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This edited version has been archived due to the length of time since original publication.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: 1051309618254

Date of advice: 20 November 2017

Ruling

Subject: GST and input tax credits

Question

Is the Trust entitled to the input tax credits on the acquisition of legal services in the furtherance of pursuing its objectives under the deceased’s Will (the Will)?

Answer

No. The Trust is not entitled to the input tax credits on the acquisition of legal services in the furtherance of pursuing its objectives under the Will.

Relevant facts and circumstances

Additional information

Relevant legislative provisions

A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 section 11-5

A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 section 11-15

A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 section 23-5

Reasons for decision

Is the Trust entitled to the input tax credits on the acquisition of legal services in the furtherance of pursuing its objectives under the Will?

Section 11-20 of the A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 (GST Act) (all further references are to this act unless stated otherwise) provides that:

The requirements for a creditable acquisition are set out in section 11-5 of the GST Act and provide that you make a creditable acquisition if:

While it is not contested that the requirements to paragraphs 11-5(b) and (c) could be satisfied in this case, the requirements to paragraphs (a) and (d) are not considered satisfied and are discussed in further detail below.

The requirements at paragraph 11-20(d)

With regard to the requirement that an entity is ‘required to be registered’, section 23-5 provides that you are required to be registered under the GST Act if you are carrying on an enterprise and your GST turnover meets the registration turnover threshold.

Section 188-10 concerns whether your GST turnover meets, or does not exceed, a turnover threshold. Relevantly, subsection 188-10(1) provides that:

*Asterisked terms (namely ‘current GST turnover’ and ‘projected GST turnover’) are defined in the Dictionary at section 195-1 by reference to section 188-15 and 188-20 respectively, and which are not reproduced in full here.

As advised, the Trust is not required to be registered for GST as its turnover is less than the relevant turnover threshold of $75,000. Additionally, available information does not sufficiently evidence the Trust’s current or projected GST turnover being at or above $75,000 which further supports the conclusion that the Trust is not required to be registered for GST.

It is noted that the Trust is not registered for GST and has not been registered for GST previously.

In light of the above, the requirements at paragraph 11-20(d) are not considered satisfied and therefore the acquisitions of the legal services by the Trust would not be creditable acquisitions. As such, the Trust is not entitled to the input tax credits on the acquisition of the legal services in the furtherance of pursuing its objectives under the Will.

Further discussion

The Trust has considered the relevant issue in this case to be whether the legal services were acquired for a creditable purpose which is predicated on the view that the Trust carries on an enterprise and that such services were acquired in carrying on that enterprise and not acquired in relation to the making of supplies that would be input taxed.

Notwithstanding the decision and reasoning discussed above, we include as below further discussion for completeness.

Under subsection 184-1(3), a legal person may act in a number of different capacities, and in each of those capacities the person is taken to be a different entity. The trustee of a trust may therefore be registered in its capacity as trustee of a trust (which can also be referred to as ‘the trust’), and also in its own right (commonly referred to as its corporate capacity).

In support of its view that it carries on an enterprise the Trust contended that various indicators of a business mentioned in Miscellaneous Taxation Ruling MT 2006/1 The New Tax System: the meaning of entity carrying on an enterprise for the purposes of entitlement to an Australian Business Number (MT 2006/1) are present in this case having regard to the trustee’s activities discussed in the private ruling application. Furthermore, the Trust has contended that legal services acquired should not be denied creditable purpose as the supplies to which the legal services are related, are not input taxed but rather, supplies in respect of the activities discussed. Those activities are not reproduced in full here but notably, it is apparent that such activities have been described to be, and should appropriately be the activities of the trustee in carrying out the role of a trustee (that is, in its corporate capacity) as opposed to being activities of the Trust.

Consequently, in this case, it cannot be concluded that activities of the Trust, which primary consist of investing, amount to an enterprise being carried on by the Trust.

Paragraphs 205 to 208 of MT 2006/1 contain two relevant examples concerning a holding entity not carrying on an enterprise and also investment activities that are not an enterprise.

As such, our opinion based on the circumstances of this case is that the Trust does not carry on an enterprise for GST purposes and therefore the requirements at paragraph 11-5(a) are not satisfied.

On a separate matter, it is also noted that potential application of Division 139 concerning adjustments for distributions from deceased estates, has not been considered in this private ruling.


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).