Private ruling: Non-commercial losses
Published: September 2012

Ruling: Q1: Will the Commissioner exercise the discretion in paragraph 35-55(1)(b) of the ITAA 1997 to allow you to include any losses from your business activity in your calculation of taxable income? | A1: Yes


Relevant legislative provisions: Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 subsection 35-10(1) Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 subsection 35-10(2) Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 subsection 35-10(2E) | Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 paragraph 35-55(1)(b)

Reasons for decision: Summary: For the 2009-10 and later income years, Division 35 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 will apply to defer a non-commercial loss from a business activity unless: · you satisfy the income requirement and you pass one of the four tests · the exceptions apply · the Commissioner exercises his discretion. In your situation, none of the exceptions would apply and although you satisfy the income requirement, you do not meet any of the four tests in the years of income under consideration. Your losses are therefore subject to the deferral rule, unless the Commissioner exercises his discretion. The relevant discretion may be exercised for the income year in question where: · it is in the nature of the business activity that there will be a period of time before it can be expected to pass one of the four tests · there is an objective expectation your business activity will produce a tax profit or meet one of the four tests within a commercially viable period for your industry. Having regard to your full circumstances, it is not accepted that it is in the nature of the business activity that has prevented one of the four tests being passed. This discretion is intended to cover a business activity where there is an inherent period of time between the commencement of the activity and the production of assessable income. For example, an activity involving the planting of hardwood trees for harvest, where many years would pass before the activity could reasonably be expected to produce income. For the discretion to be applied there needs to be an inherent or innate feature of the activity resulting in an inability to produce income in the year of commencement and (in most cases) a number of years thereafter. Further examples that fall into this category are forestry, viticulture and certain horticultural activities. The note above does not support any view that the discretion should be exercised for any start-up activity that is yet, for example, to satisfy the assessable income test in section 35-30 of the ITAA 1997, simply because of the small scale on which it was started, or because a client base is being built up. We do not consider that there is a lead time between the commencement of your activity and the production of any assessable income. Your business was able to generate income from professional fees in your first financial year in operation. Therefore we do not consider that there is anything inherent or innate in the nature of your business activity that it has not yet been able to satisfy one of the tests. Your activity is of a type that is able to produce assessable income quite soon after its commencement, as the professional fees from your business activity have demonstrated.

Please check this edited version to be sure that there are no details remaining that you think may allow you to be identified. If you have any concerns about this ruling you wish to discuss, you will find our contact details in the fact sheet. | Relevant facts: You do not satisfy the <$250,000 income requirement set out in subsection 35-10(2E) of the ITAA 1997. | You expect to make $20,000 in assessable income once you have built up your clientele base.