Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
moneymanagement logo
 
 

Cloud over GST payments on SMSF property

property/federal-court/self-managed-superannuation-funds/SMSFs/

5 November 2013
| By Staff |
image
image image
expand image

Self-managed superannuation funds (SMSF) that have recently sold or purchased property may have to examine whether they have to pay Goods and Services Tax (GST) after a recent Full Federal Court ruling put the practice under a cloud.

The court ruled in the case of MBI Properties Pty Limited v Commissioner of Taxation that on the transfer of a property to a new owner, the GST component of rental payments did not carry over to the new owner.

The court stated this was because the contractual agreement in which both rent and the GST component were set was taken out by the leasee and the initial owner acting as landlord, and did not extend to new owners during the course of the lease.

DLA Piper partner Matthew Cridland said the case was relevant for any entity that is GST-registered and which leases commercial premises to tenants.

This could include SMSFs that own commercial premises which produce rent and outgoings in excess of $75,000 per annum, which is the compulsory GST registration threshold. He also stated the case was also relevant to listed and unlisted AREITs that own and lease any commercial premises.

According to Piper, the Federal Court found that an entity which purchases a tenanted property that is subject to an existing lease does not make any "supply" to tenants post-acquisition — meaning that no "increasing adjustment" arises under Division 135 of the GST Act as a result of such an acquisition.

He stated the decision means that purchasers were not liable for GST on any rental income received after the purchase from tenants under leases that were active at the time of the sale, since they were not making any supply of goods or services to tenants.

Cridland said while the Federal Court case dealt with a residential lease there were implications for purchasers of office, commercial, industrial and retail premises, including those held through SMSFs, which are subject to GST when leased.

"If the same logic is followed in the context of taxable leases, it arguably follows that there will be no GST payable by purchasers of a tenanted property, which would be an extraordinary outcome. This decision raises some difficult GST questions for both vendors and purchasers of tenanted properties, as well as for landlords and tenants," Cridland said.

"Vendors may now want an indemnity from purchasers for any ongoing GST liability that could arise in relation to a lease that continues after a property has been sold. Purchasers of tenanted properties may also need to consider whether they are liable for GST in relation to leases that were on foot at completion of a sale. This will be particularly relevant if tenants start to pressure landlords for GST refunds."

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

Significant ethical issues there. If a relationship is in the process of breaking down then both parties are likely to b...

3 weeks 3 days ago

It's not licensees not putting them on, it's small businesses (that are licensed) that cannot afford to put them on. The...

1 month ago

So we are now underwriting criminal scams?...

7 months ago

After last month’s surprise hold, the Reserve Bank of Australia has announced its latest interest rate decision....

3 weeks 5 days ago

ASIC has released the results of the latest adviser exam, with August’s pass mark improving on the sitting from a year ago. ...

2 days 17 hours ago

While the profession continues to see consolidation at the top, Adviser Ratings has compared the business models of Insignia and Entireti and how they are shaping the pro...

1 week 4 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND