Capital gains tax - Australia Essay

Executive Summary

One of the most controversial issue in Australian revenue enhancement jurisprudence was the debut of capital additions revenue enhancement. It was introduced in 1985 by the Whitlam Labour Government. Capital addition can be seen as the income derived from the merchandising of a capital plus. These could run from belongings, portions, collectibles etc. the addition or grasp is fundamentally the original monetary value paid for the plus plus any incidental cost such as stamp responsibilities, legal fees, transportation cost, publicizing etc, that would organize portion of the capital base minus the money received when the plus is sold. Capital additions revenue enhancement is hence a revenue enhancement that is paid on capital grasp of a capital assets. It can be calculated utilizing three different methods which are: 1 ) the indexation method, 2 ) the price reduction method and 3 ) where no price reduction is applied because the plus was held for less than a twelvemonth. This study will sketch how capital additions revenue enhancement is applied and the deductions of capital additions revenue enhancement.

We will write a custom essay sample on
Capital gains tax – Australia Essay
or any similar topic only for you
Order now


a ) A motor vehicle for $ 25,000. Jason originally acquired the motor vehicle for $ 45,000 on 1 June 2010.

In giving you advice, we need to see to possible scenarios. This is due to a deficiency of relevant and sufficient information to come up at decisive decision. These include:

Initially we need to set up whether Jason had a capital addition event or non. Harmonizing to CGT Event A1: ( Section 104-10 ) : Disposal of a CGT Asset, there was a capital addition event. This is derived from the fact that ; the capital plus ( motor vehicle ) was acquired after 19 September 1985 which would imply that it is an plus that capital addition revenue enhancement could be applied to. Harmonizing to sec 109-5 ( 2 ) , the day of the month of acquisition of the motor vehicle is the day of the month that the contract was entered into, which would be the 1 June 2010.

Due to the fact that the plus was acquired after 21 September 1999, the cost base of the plus can non be indexed when subdivision 114-1 is used. The method that would be available if s115-10 to 115-25 were to be applied would be the Discount method which is calculated as follows:

Discount Method:

Capital Proceeds $ 25,000

Less: Cost Base ( $ 45,000 )

Capital Loss before Discount ( $ 20,000 )

Less: 50 % CGT Discount

Capital Loss after 50 % price reduction $ 10,000

The $ 10,000 Capital loss can be used to countervail any capital additions. If the capital losingss are still unabsorbed they can be carried frontward to countervail future capital additions. This can be done indefinelty until all the capital losingss are used up.


If Jason sold the motor vehicle to Fred harmonizing to sec 118-5 ( a ) ITAA 97, it would be exempt from CGT if it is a motor vehicle, auto and similar vehicle which was made to transport a burden of less than one metric ton or less than nine riders.

B ) A film editing machine for $ 35,000. This machine was originally acquired by Jason for $ 50,000 on 1 April 2011 and Jason had claimed a revenue enhancement tax write-off for depreciation in his revenue enhancement returns in regard of this machine.

A company is considered a separate legal entity under the jurisprudence ; hence Jason was non supposed to claim a revenue enhancement tax write-off on the cutting machine in his revenue enhancement return. I would rede Jason that he needed to amend his 2010/2011 appraisal. This nevertheless raises the inquiry where the tax write-off was meant for the company and would at that place be included in the cost base of company assets.

degree Celsiuss )Business premises for $ 880,000. Jason had inherited this edifice on the decease of his male parent on 1 June 2006. Jason’s male parent was besides a carpenter and had acquired the edifice in 1982 for $ 60,000 and it was valued at $ 520,000 at the clip of his decease. In 2012 a storage installation was installed on the side of the edifice for a entire cost of $ 77,000.

If your male parent had sold the concern premises, the premises would hold been exempted from CGT because harmonizing to subdivision 100-25 ( 1 ) because it was an assets that was acquired before 20 September1985.

I would inform Jason that, subdivision 128-10 provinces that any assets acquired through heritage are by and large disregarded for CGT intents, that is a capital additions or losingss are non recognised when you die.

When you inherited the concern premises from your male parent, you are considered to hold acquired the plus on that day of the month, which is 1 June 2006. There is a demand to cognize the value of the concern premises ( cost base ) so that later on, you would be able to cipher the capital additions or losingss of the plus when you decided to dispose of it. The cost base of the concern premises is the market value on the day of the month of decease which is $ 520,000 ( s 128-15 ( 4 ) point 3B ) and its acquisition day of the month is 1 June 2006, harmonizing to sec 128-15 ( 2 ) . An inheritor or beneficiary, is considered to hold acquired the plus on the twenty-four hours you die.

As for the storage installation, the $ 77,000 is considered as a capital betterment. It is hence added to that cost base of the concern premises. If nevertheless the concern premises were still under Jason’s father control. We could use unsweet 108-55 ( 2 ) it says that a edifice or construction that is constructed on land that you acquired before 20 September 1985 is taken to be a separate CGT plus. In that instance the storage installation will go a separate CGT plus.

Discount Method:

Capital Proceeds $ 880,000

Less: Cost Base ( s 110-25 )

Original Asset $ 520,000

Capital Improvements $ 77,000

Cost Base ( $ 597,000 )

Capital Addition before Discount $ 283,000

Less: 50 % Discount

Capital Gain after 50 % price reduction $ 141,500

vitamin D ) A big picture hanging in the edifice was besides sold. The picture was acquired by Jason in 2011 for $ 29,000 and sold for $ 26,500.

I would rede you pictures are considered as collectibles under s 108-10 ( 2 ) and are normally kept for personal usage or pleasance. The list of collectibles includes: old-timers, Works of art ( eg- pictures, sculptures ) ; Jewellery, Rare books and Manuscripts, Rare stamps, coins etc. if any capital losingss from collectibles occurred, they are set apart and can merely be offset against capital additions on other collectibles. Section 118-10 ( 1 ) and ( 2 ) provinces that CGT on collectibles are disregarded if they were bought for less than $ 500.

Capital returns $ 26,500

Cost base ( $ 29,000 )

Capital loss ( $ 2,500 )

The capital losingss from painting and jewelry can non be used against the capital additions from portions or other assets, as capital losingss from collectibles are quarantined and can merely be applied to capital additions from collectibles, s108-10 ( 1 ) . If some or all of a capital loss from a collectible can non be applied in a fiscal twelvemonth, the unapplied sum can be applied in the following fiscal twelvemonth for which your capital additions from collectibles exceed your capital losingss ( if any ) from collectables……..

vitamin E ) Fred paid Jason an extra $ 20,000 for Jason’s promise non to transport on another woodworking concern in the local country for the following 4 old ages get downing 1 May 2013.

The contract between Fred and you would be assessed under CGT event D1, s104-35 ITAA1997. It is said to be a restrictive compacts and if any breach of contract was to happen, Fred could implement his contractual rights. A perfect illustration of this was the instance Hepples V fct. Harmonizing to sec 104-35 ( 2 ) the clip of the event is 1 May 2013, which is the day of the month you entered into the contract or created the other right.

degree Fahrenheit ) Legal fees and associated costs on disposal of the edifice and graphics totalled $ 14,500 and $ 450 severally.

I would inform you that legal fees are considered as incidental cost. When we are determining the cost base of an plus we include incidental cost that were involved in geting and disposing of an plus. The cost of revenue enhancement advice can merely be included in the cost base if the advice is given by a registered revenue enhancement agent or a legal practician: unsweet 110-35 ( 2 ) . So therefore the cost base for the edifice is ( $ 520,000+ $ 14,500= $ 534,500 ) and graphics ( $ 29,000+ $ 450= $ 29,450 ) .

Jason besides disposed of 500 portions in BHP for $ 11,200 on 1 May 2013. Of the 500 portions 250 were acquired in 1984 for $ 600 and the 250 were acquired in April 2002 for $ 3,600

Jason has a carry forward capital loss of $ 23,000 as at 30 June 2012 from the sale of portions in 2011.

I would rede you that portions in a corporation are taxed the same manner when ciphering CGT as any other CGT plus. If the portions were obtained before 20 September 1985, they would non be capable to CGT, nevertheless all portions after that day of the month are capable to CGT. Therefore the 250 portions are non considered for CGT because they were purchased before 20 September 1985 harmonizing to sec 104-135 ( 5 ) . The staying 250 portions purchased station 20 September 1985 would be capable to CGT. If a non-stock agent was to sell his portions, they would be capable to CGT event A1, due to the fact that they is a alteration in ownership of the portions. If nevertheless the portions are redeemed or cancelled a CGT event C2 occurs……..

Calculations: April 2002 portions

Discount Method:

Capital Proceeds $ 5,600

Less: Cost Base ( $ 3,600 )

Capital Addition before Discount ( $ 2,000 )

Less: 50 % CGT Discount

Capital Gain after 50 % price reduction $ 1,000

Capital Loss Carried Forward ( $ 23,000 )

Capital loss to b/d $ 22, 000

Capital loss to be carried frontward for future old ages $ 22,000.

After retiring Jason is sing relocating with his married woman to populate for good in Canada as he is passionate about skiing and would wish to populate out his yearss on the ski inclines of Canada. Include in a separate portion of the written report the possible capital additions revenue enhancement deductions on his staying assets, being the household place in Australia and portions in Telstra, should Jason go a non-resident of Australia in 2014. ( 3 Markss )

CGT Event I1: Section 104-160 addresses the issue when an person or company stops being a occupant of Australia. You will necessitate to set up whether you have any capital additions or losingss for each plus that you own merely before you cease to go a occupant, apart from the 1s that have the necessary connexion with Australia………… you are besides deemed to hold sold any CGT assets at the market value when you cease to go a occupant of Australia. Hence the Telstra portions and the household place will be deemed sold at the market value when you ceased your residence.


So fundamentally if you have an plus that might be eligible for CGT

So fundamentally if you make the move to Indonesia, the fortunes l have outlined above are likely to hold you treated as a foreign occupant for revenue enhancement intents in Australia and so your salary bundle will non be assessable income because its foreign sourced so you will merely be taxed in Indonesia. As cubic decimeter mentioned above, any involvement earned in Australia like your bank involvement and rental income are nevertheless capable to revenue enhancement in Australia as they are Australian sourced


Hi there, would you like to get such a paper? How about receiving a customized one? Check it out