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This edited version has been archived due to the length of time since original publication.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: 1012963811905

Date of advice: 10 February 2016

Ruling

Subject: Am I in business - rental properties

Question:

Are you carrying on a business of letting rental properties?

Answer:

No.

This ruling applies for the following period

Income year ending 30 June 2016.

The scheme commences on

1 July 2015.

Relevant facts and circumstances

Documentation has been provided with this private ruling which should be read in conjunction with, and forms part of the description on the private ruling.

You own a number of rental properties which were purchased over a period of greater than 10 years.

All of the properties were initially leased for around six or 12 months. However, at present several of the properties are on a month to month lease due to the difficulty in securing a six or 12 month lease.

Your purpose and intention over the years was to continue to increase the number of properties with the objective of producing a profit.

Your objectives in relation to the properties are:

Your business plan in relation to your rental properties is to generate a profit by extinguishing the mortgages on the properties, which you have done with a number of the properties.

You undertake contract work and your working hours and location change with each contract and project you are working on. During the past years you have:

You spent the following estimated time on your rental properties:

You obtained a Bachelor degree to develop your knowledge of property business.

You undertake the following in relation to the properties:

You included a rental loss for your group of rental properties in more than 10 of your assessments from the relevant income year to the 2013-14 income year.

You have engaged the services of a real estate agent (Property manager) to manage your rental properties and pay them a set percentage of the gross rental income.

You state that the Property manager undertakes the following activities in relation to your properties:

Your future property strategies to expand your property holdings are as follows:

You have made the following statements in relation to your rental properties:

Relevant legislative provisions

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 6-5

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 8-1

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 995-1

Reasons for decision

Summary

You are not carrying on a business of letting rental properties. It is considered that the scale of activity and volume of operations carried on by you is insufficient to be considered as carrying on a business.

Detailed reasoning

Subsection 6-5(1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) states that your assessable income includes income according to ordinary concepts. This 'ordinary income' includes amongst other things, income from salary and wages and business operations.

Section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997 allows you to claim a deduction for a loss or outgoing that is incurred in gaining or producing your assessable income, or necessarily incurred in carrying on a business to gain or produce assessable income. These deductions are limited by the exclusion of losses or outgoings that are capital, private or domestic in nature.

Carrying on a business

Section 995-1 of the ITAA 1997 defines 'business' as 'including any profession, trade, employment, vocation or calling, but not occupation as an employee'.

Normally the receipt of income from the letting of property to a tenant(s) does not amount to the carrying on of a business.

Whether the letting of property amounts to the carrying on of a business will depend on the circumstances of each case. Generally, it is easier for a company that derives income from the letting of property to show that it carries on a business than it is for an individual.

A person, who simply owns an investment property or several investment properties, either alone or with other co-owners, is usually regarded as an investor who is not carrying on a rental property business. This is because of the limited scope of the rental property activities and the limited degree to which an owner actively participates in rental property activities. A conclusion that an individual is carrying on a business of letting property would depend largely upon the scale of operations.

The issue of whether individuals are carrying on a business of letting property has been considered in a number of cases, some of which are discussed below.

In Cripps v. FC of T 99 ATC 2428; (1999) 43 ATR 1202 (Cripps case), the taxpayer and his wife purchased, as joint tenants, 14 townhouses which they rented out. They also purchased a property which was used initially as a holiday home but was later periodically rented out. A further property was purchased for residential purposes. After a failed attempt to sell it, it was also rented out. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal found that the taxpayer and his wife were mere passive investors and were not in the business of deriving income from rental properties. They rejected the taxpayer's argument that he had greater involvement with his 16 properties.

In 11 CTBR (OS) Case 24 (Case 24), the taxpayer's income included rents from three properties. The taxpayer employed a manager and an accountant - he was principally a letting clerk with authority to refuse tenants. He collected and banked rents, attended to repairs and supervised them, and controlled the caretaker and cleaners. He kept books in connection with rents and repairs, and rates and other outgoings. The taxpayer said he personally carried out the principal part of the management of his rent-producing properties and directed policy, attended to the financial arrangements and made decisions regarding repairs. The taxpayer claimed that he was carrying on a business. In holding that he was not carrying on a business, a majority of the members of the Board of Review said:

In 15 CTBR (OS) Case 26, (Case 26) the taxpayer derived income substantially from her joint ownership of a block of flats (containing 22 living units) with her sister-in-law. A swimming pool was shared with a neighbouring block of flats owned by the taxpayer's husband and his brother. A garden was maintained and a staff of one caretaker and one cleaner employed on both buildings with casual labour as required. The building was erected and financed by F & Co., the husbands of the joint owners, in the course of their business as building contractors. The general supervision of letting, rent collecting, servicing and maintenance was carried out by the owners or by F & Co. on their behalf. No charge was made by F & Co. for the extensive assistance given in the supervision of the flats. It was held that a business was not being carried on by the owners of the block of flats.

On the other hand, Case G10 75 ATC 33 (Case G10), the taxpayer owned two properties of which six units were let as holiday flats for short term rental. The taxpayer, with assistance from his wife, managed and maintained the flats. Services included providing furniture, blankets, crockery, cutlery, pots and pans, hiring linen and laundering of blankets and bedspreads. The taxpayer also showed visiting inquirers over the premises, attended to the cleaning of the flats on a daily basis, mowing and trimming of lawns, and various other repairs and maintenance. The taxpayer's task in managing the flats was a seven day a week activity. The Board of Review held that the activity constituted the carrying on of a business.

Taxation Ruling TR 97/11 Income Tax: am I carrying on a business of primary production? (TR 97/11) provides the Commissioners view of the factors used to determine if a taxpayer is in business for tax purposes. Its principles are not restricted to questions of whether a primary production business is being carried on.

In the Commissioner's view, the factors that are considered important in determining the question of business activity are:

TR 97/11 states the indicators must be considered in combination and as a whole and whether a business is being carried on depends on the 'large or general impression gained' (Martin v. FC of T (1953) 90 CLR 470 at 474; 5 AITR 548 at 551) from looking at all the indicators, and whether these factors provide the operations with a 'commercial flavour' ( Ferguson v. FC of T (1979) 37 FLR 310 at 325; 79 ATC 4261 at 4271; (1979) 9 ATR 873 at 884). However, the weighting to be given to each indicator may vary from case to case.

In the Rental Properties 2015 guide (Rental Properties guide) published by the Australian Taxation Office the Commissioner sets out two examples that discuss the issue of whether or not the owner of one or more rental properties can be said to be carrying on a business.

The first example, Example 4 on page 5 of the guide, outlines a situation in which the owners are not carrying on a rental property business. The Commissioner states:

The second example, Example 5 on page 6 of the guide, outlines a situation in which the owners are carrying on a rental property business. The Commissioner states:

As shown in the above cases and the views of the Commissioner listed above, the indicators with the greatest weighting are the scale or volume of operations and the repetition and regularity of the activities.

Applying the relevant cases and indicators to your circumstances

In many instances, it is obvious that an activity is being carried on as a business and no further investigation is required.

Where it is less obvious, regard must be had for any other potential outcome when determining whether a particular activity should be considered to constitute a business and in determining the tests are to be applied in reaching such a determination.

There are many decided cases that consider the issue where the potential outcome is between 'business or hobby' or 'employee or independent contractor' (with an independent contractor being considered to carry on a business). In this case, we are considering the question of 'Are you carrying on a business' with the other potential outcome being that the activity constitutes an investment that generates assessable income.

In the recent Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) case of YPFD and FCT [2014] AATA 9 (YPFD case), the following statement about the tests that are relevant when the issue involves residential rental properties was made:

You have stated that your circumstances are very similar to those of the plaintiff in YPFD case. However, the decision made by the AAT is based on the plaintiff's facts. The Commissioner considers matters on a case by case basis according to the facts of that case. Therefore, we have taken the factors from TR 97/11 as outlined above into consideration and applied them to the facts of your situation when making our decision as to whether or not you are carrying on a business of letting your rental properties as follows:

Significant commercial purpose

The 'significant commercial purpose or character' indicator is closely linked to the other indicators and is a generalisation drawn from the interaction of the other indicators. It is particularly linked to the size and scale of activity, the repetition and regularity of activity and the profit indicators.

You own a number of properties which were purchased over a number of years. The properties are generally leased out for periods of six or 12 months. However, when it is difficult to secure leases for the longer period, the properties may be leased on a month by month basis with several of the properties being currently on month by month leases.

The value of the properties is around $X million, and you have invested over $X million to acquire the properties. You have mortgages on some of the properties, with a total mortgage for the properties of over $X.

The properties generate gross revenue of around $X per year.

While the number of rental properties you own is more than in Case 24, it is significantly less than in the Cripps case and Case 26 when it was determined that the taxpayers were not in the business of letting rental properties.

Intention of the taxpayer

The carrying on of a business is not a matter merely of intention, it is a matter of activity. It is appropriate to look at when the activities started and whether they add up to more than a mere intention to conduct a business.

You purchased your first investment property after 20 September 1985, and purchased the other properties over a number of years, with the last property being purchased over 15 years after the first property was purchased.

While you have stated that your purpose and intention over the years was to continue to increase the number of properties with the objective of producing a profit, the size and scale of your rental property activities has not changed since you purchased your last rental property, and you have not bought or sold any properties since then.

You receive rental income from your investment properties. You outsource the management of your properties to an agent. You undertake some of the maintenance activities yourself however you leave the more complex maintenance activities to a professional.

Prospect of profits

The taxpayer's involvement in the business activity should be motivated by wanting to make a tax profit and the taxpayer's activities should be conducted in a way that facilitates this. This will require examining whether objectively there is a real prospect of making such a profit from participating in the business of the taxpayer.

You have stated that the properties generate gross revenue of around $X per year and that a number of the properties have consistently made a profit in past years, accomplished in part by extinguishing the mortgages. However, you have included rental losses for your group of rental properties in over 10 income years for the past 14 income years.

Your future property strategy is to increase your involvement with your rental properties when you retire and reduce the responsibilities of your property manager. Also, you will increase the number of your properties by constructing additional units on one of the properties. However, this strategy is speculative as to what will happen in the future.

Repetition and regularity

The taxpayer's activities should involve repetition and regularity and have an air of permanence about them. With regards to letting of properties, repetition and regularity may be measured by factors such as regularity of maintenance, collecting of rent, management and advertising of the properties, insurance, dealing with tenancy agreements and inspection reports.

In comparison to some rental property owners your daily involvement is minor. Given the activities of other property owners who are considered to be carrying on a business of letting properties it could not be concluded the level of repetition and regularity of your activity is the same.

We are looking at those activities that would be required in the renting of properties. If there was a block of 30 holiday units rented on a short time basis there is an extensive amount of work conducted on a daily basis in meeting tenants, providing cleaning, linen and other services. The fees paid by the tenants are for both the services and the use of the property and if it is of sufficient scale, because of the regularity of these services it can be argued that they could be carrying on a business of renting properties.

Your property activities are of a different nature to this. The lease periods for your properties are generally of a long nature, being around six to 12 months. However, the leases for the properties can be on a month by month basis when a tenant for the longer period cannot be obtained.

The daily management of the properties is under the management of the Property manager. Whilst you have advised that you inspect the properties, personally undertake the repairs or organise for tradesmen to complete the repairs on the rental properties and maintained accounts in relation to your rental properties, the activities you undertake in relation to your properties would also be undertaken by a property investor as was found in Case 24.

The level of repetition and regularity of your activities is not as great as that noted in Case 26 where despite the management and maintenance activities undertaken, the property owners were not considered to be carrying on a business of letting properties.

The overall impression is that you are not carrying on a business of renting properties. The income is derived predominantly from the letting of the property and not from activities 'carried on' in relation to renting the properties out.

Activities of the same kind and carried on in a similar manner to those of the ordinary trade in that line of business

If a taxpayer carries out their activity in a manner similar to other taxpayers in the industry, it is more likely that their activity amounts to the carrying on of a business. That is, the taxpayer's operations are of the same kind and carried on in the same way as those characteristic of ordinary trading in that particular line of business (IR Commissioners v. Livingston 11 TC 538).

This indicator requires a comparison between the activities of the taxpayer in question and those undertaken by a person in business in the same type of industry. Where the taxpayer's activities are similar in nature to the business, further support is given to the fact that a business exists.

Generally, where the property owners grant exclusive possession of the property to the residents the relationship between the two parties is one of tenant and landlord, and the activity is more likely to be passive investment rather than a business. Similarly, activities constituting the mere maintenance of an asset and the mere collection of income do not indicate the existence of a business of renting premises.

Your activity in renting out the rental properties is renting residential properties at market rates. Hence the relationship is considered to be that of a landlord and tenant.

Organisation in a business-like manner, the keeping of books, records and the use of a system

The activities conducted by, or on behalf of the taxpayer, should be carried out in a systematic and organised manner. This will usually involve matters such as the keeping of appropriate business records by the taxpayer. If the activities are carried out on the taxpayer's behalf by someone else, there should be regular reports provided to the taxpayer on the results of those activities.

The Property manager provides an annual financial summary in relation to your rental. You have developed your computer application specifically for your rental properties in which you enter information relating to the purchase price of the properties, rental income and expenses and produce financial accounts, profit and loss, balance sheets, tax summaries and property analysis reports.

Although you have spent time in relation to your rental computer application, it is reasonable to expect anyone investing in rental properties, including passive investors, to keep records in relation to their rental property/ies so that they can keep informed as to whether or not they are making a profit in relation to the rental property/ies and to make decisions as to what activities to undertake in relation to their rental properties to maximise their returns.

The size and scale of the activity

When considering this factor, we are looking at the scale in terms of the number of properties and what management input that may be required to conduct the activity.

The business should be large enough to make it commercially viable. In Cripps' Case, it was held that the renting of 14 two storey townhouses was not a business and in McDonald's Case it was held that the letting of two units in different strata plans was also not a business. Similarly in Cases 24 and 26 the renting of 22 units and three properties respectively was also not considered a business.

You currently rent out a number of rental properties. As stated above, whether an activity of letting of property amounts to the carrying on of a business will depend on the circumstances of each case as noted at paragraph 5 of IT 2423.

The scale of your activities and volume of operations can be distinguished from the cases noted above as there were fewer rental properties.

Hobby or recreation

The activity does not have the nature of a hobby or recreational pursuit. The nature of the activity is similar to other rental property owners who are actively involved in some aspect of the property they own.

Conclusion

After weighing up the relative business indicators and objective facts surrounding this case it is considered that you are not carrying on a business of letting rental properties.

Your case can be distinguished from Cripp's case as in that case the scale, being 16 townhouses, was far greater than in your seven properties. Despite the fact that 16 townhouses were rented the AAT found that the taxpayers were mere passive investors and not in the business of deriving income from rental properties.

Similarly in Case 26, despite the scale of operations of 22 units, the AAT found a business was not being carried on by the owners of the block of flats. Again the quantity of rental units is far in excess of your seven properties.

Also, you circumstances are not similar to the examples provided in the Rental Property guide as outlined above.

We acknowledge that there are some elements of your activity that add weight that the activity has a business like nature such as investment of capital and the length of time the activity has been undertaken. However, the majority of your activities are considered to be in line with those required of a passive investor in rental properties.

The additional activities you undertake for the rental properties such as carrying out some minor repairs and maintenance and organising tradesman for repairs are not day-to-day activities. Also, your Property Management Agreement outlines that a specified maximum expenditure amount could be authorised by the property manager in any one instance in for repairs and maintenance without your specific approval.

It would be reasonable to expect any property owner, either in general or a passive investor, to undertake any repairs/maintenance they have the capacity to undertake so that they do not have to engage the services of tradesmen. The undertaking of the repair and maintenance activities does not change the character of your rental property activities from investment to business.

There is no evidence to suggest that the properties are rented as short term (nightly or weekly) rentals; rather, they are rented under lease agreements which are typically long term in nature, or on a month-by-month basis according to the rental market conditions. It would be reasonable to expect anyone with rental property, whether a passive investor or a person carrying on a business, to be affected by rental demands and to lease properties on a month by month basis when unable to obtain a tenant for a longer lease period.

The relationship between you and the residents of the properties is that of a landlord and tenant; where the tenants have exclusive possession and control access to and from the properties.

The undertaking of managing and maintenance, level of involvement, scale of activity and volume of operation in your activity is not as great as that noted in Case G10. We consider your case to be aligned closer with the circumstances in Case 24 and Case 26. Your activity lacks the repetition and regularity that is expected of a person carrying on a rental property business.

The overall management of your rental properties is not dissimilar to other rental properties managed by an agent for a passive investor with the activities undertaken by the property manager in your case being of a similar nature to those undertaken in relation to properties owned by passive investors.

You have created a property application provides you with property performance statistics that you review to help track the performance of individual properties in relation to the market conditions and historical statistics. It is reasonable to expect anyone with an investment property, either as a passive investor or in business, to keep records in relation to their rental property/ies to enable to determine how their investment is going.

The types of records and tracking for a rental investment would not be dissimilar for a passive investor and someone carrying on a business of letting rental properties given that rental income and expenses need to be recorded and property analysis reports and financial rations would be useful to invest further, or make any decisions about the performance of the rental property/ies.

The fact that you keep your property records separate from your personal accounts would be an undertaking that it would be reasonable that a passive investor would do.

Your business plan is to generate a profit by extinguishing the mortgages on the property which could be viewed as the intention of a passive investor when purchasing a rental property.

The rental income received in relation to the rental properties was at the market value. It can be viewed that the returns you received in relation to your properties were merely from holding the properties and is passive income and not from selling, buying or continually renovating the properties to gain increased rental income or obtain a profit from selling a property. Nor are you undertaking activities such as those undertaken by the taxpayer in Case G10 who was actively involved with his units on a daily basis, and undertaking most of the activities arising in relation to the units himself, with the assistance of his wife.

Your properties are generally rented out for periods of around six to 12 months, but are leased on a month to month basis when the market is slow. It would be reasonable to expect anyone with rental property, whether a passive investor or a person carrying on a business, to be affected by rental demands and to lease properties on a month by month basis when unable to obtain a tenant for a longer lease period.

The activities of a taxpayer may change from year to year, or even during the income year, which may change them from being passive investors to carrying on a business of letting rental properties. However, your activities in the income year covered by this private ruling support that while you own a number of rental properties you are a passive investor.

Based on the information and documentation provided, it is the Commissioner's view that your rental property activities are better described as leasing residential properties to receive passive income from a stream of rental income. The income is not derived from the services you provide, but from the letting of the properties.

Accordingly, it is the Commissioner's view that you are not carrying on a business of letting rental properties and are a passive investor in rental properties.


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).