Header Ad Module

Collapse

Developing, Trading, Tax & Structures - Grey IRD area

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • sbw
    Opinionated
    • Feb 2011
    • 166

    #1

    Developing, Trading, Tax & Structures - Grey IRD area

    A hypothetical example... - lets leave GST completely out of this to begin with.

    As it stands, Jeff owns properties which are for either long term investment properties (meaning retirement 15-20years away), and the house he owns and live in. All of these properties are owned in Jeff's own name.

    Jeff buys another house, this time with the intention to renovate it, add capital value, and then sell it in 6-12 months time, for a profit.

    Obviously the intention is to make a profit, so therefore there is income tax to pay on the profits. e.g.

    Sale price at completion 200,000
    expenses (50,000)
    less purchase price (100,000)
    profit = 50,000
    tax @ 33% = (16,500)
    net profit = 33,500

    The house is sold, profit is made and Jeff is happy.

    Jeff now "needs" to sell his long term investment property (which he thought would wait for retirement) and sells this property for more than what he paid for it 2 years ago. He needs to sell this property due to financial problems.


    Questions:

    1) What do you think is the best way to structure the purchase of the development property to keep Jeff's development interest separate from his long term investments and own house? (avoid tainting and associated person rules) *

    2) does he need to pay tax on the long term investment property he sold due to financial problems?

    3) if he sold the long term investment property to free up capital for other developments would he have to pay tax?


    * I have previously heard of people setting up trading trusts and buy and hold long term trusts. I don't know if the rules still allow this - as a means to avoid associated parties? But could someone go into a bit more detail about who would be the settler, the trustee, the beneficiaries ect?

    What about if you set up two trusts - one for your family/bach home, and another for your long term buy and hold properties (yourself as the trustee and kids/dog as the beneficiaries). Then set up a company for your developments? (as you as the shareholder and director) You pay tax on each property you buy and sell for developments in the company, and the trusts are separate - or would they be, because you are the trustee and the director/shareholder of company?

    I know the people with the answers are not probably going to contribute much here - as this is where their money for intellectual property is very high. but hopefully someone with experience or someone nice who will share will come forward and give their thoughts!
  • spaceman
    Banned
    • Feb 2004
    • 2841

    #2
    1.There is no need for any special structure ...... your example is quite clear ....... the properties that Jeff owns before he started trading aren't "tainted" ......only properties purchased AFTER he started trading.

    There is no need for any special structure to protect the existing properties and it is arguable that with the new rules around trusts/associated persons that it is "impossible" to "structure yourself" to avoid tainting any future purchases. As any moves to avoid tainting would be seen as tax avoidance.

    The new rules are quite recent and I don't know if anybody has tested them for certain. But as the whole point of the new rules was to stop people from using trusts to avoid paying tax, it's reasonably logical that any attempt to circumvent the new rules is automatically tax avoidance.

    2 & 3. No

    Cheers
    Spaceman
    Last edited by spaceman; 20-05-2011, 09:39 PM.

    Comment

    • motivated
      Forum Junkie
      • Oct 2007
      • 371

      #3
      You DO need to set up separate structures to protect your long term assets from risks taken in your development and trading activities. ie at least 2 entities. Make a development mistake and the whole lot is at risk if they are in one structure/entity.
      What type of structures and how many you set up will depend on your own situation, probably best to get that advice from your lawyer/accountant or other professional advisor

      Comment

      • spaceman
        Banned
        • Feb 2004
        • 2841

        #4
        The war never ends

        Motivated has a point regarding asset protection ...... however that wasn't the thrust of the OP's post ....... asset protection appears to be a valid reason for setting up trusts, but in my experience they protection they provide isn't really as clear cut as it seems. The banks/lenders want collateral and tend not to lend into entities where they can't see enough assets to cover the loan without demanding cross-collateralisation

        Cheers
        Spaceman
        Last edited by spaceman; 21-05-2011, 09:54 AM.

        Comment

        • Rosco
          Fanatical
          • May 2007
          • 3711

          #5
          Silly question, but don't you work for an accounting firm and therefore shouldn't you easily have resources to answer these questions? I'm happy to answer questions from investors, but I hate hypothecitical questions, or questions on behalf of someone else. If this relates to one of your clients, you really need to do your research somewhere else!

          1) there are some better ways to do this, more around the future than the past.
          2) Spaceman has answered this for you.
          3) answered with 2)

          Associated person rules changed around October 2009. Makes it a lot harder to structure, but not impossible. There are loop holes or ways around the new rules, but as Spaceman correctly says, this could then be viewed as tax avoidance anyway. BUT, all of these rules only matter if more rentals are purchased, and if the entity that buys rentals in the future is tainted. Often very simple, common sense ways to structure around being tainted, without finding loop holes, or going against IRD/government intention. I think Matt Gilligan or myself would have mentioned these before on property talk.

          Ross
          Book a free chat here
          Ross Barnett - Property Accountant

          Comment

          • sbw
            Opinionated
            • Feb 2011
            • 166

            #6
            I'm happy to answer questions from investors, but I hate hypothecitical questions, or questions on behalf of someone else. If this relates to one of your clients, you really need to do your research somewhere else!
            defiantly not!!! don't have any clients as developers or traders!! unethical to ask a question here regarding work too!

            I guess the question is more for a discussion around this and as I suspected the people who know the answers (or have experience - which I don't) aren't willing to share more in depth. Which is fair enough.

            Would you agree Ross, that it is more an interpretation of the rules/law?

            Comment

            • Rosco
              Fanatical
              • May 2007
              • 3711

              #7
              Pretty black and white. No need to get complex with this one, and doesn't come down to subjective opinion or interpretation of the law.

              When you mention discussion around this, you mean "Hypothetical", ie this isn't a real problem you are facing.

              Ross
              Book a free chat here
              Ross Barnett - Property Accountant

              Comment

              • sbw
                Opinionated
                • Feb 2011
                • 166

                #8
                you mean "Hypothetical", ie this isn't a real problem you are facing
                correct - this is not a real problem - developing is something I hope to start myself in the next 2 years. best start learning as much as I can now, so when I am ready I can be prepared.

                Comment

                • Rosco
                  Fanatical
                  • May 2007
                  • 3711

                  #9
                  Two easy ways around tainting

                  1) Under 25% shareholding in trading/development company. ie you and 4 friends (all non related) form company with 20% each. This company then won't taint you. Watch if you have other companies with some of the 4 friends, as this can ruin it.

                  2) Start a company. Do trading or development. It will be tainted and you will most likely be tainted. Finish the trading, cease the business of the company (probably liquidate), then you are no longer tainted! This is what I would suggest for your original question.

                  Issue is if you buy long term holds while trading company exists, then these are tainted! If you want to do this, or do both buying/holding and trading, that is where you need to get more complex.

                  If you can keep to one, then cease, its really simple!

                  Ross
                  Book a free chat here
                  Ross Barnett - Property Accountant

                  Comment

                  • sbw
                    Opinionated
                    • Feb 2011
                    • 166

                    #10
                    I didn't know that!! Thanks for the insight Ross

                    Comment

                    • WGN ex-property manager
                      Fanatical
                      • Jun 2007
                      • 1237

                      #11
                      Originally posted by Rosco View Post
                      1) Under 25% shareholding in trading/development company. ie you and 4 friends (all non related) form company with 20% each. This company then won't taint you. Watch if you have other companies with some of the 4 friends, as this can ruin it.




                      Ross
                      What happens if one of the 4 friends is already tainted from their other activities? Does keeping their shareholding below 20% stop the company (and hence the other shareholders) becoming tainted?

                      Comment

                      • Rosco
                        Fanatical
                        • May 2007
                        • 3711

                        #12
                        Originally posted by Robin McCandless View Post
                        What happens if one of the 4 friends is already tainted from their other activities? Does keeping their shareholding below 20% stop the company (and hence the other shareholders) becoming tainted?
                        If company is trader/developer than it is tainted.

                        It's the shareholder I'm talking about. If a shareholder owns 25% or over, then the company is assoicated to them. So company being trader/developer then taints shareholder by association. So under 25% does not, unless caught under other association rules (hence why I mentioned the relation with other shareholder, or commonly owned companies).

                        Ross
                        Book a free chat here
                        Ross Barnett - Property Accountant

                        Comment

                        • WGN ex-property manager
                          Fanatical
                          • Jun 2007
                          • 1237

                          #13
                          Ok, I think I understand.... but I'm asking about tainting in the other direction.

                          Can the Shareholder taint the company by association if the shareholder is already tainted but the company is a buy and hold entity?

                          EG

                          Tim the Trader is Beneficiary and Trustee of Tim's Trading Trust. He does trading, so he personally is tainted.

                          Tim then goes into business with Maggie the Money partner in, say, a new Qualifying
                          Company. Maggie has 90% shares, Tim has 10%. The company does buy and hold residential only.

                          Is the JV QC tainted by Tim?
                          Is Maggie Thus tained for any other buy and hold's she might have or buy outside the JV?

                          Comment

                          • cube
                            Thinking outside the square.
                            • Jun 2005
                            • 5099

                            #14
                            Wouldn't it all be easier if the IRD said 'if you've owned it for less than 2 years, income/company tax is payable on the profit. If you've owned it for more than two years, no tax is payable', and applied the rule to each property disposal individually.

                            That's the simplest form - a sliding scale of 100 - 75 - 50 - 25% taxable profit would prevent traders holding property for two years and a day.
                            DFTBA

                            Comment

                            • Rosco
                              Fanatical
                              • May 2007
                              • 3711

                              #15
                              Originally posted by Robin McCandless View Post
                              Ok, I think I understand.... but I'm asking about tainting in the other direction.

                              Can the Shareholder taint the company by association if the shareholder is already tainted but the company is a buy and hold entity?

                              EG

                              Tim the Trader is Beneficiary and Trustee of Tim's Trading Trust. He does trading, so he personally is tainted.

                              Tim then goes into business with Maggie the Money partner in, say, a new Qualifying
                              Company. Maggie has 90% shares, Tim has 10%. The company does buy and hold residential only.

                              Is the JV QC tainted by Tim?
                              Is Maggie Thus tained for any other buy and hold's she might have or buy outside the JV?
                              Associate rules are very complex, and you really need to go through them very carefully based on the specific circumstances.

                              Yes a shareholder can taint a company. In your question it is no if no other relationship, but it is very easy to get a yes if shareholding higher, or if Tim has common companies with Maggie or if Tim and Maggie are related.

                              There association rules from person to Company, Company to Company and between all other structures, plus a Tripartite test to catch anything missed.

                              Income Tax Act 2007, sections YB2 to YB 14


                              Ross
                              Book a free chat here
                              Ross Barnett - Property Accountant

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X