Update on super changes, the levy and contribution caps
A quick explanation of what’s going on with recent changes around super and tax. Financial planners are already working on ways to minimise the impacts for their clients.
Update on super changes, the levy and contribution caps Gordon Mackenzie,Senior Lecturer in taxation and business law at UNSW A quick explanation of what’s going on with recent changes around super and tax. Financial planners are already working on ways to minimise the impacts for their clients.
The two changes to superannuation announced in the Federal Budget, one of which is welcome news, were:
• the way excess non concessional contributions are dealt with, and
• the progressive increase of the Superannuation Guarantee will be delayed another year.
A third announcement, the 2% debt levy, is already encouraging the financial planning community to look at ways to avoid it (sigh).
In addition to these Budget changes, the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) recently put the market on notice that it will come down hard on taxpayers using leverage in a superannuation fund to circumvent the contribution limits.
Non-concessional contribution caps
The contributions caps in superannuation limit the amount of tax concessions anyone, no matter how wealthy, can receive from using a low-taxed superannuation fund. One of those limits applies to contributions which, in effect, have not been tax-deductible, and is considered a penalty. It has also been highly problematic for many.
When introduced in 2007, any contributions in excess of the limit were taxed to the member at 46.5%. While that extra tax on excess contributions was said to recapture any tax concessions that had been derived from having the excess in the fund, it was more in the nature of a penalty tax.
Indeed, through one of the other rules relating to this contributions limit, it was not unusual for people to make contributions, say, two years ago and without fully appreciating what they had done earlier, make a contribution now that resulted in an excess non-concessional contribution and a 46.5% tax bill on that excess. It is with some relief, and probably six years too late, that these rules are now changing for the better.
From 1 July 2014 it is proposed that a person who contributes non-concessional contributions in excess of the cap will be required to take it out of the fund. No more 46.5% taxes.
Super Guarantee increase delayed
The increase in the Super Guarantee payment from 9% to 12% will be delayed a year. The super guarantee will not reach 12% now until 2022. However, the increase from the current 9.25% to 9.5% in 2014/2015 will go ahead, and it will remain at this level for four years until the end of the 2017/2018 financial year.
Dealing with the 2% debt levy
I never cease to be amazed by the ingenuity of the financial planning profession (of which I am part, I feel obliged to add). Within a few days of the Government announcing taxpayers over $180,000 pa will be charged an additional 2% income tax as a levy to cover Australia’s debt position, plans surfaced on how to manage around it.
The 2% increase will mean that the highest marginal tax rate for those affected, excluding the Medicare levy, will now be 47%, rather than 45%. However, the FBT rate is staying at 45% until at least the 2014/2015 financial year. The proposed scheme to avoid the levy is to salary sacrifice into taxable fringe benefits, which will be taxed at 45% rather than 47% had it been paid in cash, until 31 March 2015 (the commencement of the new FBT year).
Leveraging around the contribution limits
There has been one other significant tax issue related to superannuation that does not come out of the budget. The ATO has put the market on notice that it is not happy with people using leverage in a superannuation fund to overcome the contribution limits.
In one extreme example, three wealthy brothers all over age 60 who each set up an SMSF then loaned $10 million to it interest-free. The three SMSFs would then co-invest in a $30 million commercial property.
There is no deeming of the interest free loan as being a contribution so there were no contribution limit problems and as each brother was over age 60, their SMSFs were in pension mode and no tax was being paid on any rent or gain on sale from the commercial property.
The only risk being run was if they died without a Death Benefit Dependent, when tax would be payable on any benefit payment.
In any case, the ATO is now signalling that this kind of structuring is problematic. Briefly, the ATO is suggesting that the rental income and indeed, any gain made by the SMSF on sale, will be taxed to the fund at 46.5%. Some tax professionals are not sure the ATOs technical analysis of these types of transactions is correct. However, they take the view that the more likely result would be the application of the general anti-avoidance rule, which would seem to directly catch this practice.
Importantly, the views expressed by the ATO are a message to the market that it does have serious concerns with using leverage to get around the contribution limits.
This information is general in nature and readers should seek their own professional advice before making any financial decisions.
This content is provided by Cuffelinks and does not represent the views of AMP Capital.