| Disclaimer This edited version has been archived due to the length of time since original publication.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: 1051421331001
Date of advice: 28 August 2018
Ruling
Subject: Capital gains tax – deceased estate (2 year discretion)
Question
Will the Commissioner exercise his discretion under subsection 118-195(1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) and extend the 2 year period?
Answer
Yes.
In this case the complexities that arose in regards to finalising the estate were attributed to the delays in relation to the completion of the administration of the estate. Having considered the circumstances and the factors outlined below, the Commissioner is able to apply his discretion under subsection 118-195(1) of the ITAA 1997 and allow an extension of time.
This ruling applies for the following period:
30 June 2018
The scheme commences on:
1 July 2017
Relevant facts and circumstances
The deceased passed away in XXXX.
The property was acquired by the deceased in XXXX.
The deceased used the property as their main residence for the entire ownership period. The property was never used for income producing purposes.
The deceased’s child A (“you”) and the deceased’s child B (“your sibling”) were appointed as executors on the will.
Your Child B had previously lived in the property with the deceased and decided to continue to reside in the property after the deceased’s passing, without any legal interest in the property as they believed that they would be inheriting the property.
There was no right to occupy clause stipulated in the will, nor any indication to support your siblings claim that they would inherit the property. However your sibling continued to reside in the property.
You disputed these claims and engaged a solicitor to conduct negotiations with your sibling to attempt to reach an agreement regarding the property.
Probate of the will was granted and you were appointed as the legal personal representative of the estate.
During this time of trying to reach an agreement your sibling was uncooperative and avoided many interactions of communication to resolve the issue, despite continued efforts by you to resolve the dispute. Your sibling was unwilling to compromise or adhere to the terms of the will.
Your sibling then lodged a court application seeking readjustment of the will.
An official mediation commenced in XXXX, however no agreement was reached.
The matter went to trial in XXXX.
An agreement was reached and Terms of Settlement were executed.
The Court approved the Terms of Settlement and distribution to the beneficiaries in XXXX.
The property settled and the transferred occurred in XXXX.
The delay in selling the property was due to the complexity of dealing with the estate matters and the issues having to be resolved through court which was outside your control.
Relevant legislative provisions
Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 subsection 118-195(1)