Warning on conducting a business
One of the criteria for the exemption in 13.22C to apply is that the trust or company cannot be conducting a business. This requirement may prevent short-term property developments that are built and sold for profit.
Typically, 13.22C arrangements are used for long term investments where the development enables the creation of an asset that is then leased by the trust or company. This could be commercial premises leased to a related or unrelated party (e.g., premises for a child care centre or manufacturing), or residential premises leased to unrelated parties (e.g., townhouses or small developments).
Unrelated property developments
Investing in unrelated entities for a property development is attractive as there is no limit to how much of the fund’s assets can be invested (subject to the investment strategy and trust deed allowing the investment), and unlike ungeared entities, the entity is able to borrow money/place charge over the assets.
Where related parties are investing in the same entity, there are rules governing the percentage of ownership the SMSF and their related parties can hold. To meet the definition of unrelated entity for in-house asset purposes, the SMSF and their related parties must not own more than 50% of the units available. This is because the SMSF cannot control or hold sufficient influence over the entity and remain an unrelated entity. If the ATO considers the entity is related to the SMSF, then it would become a related party and the investment an in-house asset.
Joint venture arrangements
An SMSF can potentially invest in a joint venture (JV) property development, but the criteria are necessarily strict and there are a range of issues that need to be considered carefully. One of the issues that needs to be considered up-front is determining the substance of the arrangement between the parties, because the term JV can be used to describe a variety of arrangements. The ATO confirms that care must be taken to ensure that arrangements with related parties are true JVs.
Under a JV, the SMSF invests in and has a share of the property being developed (not the entity undertaking the development). Each party bears the costs (time and/or money) of the JV and receives this same proportionate contribution from the returns. If the arrangement is not structured properly then the SMSF’s stake in the JV could be treated as an investment in or loan to a related party and be treated as an in-house asset. For example, this could be the case if the SMSF only provides a capital outlay for the arrangement and has no rights other than a contractual right to a return on the final investment.
It is also necessary to consider whether the arrangement between the parties could be treated as a partnership for tax, GST and legal purposes. For example, this could be the case if the arrangement involves the sharing of income, sale proceeds or profits, rather than sharing the output from the project.
It’s essential to get advice well in advance – tax, legal and financial – before pursuing a JV.
Is your SMSF the best vehicle for property development?
Trustees need to carefully consider any investment decisions and have a sound rationale for the investment.
Any advice on a property development needs to be from a licenced financial adviser. A lawyer should be used for any contracts or agreements between parties. And, compliance assistance from a qualified accountant.
Contractor or employee?
Just because an agreement states that a worker is an independent contractor, this does not mean that they are a contractor for tax and superannuation purposes, new guidance from the ATO warns.
Where there is a written contract, the rights and obligations of the contract need to support that an independent contracting relationship exists. The fact that a contractor has an ABN does not necessarily mean that they have genuinely been engaged as a contractor. The ATO says that “at its core, the distinction between an employee and an independent contractor is that:
· an employee serves in the business of an employer, performing their work as a part of that business
· an independent contractor provides services to a principal’s business, but the contractor does so in furthering their own business enterprise; they carry out the work as principal of their own business, not part of another.”
Contracts over time
The ATO points out that a contracting agreement at the start of a relationship may not continue to be one over time. For example, if the project the contractor was engaged to complete has finished, but the worker continues working for the company then the classification needs to be revisited.
What happens if there is no contract?
If no contract exists, then it’s important to look at the form and substance of the relationship to come to a reasonable position about whether an employment or contractor relationship exists.
