Edited version of your written advice

Authorisation Number: 1013069919758

Date of advice: 11 August 2016

Ruling

Subject: Non-commercial business losses and the Commissioner's discretion

Question 1

Is there a discretion that the Commissioner can exercise to exclude payments relating to a court order to wind up a company to which you and your ex-partner were shareholders, from the calculation of the $250,000 income requirement set out in subsection 35-10(2E) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997)?

Answer

No.

Question 2

Will the Commissioner exercise the discretion in paragraph 35-55(1)(a) of the ITAA 1997 to allow you to include any losses from your business activity in your calculation of taxable income for the 20YY to 20ZZ financial year?

Answer

No.

This ruling applies for the following periods:

year ended 30 June 20ZZ

The scheme commences on:

1 July 20YY

Relevant facts and circumstances

You operated a business activity and incurred losses for the 20YY-ZZ financial year.

As a result of a court order to wind up a company to which you and your ex-partner were shareholders, you received dividends and franking credits which caused you to fail the < $250,000 income requirement set out in subsection 35-10(2E) of the ITAA 1997.

Had you not received the payments you would have had access to and passed the $20,000 assessable income test in the 20YY-ZZ financial year.

Relevant legislative provisions

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 subsection 35-10(1)

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 subsection 35-10(2)

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 subsection 35-10(2E), and

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 paragraph 35-55(1)(a).

Reasons for decision

For the 20WW-XX and later financial years, Division 35 of the ITAA 1997 will apply to defer a non-commercial loss from a business activity unless:

• you satisfy the income requirement and you pass one of the four tests

• the exceptions apply, or

• the Commissioner exercises his discretion.

One off payments and the $250,000 adjusted taxable income rule

The income requirement set out in subsection 35-10(2E) of the ITAA 1997, prevents you from accessing the four tests where your adjusted taxable income exceeds $250,000 (that is, your taxable income, reportable fringe benefits, reportable superannuation contributions and total net investment losses but excluding your business losses).

Not all assessable income is included in calculating the adjusted taxable income. Any assessable income attributed to the business activity incurring the loss is not included in the adjusted taxable income calculation. This is because it forms part of the business losses, which are disregarded (the business losses are calculated by deducting the expenses attributed to the business activity from the assessable income 'from' that business activity).

No other income is excluded in the calculation of the adjusted taxable income. Further, there is no discretion provided to Commissioner under Division 35 of the ITAA 1997, which enables him to exclude other income from the calculation of the adjusted taxable income. Therefore payments relating to a court order to wind up a company to which you and your ex-spouse were shareholders, must be included in the adjusted taxable income calculation for the purposes of subsection 35-10(2E) of the ITAA 1997.

Special circumstances and the Commissioner's discretion

As explained above, in your situation you do not satisfy the income requirement for the purposes of subsection 35-10(2E) of the ITAA 1997, and you do not come under any of the exceptions. Your business losses are therefore subject to the deferral rule unless the Commissioner exercises his discretion.

The relevant discretion may be exercised for the financial year in question where your business activity is affected by special circumstances outside your control.

'Special circumstances' are those circumstances which are sufficiently different to distinguish them from the circumstances that occur in the normal course of conducting a business activity, including drought, flood, bushfire or some other natural disaster. For those individuals who do not satisfy the income requirement, special circumstances are those which have materially affected the business activity, causing it to make a loss.

Taxation Ruling TR 2007/6 sets out the Commissioner's interpretation of the exercise of the Commissioner's discretion under paragraph 35-55(1)(a) of the ITAA 1997. The following has been extracted from paragraphs 47 to 53 of this ruling:

Although not limited to natural disasters, paragraph 35-55(1)(a) of the ITAA 1997 refers to special circumstances outside the control of the business activity, including drought, flood, bushfire or some other natural disaster. Cyclones, hailstorms and tsunamis are examples of other natural disasters that would come within the scope of the paragraph. These events are taken to be special circumstances outside the control of the operators of the business activity. The special circumstances must have affected the business activity. 

In your case, you have received payments relating to a court order to wind up a company to which you and your ex-spouse were shareholders.

Receiving the payments did not affect your business activity; instead it caused you to fail the income requirement under subsection 35-10(2E) of the ITAA 1997. This is not considered to be 'special circumstances' for the purposes of paragraph 35-55(1)(a) of the ITAA 1997.

While we appreciate your situation, there is no other discretion available to the Commissioner under Division 35 of the ITAA 1997 that would allow you to claim your losses in the circumstances you describe.