WARNING:
This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as
introduced and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest
does not have any official legal status. Other sources should be
consulted to determine the subsequent official status of the
Bill.
CONTENTS
Passage History
Purpose
Background
Main Provisions
Endnotes
Contact Officer & Copyright Details
Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No. 5) 2000
Date Introduced: 17
February 2000
House: House of
Representatives
Portfolio: Treasury
Commencement: Royal Assent. However, the measures contained in
the Bill have differing application dates which are dealt within
the Main Provisions section of this Digest.
To:
-
- alter the calculation of the market value of shares for
calculations under provisions dealing with the taxation of employee
share ownership schemes where an employee share offer is made in
conjunction with a public offer by a listed company
-
- provide the Commissioner with a discretion to extend the time
for reporting by trustees of closely held trusts and to allow such
trustees to recoup from others tax paid in certain circumstances,
and
-
- exempt from sales tax the additional cost of manufacturing
motor vehicles for use by, or in relation to, disabled
persons.
As there is no central theme to the Bill the background to the
various measures will be discussed below.
Employee Share Ownership Schemes
(ESOS)
Since the introduction of the Capital Gains Tax in 1985 and the
Fringe Benefits Tax (FBT) in 1986, the provision of shares, or
rights to shares, in lieu of income has been a less attractive
method of tax minimisation for both employers and employees. In
order to escape FBT liability, shares or rights provided under an
ESOS must satisfy the criteria contained in the Income Tax
Assessment Act 1936 (ITAA36). Subject to transitional
provisions, shares or rights issued prior to 6pm on 28 March 1985
had to comply with section 26AAC, while since that time Division
13A of Part III of the ITAA36 has had to be complied with. Division
13A was introduced to curtail the use of ESOS as a tax minimisation
scheme and the remainder of this Digest will deal with the
situation since the introduction of Division 13A.
Tax Treatment
Under Division 13A, any discount between the price that a share
or right is acquired for and its market value is to be included in
the income for the year in which it is acquired (the calculation of
the amount of discount can vary depending on circumstances of
acquisition and disposal) unless the share or right is a qualifying
share or right and the taxpayer has not elected that Division 13A
is not to apply.
If a share or right qualifies for concessional treatment under
Division 13A, the main advantages are that the first $1 000 of such
income is to be excluded or the inclusion of any discount
associated with the receipt of the share/rights in assessable
income may be delayed by up to 10 years.
To be a qualifying share or right, it must be provided under an
employee share scheme (ESS) as defined in section 139C, which is
basically where the share or right is provided in relation to
employment or the provision of a service by the taxpayer or an
associate and the share or right is provided for less than market
value (ie there is a discount). If acquired under an ESS, a share
or right will be a qualifying share or right if the following
conditions are satisfied:
-
- the share or right is in the company employing the taxpayer or
the holding company of the employing company
-
- the shares or rights to be acquired relate to ordinary
shares
-
- at the time the shares are acquired by the taxpayer at least
75% of the permanent employees of the employer are, or were at an
earlier time, entitled to acquire shares or rights under the ESS or
another ESS (the Commissioner may deem this condition to be
satisfied if the employer has done everything reasonably
practicable to ensure that the condition is satisfied), and
-
- immediately after the acquisition the taxpayer does not hold
more than 5% of the shares in the company or more than 5% of the
voting rights in the company (section 139CD).
If a share is a qualifying share and the taxpayer does not wish
to defer the inclusion of the discount amount in assessable income
in the year it is acquired, but does wish to take advantage of the
exemption of the first $1 000 of the value of the share, the
following conditions must be satisfied:
-
- the scheme does not have any conditions that can result in
ownership being forfeited
-
- shares, rights or shares acquired as a result of exercising
rights cannot be disposed of within 3 years of the acquisition of
the share or right unless the taxpayer ceases employment with the
employer, and
-
- the scheme operates on a non-discriminatory basis (this is
expounded on in section 139GF and is basically that there is no
different treatment for different categories of employees) (section
139CE).
(Generally it could be expected that the choice that the
taxpayer will make between the $1000 exclusion and possible 10 year
deferral will depend on the value of the shares/rights received. If
the value of the discount received in a year is $1 000 or less, the
most tax effective course is to immediately include the amount in
income. However, if the amount is substantial the taxpayer is
likely to take advantage of the deferral which can be used in
conjunction with other tax planning, such as inclusion in other
years when assessable income is low, to result in a lower overall
tax bill.)
Once the value of the discount has been taken into account
through inclusions in assessable income, normal capital gains tax
rules apply for any subsequent disposal of the shares, with the
cost base of the shares/rights being based on the market value of
the share at the time of acquisition.
Extent of ESOS
As with many other areas involving tax concessions, it is
impossible to give a costing of the concessions available to ESOS,
nor to quantify the extent to which they operate.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) figures estimate that, as
of August 1999, approximately 400 000 employees receive share
benefits, which represents approximately 5.5% of the total number
of employees. The ABS figures show high amounts of share benefits
in communication services (30.2%) and finance and insurance
(29.24%) and a much higher incidence amongst full-time employees
compared to part-time employees. The figures also show that the
highest rate of share benefits are for managers and administrators
(12.6%), advanced clerical and service workers (9.5%) and associate
professionals (7.6%). The lowest rate is amongst labourers and
related workers (1.7%).(1) These figures tend to support
the view that while ESOS have to be aimed at all employees, the
rate of take up of general share benefits, which may be provided
under schemes other than ESOS, is much higher among managers and
other senior officers of service industry employers and their
impact among lower paid, 'blue collar' workers is relatively
minor.
While the above figures give an indication of the numbers
involved in receiving share benefits, they do not indicate the
value of benefits received and so a conclusion cannot be reached on
whether this increases the bias indicated above. In regard to the
lack of statistical information on the extent and distribution of
share benefits which gain a tax concession (ie ESOS), in recent
submissions to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on
Employment, Education and Workplace Relations, Inquiry Into Share
Ownership in Australian Enterprises, the following statements were
made in response to a request for information regarding, amongst
other matters, the extent of ESOS:
Australian Taxation Office:
The ATO does not have details as to the precise
extent to which employee share ownership schemes have been
established or the amount of contributions being made to these
schemes.(2)
(The submission provided no estimates of these matters.)
Australian Securities and Investment Commission:
....ASIC has no statistical information on the Inquiry's terms
of reference.(3)
The absence of meaningful statistical data in this area
precludes any judgement being made on the effectiveness of ESOS
from a policy point of view as while benefits from the schemes in
matters such as productivity can also be hard to judge, there is no
reliable estimate of the cost of the scheme to compare the benefits
to.
While not necessarily part of an ESOS, the shares/rights made
available to senior executives have received considerable recent
comment and while comprehensive overall statistics are not
available, individual entitlements for senior officers of public
companies are publicly available. The Australian Financial
Review recently published a list of the top 100 remuneration
and equity packages. In relation to equity ownership, some examples
from that list include:
|
Company
|
Name of Executive
|
Options gross value
|
|
News Corporation
|
P. Chemin
|
$69 853 500
|
|
Westpac bank
|
RL Joss
|
$51 888 340
|
|
Coles Myer
|
D Eck
|
$47 220 000
|
|
National Aust Bank
|
DR Argus
|
$35 856 000
|
|
BHP
|
PM Anderson
|
$32 775 000
|
|
C'wealth Bank
|
DV Murray
|
$19 384 000
|
|
Colonial Group
|
PJ Smedley
|
$17 070 000
|
Source: The Australian Financial Review, 1 November
1999.
The House of Representatives Standing Committee on Employment,
Education and Workplace Relations, Inquiry Into Share Ownership in
Australian Enterprises, is anticipated to report in April or May
2000.
When determining the value of a share or right listed on the
market, section 139FA provides that the market value is to be
determined by the weighted average of the share price during the
week, including the day under consideration, leading to the time in
respect of which the assessment is made or, if there was no such
trading, the market value is to be determined as if the stock were
an unlisted stock. (Market value is important in determining the
amount of the discount received.). On 2 September 1999 the
Treasurer announced that where a public offer of shares is made by
a listed company and at the same time such shares are offered to
employees, the value of the shares for the employees will be the
public offer price, rather than the weighted average price. This
was explained as overcoming 'an anomaly in the existing law that
produces unintended consequences'.(4)
Schedule 2 will insert a new section
139FAA into the ITAA36. The proposed section will apply to
calculate market value where a number of conditions are satisfied,
including:
-
- the share is acquired within 7 days before, and 7 days after,
the time when shares were first acquired under the public
offer
-
- the voting, dividend and distribution rights of the share
acquired are the same as those for the public offer shares
-
- there is at least one price at which shares were sold under the
public offer to at least
1 000 Australian residents and the cost of acquiring those shares
was at least $1 million, and
-
- the company has been a listed public company for at least 6
months.
If these conditions are satisfied, the market value of the
shares will be the lowest price that the shares were sold in the
public offer that satisfies the criteria referred to in the third
point above.
Application: To shares and rights acquired
after 1 September 1999.
Closely Held Trusts
A closely held trust is defined in section 102UC of the ITAA36
to be:
-
- a trust where up to 20 individuals have a fixed entitlement to
75% or more of the income or capital of the trust, or
-
- a discretionary trust
other than a complying superannuation fund, approved deposit
fund or a pooled superannuation trust; a trust of a deceased
estate; a fixed trust where all the beneficiaries are tax exempt;
or a unit trust listed on the Australian Stock Exchange.
Division 6D of Part III of the ITAA36 provides for the trustee
of a closely held trust to report to the Commissioner on the
ultimate beneficiaries of the trust so that the Commissioner can
check that tax is paid on the distributions. The statement
outlining the distributions is known as the UB Statement. A UB
Statement is to include details of any tax preferred amount paid to
a beneficiary (eg amounts not required to be included in assessable
income), other amounts paid and identification details of the
ultimate beneficiary.
Currently, section 102UH provides that a UB Statement must be
made to the Commissioner by the end of the period in which the
trust is required to provide its income tax return. Item 3
of Schedule 3 will substitute a new section
102UH which will provide the Commissioner with power to
allow a further period for the provision of the UB Statement.
If a UB Statement is not provided or is incorrect, tax is
payable by the trustee at the highest marginal rate plus Medicare
levy in respect of the beneficiary for whom a UB Statement has not
been provided or is incorrect. Item 5 will insert
a new subsection 102UK(2A) which will allow a
trustee to correct a UB Statement, and not be liable for tax,
where:
-
- the trustee believed on reasonable grounds that the original UB
Statement was correct
-
- the trustee could not reasonably have foreseen the event that
caused the UB Statement to be incorrect, and
-
- the correction is made either before the trustee becomes liable
to pay the tax or within 4 years of the tax becoming payable.
If a trustee becomes liable for, and has paid, tax under
Division 6D proposed section 102USA will allow the
trustee to sue to recover the amount paid in certain circumstances.
Action may be taken against:
-
- an ultimate beneficiary
-
- a trustee beneficiary, or
-
- the trustee of an interposed trust or a partner of an
interposed partnership
where:
-
- the person has been requested to provide information in
relation to the UB Statement and has failed to do so, or
-
- the person has supplied incorrect information that the trustee
has reasonable grounds to honestly believe was correct.
Application: Subject to the Commissioner's
discretion (see below), the amendments will apply from the same
time as Division 6D, ie. for amounts entitled to be received after
4pm on 13 August 1998 (subitem 9(1)). The
Commissioner will have power to delay the commencement of the
changes by up to 1 year (subitem 9(2)).
Motor Vehicles for Transporting Disabled
Persons
The current sales tax regime contains a number of exemptions in
respect of motor vehicles used to transport disabled people,
including:
-
- motor vehicles for disabled veterans
-
- motor vehicles used by disabled persons for transportation to
and from gainful employment, and
-
- goods used to modify motor vehicles to adapt them for driving
by a disabled person or for transporting a disabled person.
On 5 November 1999, the Assistant Treasurer announced that, with
regard to modified vehicles, the part of the cost of the vehicle
attributable to making the vehicle suitable to be driven by, or
used to transport, a disabled person would be exempt from sales
tax. The main difference between the proposal and current
provisions is that the proposal will apply to the manufacture,
rather than modification, of vehicles.
The measure was announced to have effect from 26 June 1998, the
date that the NSW government announced the release of 400
additional wheelchair accessible taxi licences.(5)
The changes will be introduced by item 1 of Schedule
1 of the Bill, which will insert a new section
49A into the Sales Tax Assessment Act 1992. The
proposed section will apply to motor vehicles designed or adapted
for driving by, or for the transportation of, people with a
physical impairment. The additional cost of manufacturing the
vehicle for either of these purposes will be exempt.
Application: For dealings in goods on or after
26 June 1998.
- Australian Bureau of Statistics, Employee Earnings,
Benefits and Trade Union membership, August 1999, 6310.0.
- Submission to the Committee Secretary, 30 April 1999, p.1.
- ASIC, 30 April 1999, p 3.
- Treasurer, Press Release, 2 September 1999.
- Assistant Treasurer, Press Release, 5 November
1999.
Chris Field
13 March 2000
Bills Digest Service
Information and Research Services
This paper has been prepared for general distribution to
Senators and Members of the Australian Parliament. While great care
is taken to ensure that the paper is accurate and balanced, the
paper is written using information publicly available at the time
of production. The views expressed are those of the author and
should not be attributed to the Information and Research Services
(IRS). Advice on legislation or legal policy issues contained in
this paper is provided for use in parliamentary debate and for
related parliamentary purposes. This paper is not professional
legal opinion. Readers are reminded that the paper is not an
official parliamentary or Australian government document.
IRS staff are available to discuss the paper's contents with
Senators and Members
and their staff but not with members of the public.
ISSN 1328-8091
© Commonwealth of Australia 2000
Except to the extent of the uses permitted under the
Copyright Act 1968, no part of this publication may be
reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, including
information storage and retrieval systems, without the prior
written consent of the Parliamentary Library, other than by Members
of the Australian Parliament in the course of their official
duties.
Published by the Department of the Parliamentary Library,
2000.
Back to top