 provides that there is an ENCO to take an action under a scheme if, having regard to the pricing, terms and conditions of the scheme, there is in substance or effect a non-contingent obligation to take that action.

Subsection 974-135(3) provides that an obligation is non-contingent if it is not contingent on any event, condition or situation (including the economic performance of the entity having the obligation or a connected entity of that entity) other than the ability or willingness of that entity or connected entity to meet the obligation.

Subsection 974-135(6) provides that in determining whether there is in substance or effect a non-contingent obligation to take the action, regard should be given to the artificiality, or contrived nature, of any contingency on which the obligation to take the action depends.

Subsection 974-135(7) provides that an obligation of yours is not effectively non-contingent merely because you will suffer some detrimental practical or commercial consequences if you do not fulfil the obligation.

An ENCO may arise where there is economic compulsion on an issuer to take the action. Taxation Ruling TR 2010/5 Income tax: the relevance of 'economic compulsion' in deciding whether an issuer of a financing arrangement has an 'effectively non-contingent obligation' for the purposes of section 974-135 of the ITAA 1997 ('TR 2010/5') provides the Commissioner's view on the relevance of economic compulsion in deciding whether an issuer has an ENCO to take an action. Economic compulsion is defined as the issuer being inevitably bound to take a future action rather than suffer the adverse economic consequences of not taking that action.

TR 2010/5 concludes that there is an ENCO on an issuer to take the action if the compulsion arises having regard to the pricing, terms and conditions of the relevant scheme as stated in subsection 974-135(1). Other matters which might be said to constitute some economic compulsion are irrelevant except in so far as they impact on the effect of the pricing, terms and conditions of the relevant scheme.

Equity test

The issue of the Capital Notes is a scheme under subsection 995-1(1) and a financing arrangement under subsection 974-130(1) as it is intended to raise finance for the Issuer.

The Capital Notes will pass the equity test in subsection 974-75(1) as they carry a right to a fixed return from the Issuer that is contingent on the economic performance of the Issuer and at the discretion of the Issuer, and the Capital Notes may be converted into Ordinary Shares in the Issuer.

Debt test

The debt test will be examined based on potential benefits that may be provided by the Issuer to the Noteholders, being the Distributions during the life of the Capital Notes and the possible outcomes at the termination of the Capital Notes.

Distributions

The Distributions are financial benefits under section 974-160. However, the Distributions are contingent on the Issuer having Sufficient Operating Surplus. This contingency may be influenced by the presence of the Dividend Stopper in the terms of the Capital Notes, but as the Dividend Stopper is also contingent on the Issuer having Sufficient Operating Surplus, the payment of Distributions is not considered an ENCO under section 974-135.

Possible outcomes at the end of the Capital Notes

The possible outcomes at the termination of a Capital Note, and the financial benefits provided in these outcomes, are:

As the Issuer wishes to preserve its ordinary share ownership, the likelihood of an Ordinary Share Conversion or Unit Conversion is low. It will therefore be necessary to determine if the Preference Share Conversion is an artificial or contrived contingency, or whether there is an economic compulsion for the Issuer to, Repurchase instead.

The only potential adverse economic consequence directly for the Issuer occurs due to the Dividend on the Preference Shares being payable at the Step-Up Distribution Rate (assuming that a higher rate will not have to be paid by the Issuer as the Dividends will continue to be fully franked utilising the franking credits that arise in the franking account of the Issuer each year).

The Issuer would still maintain ownership of the underlying assets funded by the Capital Notes if the Issuer borrowed the Repurchase Amount at its market rate of interest, and used these funds to perform the Repurchase. The adverse economic consequence of performing the Preference Share Conversion instead would arise where the Step-Up Distribution Rate was higher than this market rate of interest. However, the Issuer would not be "inevitably bound" to pay a Dividend as it is contingent on their discretion and economic performance. The Step-Up Distribution Rate is also within market expectations for interest rate step-ups on market rates of interest.

Therefore, the Commissioner concludes that there is no ENCO for the Issuer to Repurchase rather than perform a Preference Share Conversion for the purposes of section 974-135. The Capital Notes do not meet the debt test in section 974-20 and are equity interests under subsection 974-70(1).

Question 2: Will section 177EA of the ITAA 1936 apply to impose franking debits in the franking account of the Issuer, or while the Issuer is a member of the Group, the franking account of the Group, in respect of the Distributions made in the Relevant Period?

Summary

The Commissioner has concluded that the purpose of enabling the Noteholders to obtain imputation benefits is not more than incidental to the Issuer's purpose of raising capital. Accordingly, section 177EA of the ITAA 1936 will not apply to impose franking debits in the franking account of the Issuer, or while the Issuer is a member of the Group, the franking account of the Group, in respect of the Distributions made in the Relevant Period.

Detailed reasoning

Section 177EA is a general anti-avoidance provision that applies where one of the purposes (other than an incidental purpose) of the scheme is to obtain an imputation benefit. In these circumstances, subsection 177EA(5) enables the Commissioner to make a determination with the effect of either:

Subsection 177EA(3) provides that section 177EA applies if:

Subsection 177EA(12) extends the operation of section 177EA to non-share equity interests. Subsection 177EA(12) provides that section 177EA:

Section 202-40 of the ITAA 1997 provides that a distribution is a frankable distribution to the extent that it is not unfrankable under section 202-45 of the ITAA 1997, which lists circumstances where distributions are unfrankable.

In arriving at a conclusion under section 177EA, the Commissioner must have regard to the relevant circumstances of the scheme which include, but are not limited to, the factors listed in subsection 177EA(17), which include at paragraph (j), a reference to the matters in subsection 177D(2). The relevant circumstances in subsections 177EA(17) and 177D(2) encompass a range of circumstances, which taken individually or collectively, could indicate the requisite purpose. Due to the diverse nature of these circumstances, some may or may not be present at any one time in relation to a particular scheme.

The Commissioner considers that the conditions in paragraphs 177EA(3)(a) to 177EA(3)(d) are satisfied because:

Accordingly, the issue is whether having regard to the relevant circumstances of the scheme, it would be concluded that a person, or one of the persons, who entered into or carried out the scheme, did so for a purpose (whether or not the dominant purpose but not including an incidental purpose) of enabling the Noteholder to obtain the imputation benefit.

Based on the information provided, and having regard to all of the relevant circumstances of the scheme, the Commissioner has concluded that the purpose of enabling the Noteholders to obtain imputation benefits is not more than incidental to the Issuer's purpose of raising capital to reduce its business risks and to fund new investments or acquisitions.

Accordingly, the Commissioner will not make a determination under paragraph 177EA(5)(a) to impose franking debits in the franking account of the Issuer, or while the Issuer is a member of the Group, the franking account of the Group, in respect of the Distributions made in the Relevant Period.

Question 3

Will Subdivision 204-D of the ITAA 1997 apply to impose franking debits in the franking account of the Issuer, or while the Issuer is a member of the Group, the franking account of the Group, in respect of the Distributions made in the Relevant Period?

Summary

The Commissioner has concluded that the requisite element of streaming does not exist in relation to the Distributions. Accordingly, Subdivision 204-D of the ITAA 1997 will not apply to impose franking debits in the franking account of the Issuer, or while the Issuer is a member of the Group, the franking account of the Group, in respect of the Distributions made in the Relevant Period.

Detailed reasoning

Subdivision 204-D enables the Commissioner to make a determination where distributions with attached imputation benefits are streamed to a member of a corporate tax entity in preference to another member.

Section 204-30 prescribes the circumstances that are required to exist before the Commissioner may make such a determination. Section 204-30 applies where an entity 'streams' the payment of distributions or the payment of distributions and the giving of other benefits, in such a way that:

In these circumstances, subsection 204-30(3) enables the Commissioner to make one or more determinations with the following effects:

Section 204-5(2) of the ITAA 1997 provides that Division 204 of the ITAA 1997 applies to non-share dividends in the same way as it applies to distributions.

Streaming is not defined for the purposes of Subdivision 204-D. However, the Commissioner understands it to refer to a company 'selectively directing the flow of franked distributions to those members who can most benefit from the imputation credits' (paragraph 3.28 of the Explanatory Memorandum to the New Business Tax System (Imputation) Bill 2002).

The Noteholders will receive the same Distributions with the same Franking Percentage regardless of their tax attributes or their individual tax position.

As the dividend payout ratios of the Issuer and the Group, and the Issuer's and the Group's policies in relation to the franking of dividends or distributions on Ordinary Shares, Preference Shares or Other Non-Share Equity, are not expected to change as a result of the issue of the Capital Notes and the Distributions that may arise as a result of the Capital Notes, the Commissioner has concluded that the requisite element of streaming does not exist in relation to the Distributions to be paid by the Issuer to the Noteholders. Accordingly, the Commissioner will not make a determination under paragraph 204-30(3)(a) to impose franking debits in the franking account of the Issuer, or while the Issuer is a member of the Group, the franking account of the Group, in respect of the Distributions made in the Relevant Period.


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).