Marzena is a property developer and is engaged in the business of developing land into buildings for making profits. In this case, a piece of land was purchased for developing but due to certain restrictions, this plan was cancelled and the land was sold. In this case, the issue is to determine whether the selling of land is assessable income. In addition to this is also required to determine whether selling of separate lock of land is a part of ordinary income.
In Australia, every individual business or other entity is required to pay tax as per section 4-1 of ITAA 1997. This tax is paid on the taxable income that is calculated by subtracting from assessable income the allowable deductions as per section 4-15 of the ITAA 1997. In the assessable income, both the ordinary income and statutory income are included. The income according to the ordinary concept is regarded as the ordinary income as per section 6-5 of the ITAA 1997. The income that are not ordinary income are statutory income as per 6-10 of the ITAA 1997. The section 6-5 and section 6-10 state that in case of resident income from all the sources is taxable. On analyzing the above issue, it can be said that the income received from selling of land is an accessible as for the above sections.
The capital gain is taxed at a normal rate but it is regarded as statutory income. Therefore, it is important to ascertain the nature of income in order to determine whether the income is in the nature of ordinary income of category income. The capital gain arise from sale of capital assets and the example of Capital Asset is provided in section 100-25 of the ITAA 1997 that includes land. However, it should be noted that an assets is regarded as capital assets if it is not regarded as inventory. In this case, the intention of the taxpayer was to use as inventory for the purpose of sale. Therefore, it can be said that income derived from the sale of land should be regarded as an ordinary income.
Conclusion
Based on the above discussion it can be said that income did from selling of land is taxable income. However, the income is an ordinary income and they are not statutory income.
In this case, the business is engaged in underground drilling. The company has entered into a contract of constructing of rails with the Queensland state government. The contract provides the government will provide funding for the equipment that is necessary for the contract. However, the contractor is required to engage exclusively for the project for the term of 3 years. If this contract is violated then the company will have to pay for the equipment that was founded by the government. The issue here is to determine the treatment of the funding received from government. In addition to this, another issue is to ascertain whether accrual or cash accounting system should be followed.
The laws and rules that have been applied are:
The Taxation Ruling 98/1 provides that there are mainly two types of accounting the cash basis or the accrual basis. The para 18 of the ruling provides that cash basis of accounting is appropriate for employment income, nonbusiness income and income that are derived from business from personal skill and knowledge. In para 20 the rule provides that earning method is appropriate for accounting of business. Based on the ruling it can be said that in this case earning method to be followed.
The Para 10 of the Taxation Ruling 2006/3 provides that the payment that has been made to the business by the government for continuing the operation should be included in the assessable income. If the business agrees to sacrifice profit or provides share as the consideration for the funding provided then this should not be included in the assessable income. In this case, the business has received funding from the government without sacrificing any profit or share of business. Therefore, the amount of fund received from the government should be included in the assessable income of the business.
Conclusion
Based on the above discussion it can be concluded that for the business earning method of accounting should be followed. The business should include the amount of fund received from the government in the assessable income.
In the country of Australia, the allowance of capital gain tax is provided to undersized business and forms part of the laws and rules of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997. The most important plan is looking at the allowance of CGT that is provided to the undersized industry concession. The paper also consists of the state of affairs that are required to be fulfilled by the small businesses for getting the concession of the Capital Gain Tax (Devos 2012). The financially viable augmentation and service in Australia is mainly dependent on the achievement of the small trading industries. In the miniature business, the increase rate of employment for the annual period has been 3.2% as per the research.
The study shows that the most important contribution of service in Australia is provided by undersized businesses. It has shown that around 44% of the total service in Australia is made obtainable by undersized industry (Sadiq and Marsden 2014). The small industry has given employment to around 4.7 million individuals in the state for the duration of the year under concern i.e. 2014 as per the statement of Research Paper series, 2015-16 of parliamentary Library Report of the country Australia. Thus, it could be seen that the minute industry is noteworthy for Australian system of finance. Consequently, in this relation a discussion is made on the conclusion and effects of CGT dispensation on minute business.
The relationship for Economic group effort and improvement has 30 associates and the country is a significant member of the association. The country had been the previous associate to launch the capital gain tax amongst the associate lands (Sadiq and Marsden 2014). Originally, Australia was reluctant to create an obligation of tax on capital gain. On the 20 September 1985, there was imposition of duty on capital gain by instigation of the provisions under section 160A to section 160 ZZU Part III of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936. The revenue generated from the utilizing of the properties and belongings was taxed but the earnings that are made on trade of possessions were not levied with tax. The unjust benefit that subsisted on the purchase and sale of assets was removed by commencing the duty on capital gain (Latimer 2012). Hence, for removing this discrepancy in the system of taxation, there was an introduction of the Capital gain tax.
The levy of capital gain had an introduction with the employment of section 26(a) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936. There was an early re-introduction under the section 15-15 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (Evans et al. 2014). Under the section 26(a) of the stated Act, it was declared that if the acquisition of the assets with the purpose of building profit then revenue from retailing of such goods is chargeable. There are certain limitations of this section that requires to be ascertained about the taxpayer at the instance of acquisition. Consequently, for the avoidance of the given difficulty a new common form of levy on the capital is created.
The latest ruling affirms that if the asset is acquired succeeding to the date 20 September 1985, the levy of capital gain will be appropriate on the disposal of those possessions. The assets that are procured before the day, 20 September 1985 are recognized as the CGT possessions and no capital gain levy had been forced on the trading of the said properties and resources. Under the section 6-5 and section 6-10 of the ITAA 1997, it has been stated that a person is mandatory to disburse duty or obligations on all the incomes that is derived throughout the year irrespective of the actuality about the profit being statutory or general in nature. It is supposed to be a noted that, there is no existence of any breaking up of the CGT tax having an application on the capital gains. The net amount of the calculated capital gain is thought to be the statutory income and the tax calculation based on the rates of marginal tax (Saad 2014). It ought to be distinguished that discarding of resources is not a common business action so that it is measured as legal proceeds.
The trouble of duty falls more critically and deeply on the undersized industry and this unfavorably have an effect on the economy of Australia. The depressing effects are that it puts off the investments and savings in the undersized trades. Consequently, with the intention of accomplishing the objectives the CGT allowance that is provided to the undersized enterprise are simplified and comprehensive. The most important rationale for modification the rulings are to encourage the small enterprises so that they can be able to sustain their significant role in the financial system (Arnold et al. 2014).The prerequisites of CGT dispensation are made extra moderate and liberal by growing the significance of concession. There has also been an ease in the criterion of eligibility (Doran et al. 2013).
The enlargement of the financial system is accelerated by the contribution of the capital from the undersized trade possessors (Russell 2016). It was put under observation that the undersized business frequently faces complexity owing in the direction of the deficiency of the resources for growth and it is observed that in the majority of scenarios the holders does not have adequate amount of funds for retirement. It was stated by the honorable Treasurer of Australia that the most important purpose towards the evaluation of the ruling is to make available the small enterprises with adequate investments for development and making obtainable enough resources in the reach of the undersized business possessors after retirement.
The small owners of business are given CGT dispensation for the relief of tax to be presented to them on retailing and purchasing of industry if they turn out to be debilitated or make a decision of retiring (Evans et al. 2014). The intention of this liberation is to smoothen up the advancement of outlay and savings. It has been observed that the taxation system of the modern era enforces serious load of tax to the taxpayer and it is predominantly more in case of the taxpayers of a small business (Bender 2013). The allowances are thus vital for reducing the tax burden for the taxpayers of the small businesses. In the next segment of the report, there is a discussion about the concessions.
The CGT dispensation for undersized industries is provided under the Division 152 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997. The law states that if the certain conditions defined in section and the ones provided in the act are fulfilled, then the taxpayers of the undersized industry are permitted to gain any one among the many dispensations that are pointed out below (King 2014):
There can be availing of the CGT concessions if the situations provided forming part between the sections 152-1 to 152-60 are satisfied There are a multiple number of circumstances that are required to be contented and in a small amount of cases there are a few additional obligation that is desired to be fulfilled (Borowski 2013). With the help of an example, the same can be explained like, presume Mr. Ash selling a capital asset then in that case, he benefits from the 15 years exemption case. The major clause is that the property should have been actively used for a period of 15 years however; it is not as much as necessary to avail the reduction. Additionally, he has the obligation to retreat after the occasion of CGT occurs. Only, than Mr. Ash can obtain the concession of CGT (McKerchar Bloomquist and Pope 2013).
For availing the concession of CGT, there should be an event of CGT is an obvious fact derived. On the other hand, it should be kept in mind that the concession of CGT is appropriate only if the events take place after the day 21 September 1999 and 11:45 AM (Campbell 2015). Under the section, 152-10 of the stated Act, there is particular elementary necessities that the taxpayer must reassure and they are as follows:
In the cases where there is non-meeting of the above stated facts, then the allowances under CGT is not offered to the taxpayer. In the next section of the report, the CGT concessions that the undersized business can achieve is discussed in fine points.
The above discussions defines the nature of the undersized firms in getting the allowances for the benefits obtained from the four categories of the underlying principles under concession of CGT. The concession of CGT permits the miniature business to decrease the amount of levy or duty of the capital gain that is due (Marsden, Sadiq and Wilkins 2012). The requisite details of the concession of CGT are discussed further so that the purpose and principle of the concession of CGT can be correctly assessed.
The exemption considers the fact that a person being 55 years of age or more can take no notice of capital gain on removal of assets that have been held for a period of 15 years or more. The subsequent provision is that after the occurrence of CGT, the taxpayer has to retire or should be forever kept out of action. This exemption is also applicable to the considerable company, trust in which they have in custody a property for 15 years or more (O’Connell, Martin and Chia 2013). It must be noted that if this provision comes under application, then the other three conditions have to be ignored.
There should be a process for the verification and making sure that the business or firms had not been allowed the benefits of the 15 years exemption. Furthermore, they should be verified to make certain and remove the doubts about the qualifications for this exemption. The fundamental situations are provided under the subdivision 152A of the Act that must be satisfied for ensuring a 50% reduction of net capital. The reduction allowed is verified from the end of the taxpayer on selling off an active asset (Morgan 2014).
An individual of a small business can claim an exemption from capital gains on the selling off the assets. Furthermore, the significant individual of a company or trust can also obtain an exemption from retirement if the sales proceeds had been used towards the intention of the retirement purpose. The maximum exemption that can be claimed by a person is $500000. There can be a disregarding of the capital assets, if the person’s age is 55 years or more. An individual having an age lower than 55 years must have the proceeds from the sale of capital assets moved and rolled across the superannuation fund. The same is performed in anticipation of the age of safeguarding for obtaining the claim of such exemptions (Kewley 2013). If the maximum exemption limit does not exceed $500000, the taxpayer can also declare exemption on the occurrence of the CGT (Pinto 2013).
The taxpayer get an allowance to rollover and move the capital gain in a prospective date from the disposal date of the capital assets only on the satisfaction of the basic state of affairs. The exclusion applies only if the taxpayer creates capital gain situation from the transfer or substitution of the capital assets at a period of one year before or two years subsequent to the sale of the previous dealing (Cummings 2016). This further means, that the taxpayer has the capability to postpone the legal responsibility of CGT for a period of two years following the sale of the active assets devoid of any incurrence of the consequences for such postponement.
With the help of an example, we can evaluate and assess the importance of CGT concession. A small industry owner Mr. Show sold off his industry and obtained a capital gain of $10000. As per the Act and rules, the rate of payment of tax is 46.5% on the capital gain and thus his tax burden of duty comes out to an amount of $4650. Further, if he gets an allowance of claiming the CGT concession of 50%, then his liability will come out to an amount of $2325. As a result, if the CGT concession is applied i.e. 50% the small business owner, thus making it save a tax liability of an amount of $2325, receives deduction (Gerrans 2012). The case demonstrates that, on retirement the concessions of CGT help to give added funds to the undersized company or small owners of business.
In the given portion, the system of CGT is evaluated to find out as to whether the objective on a whole is achieved or not. There was a proposal of the four sayings for high-quality taxation arrangements in the 18th Century. The system of taxation is calculated on the basis that includes simplicity, effectiveness and equity (Forman and Mackenzie 2012). In addition, for building the evaluation the expenditure of administration and compliance must be considered for the short and long run benefits.
The system of taxation must constitute and take account two segments of equity. The two segments are horizontal equity and vertical equity. In case of the horizontal equity, there is a requirement of the provision of equal performance to all the natives of comparable financial condition. The major aim and objective of horizontal one is to encourage social justice (Brown and Davis 2012). Thus, the industries that are in identical financially viable situations should be likewise taxed so that the concession of CGT given to small business is intended with the objective of advancing horizontal equity. Thus, those having higher earnings should pay high taxes for the maintenance of a fair liaison among different groups of income. The smaller industries are provided with the concession of CGT, to save them from similar taxes as the huge businesses. Therefore, the equity is referred to as the justice and equality (Evans et al. 2014).
The effectiveness of economic means that the funds are to be paid proficiently so that most favorable yield and production can be attained. In the procedure of gathering of the revenue of tax, there are certain inbuilt restrictions that can be minimized but not eliminated. The inefficiencies in the system are condensed to stop them from influencing the business assessment in a injurious manner. The reduction of inefficiencies in the system of taxation is the objective of the tax restructuring (Liu 2013). CGT was introduced in the year 1985, to get rid of this inadequacy and concessions of CGT were set up so that more development could have been made in the system (Woellner et al. 2016). There has been an observation that the companies have changed their arrangement for gaining the benefits of the undersized business allowances.
If the taxpayer can effortlessly recognize their responsibility then the structure of taxation can be observed to be a simple one. The ease of the taxation system occurs only if the difficulty of the rule and the charge of the procedures of compliance are decreased. On analysis of the Division 152, it is observed that there is a diversity of requirements and circumstances that desires to be well thought-out previous to determining the allowance that is permissible to the undersized industry. Many think about the scenario that the CGT concession amplifies the difficulty of the system and further evaluation proves that the concessions of CGT face breakdown to meet up the criteria of the test of simplicity (Raftery 2014).
It is also a case of dispute that concession provided to the small businesses has diminished their efficiency and additional equity is injured. The scheme has turned out to be more and more complex with the development of the rules connecting to the concessions of CGT. However, the level of difficulty has been increased, due to the chief aim being the ensuring of the available adequate funds to the minute business for development and undersized industry possessors for giving up their work or retirement (Bender 2013).
The research paper has stated with the intention to explain the inclusion of numerous and certain limitations and restriction of the concession structure of CGT, than needs to be put under examination. The section contains the explanation and discussions of the proposed amendments. The utmost test of net assets in its present form is impracticable as affirmed by the taxation board for the reason that it is not uncomplicated, reasonable or well organized. The limit of threshold is $5 million and is considered to be impractical in nature.
There was a necessity felt to make available a much broader explanation related the assets in active form. Hence, the Institute of Taxation in Australia has anticipated taking account of the description of assets being active, the software’s and logical property that have an interior development (Russell 2016). It can be said and concluded that if the anticipated and planned changes were completed in the allowance of CGT, then the administration of CGT can be more uncomplicated, unbiased and well-organized(Authority 2013).
Reference
Arnold, B.R., Bateman, H., Ferguson, A. and Raftery, A., 2014. The size, cost and asset allocation of Australian self-managed superannuation funds.
Authority, A.P.R., 2013. Australian Prudential Regulation Authority.
Bender, P., 2013. Bell v FCT: Uncertainties in the small business CGT concessions. Taxation in Australia, 48(1), p.28.
Borowski, A., 2013. Risky by design: The mandatory private pillar of Australia’s retirement income system. Social Policy & Administration, 47(6), pp.749-764.
Brown, C. and Davis, K., 2012. Taxes, tenders and the design of Australian off?market share repurchases. Accounting & Finance, 52(s1), pp.109-135.
Campbell, S., 2015. A mater of trusts: CGT issues when creating and dealing with UPEs. Taxation in Australia, 50(6), p.332.
Cummings, J.R., 2016. Effect of fund size on the performance of Australian superannuation funds. Browser Download This Paper.
Devos, K., 2012. The impact of tax professionals upon the compliance behaviour of Australian individual taxpayers. Revenue Law Journal, 22(1), p.31.
Doran, C.M., Byrnes, J.M., Cobiac, L.J., Vandenberg, B. and Vos, T., 2013. Estimated impacts of alternative Australian alcohol taxation structures on consumption, public health and government revenues. Med J Aust, 199(9), pp.619-622.
Evans, C., Hansford, A., Hasseldine, J., Lignier, P., Smulders, S. and Vaillancourt, F., 2014. Small business and tax compliance costs: A cross-country study of managerial benefits and tax concessions. eJournal of Tax Research, 12(2), p.453.
Fong, C., 2013. Publications of the Honourable Justice Graham Hill. Austl. Tax F., 28, p.169.
Forman, J.B. and Mackenzie, G.D., 2012. Optimal rules for defined contribution plans: what can we learn from the US and Australian pension systems. Tax Law., 66, p.613.
Gerrans, P., 2012. Retirement savings investment choices in response to the global financial crisis: Australian evidence. Australian Journal of Management, 37(3), pp.415-439.
Kewley, N., 2013. The old, the new, and the ugly: A comparative analysis of the UK, South African and Australian CGT small business concessions-with recommendations for Australia. Austl. Tax F., 28, p.257.
King, A., 2014. CGT discount for non-residents: More complex than you think!. Taxation in Australia, 49(1), p.14.
Latimer, P., 2012. Australian Business Law 2012. CCH Australia Limited.
Liu, K., 2013. Australian superannuation: Operational structure, investment performance and trustee governance.
Marsden, S., Sadiq, K. and Wilkins, T., 2012. Small business entity tax concessions: through the eyes of the practitioner. Revenue Law Journal, 22(1), p.67.
McKerchar, M., Bloomquist, K. and Pope, J., 2013. Indicators of tax morale: an exploratory study. eJournal of Tax Research, 11(1), p.5.
Morgan, T., 2014. Getting the SME structure right: Art v science. Taxation in Australia, 48(10), p.578.
O’Connell, A., Martin, F. and Chia, J., 2013. Law, policy and politics in Australia’s recent not-for-profit sector reforms. Austl. Tax F., 28, p.289.
Pinto, D., 2013. Superannuation: Don’t kill the goose that lays the golden egg. Taxation in Australia, 47(9), p.580.
Raftery, A.M., 2014. The size, cost, asset allocation and audit attributes of Australian self-managed superannuation funds (Doctoral dissertation, School of Risk and Actuarial Studies, University of NSW).
Russell, T., 2016. Trust beneficiaries and exemptions from CGT: reflections on the Oswal litigation. Taxation in Australia, 51(6), p.296.
Saad, N., 2014. Tax knowledge, tax complexity and tax compliance: Taxpayers’ view. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 109, pp.1069-1075.
Sadiq, K. and Marsden, S., 2014. The small business CGT concessions: Evidence from the perspective of the tax practitioner. Revenue Law Journal, 24(1), p.1.
Woellner, R., Barkoczy, S., Murphy, S., Evans, C. and Pinto, D., 2016. Australian Taxation Law 2016. Oxford University Press.
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download