| Disclaimer This edited version has been archived due to the length of time since original publication.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 private ruling
Authorisation Number: 1012467431721
Ruling
Subject: Residency
Question
Is Company A an Australian resident for tax purposes?
Answer
Yes.
This ruling applies for the following periods:
Year ended 30 June 2013
The scheme commences on:
1 July 2012
Relevant facts and circumstances
Company A is incorporated outside Australia.
Company A is the sole shareholder of an Australian incorporated company, Company B.
Company A 's operations solely relate to the management of Company B and other group entities/subsidiaries of Company B.
Company A's income is derived solely from the investment decisions it makes.
Company A currently has multiple directors, the majority of the directors are Australian residents for tax and migration purposes, and the minority is a/are foreign resident(s).
Currently, all directors' meetings of Company A are held in Australia and will continue to be held in Australia. The foreign director(s) join the meetings via video conferencing facilities.
Relevant legislative provisions
Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 Section 6-1 and
Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 995-1.
Reasons for decision
There are three tests to determine residency for the purposes of income tax law: refer to subsection 6(1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (ITAA 1936).
A company will be a resident if:
· it is incorporated in Australia, or
if the company is not incorporated in Australia, but it is either:
· carrying on a business in Australia and its central management and control is in Australia, or
· carrying on a business in Australia and its voting power is controlled by shareholders who are Australian residents.
A company will only need to satisfy one of the tests to be a resident of Australia for tax purposes.
Company A is not incorporated in Australia, so it is necessary to consider if Company A is carrying on a business in Australia with further consideration to whether that business' central control and management is in Australia; or whether the voting power is controlled by shareholders who are Australian residents.
Carries on a business in Australia
The question of where business is carried on is one of fact requires consideration of where the activities of the company are carried on and is dependent on the facts and circumstances of a case. A company, whose income earning outcomes are largely dependent on the investment decision made in respect of its assets, carries on its business where these decisions are made.
Company A is a holding company and sole shareholder of Company B. Company A's sole asset is Company B which is an Australian incorporated company.
You indicate that Company A currently holds all directors' meetings in Australia. The foreign director(s) joins the board meetings via video conferencing facilities.
The majority of the directors are resident directors.
As the income earning outcomes of Company A are decided by a majority board of directors in Australia, Company A is therefore carrying on a business in Australia.
Location of central management and control
Currently the majority of board members of Company A are based in Australia, and the foreign director(s) joins the board meetings via video conferencing facilities. There is a focus on where the participants contributing to high level decisions are based when determining the location of central management and control. The fact that a majority of board members are located in Australia when participating in the meetings satisfies that central management and control is in Australia (paragraph 50 Taxation Ruling TR 2004/15).
Conclusion
As Company A is located in Australia and it is carrying on business in Australia, it is a resident of Australia under the second statutory test.