Private ruling: Am I in business? - isolated transaction - mere realisation
Date of advice: 19 April 2016
Published: June 2016
Ruling period: Income year ending 30 June 2016 | Income year ending 30 June 2017; and | Income year ending 30 June 2018.
Date scheme commenced: 1 July 2015.

Ruling: Q1: Will the profit from the sale of subdivided blocks of land be treated as ordinary income under section 6 -5 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) as a result of you carrying on a business of property development? | A1: No. | Q2: Will the profit from sale of subdivided blocks of land be treated as ordinary income under section 6-5 of the ITAA 1997 as a result of an "isolated transaction" carried out for profit and commercial in character? | A2: No. | Q3: Will the profit from the sale of subdivided blocks of land be treated as statutory income under the capital gains tax provisions in Parts 3-1 and 3-3 of the ITAA 1997? | A3: Yes.

Relevant facts and circumstances: Information and documentation has been provided with this private ruling which form part of and are to be read in conjunction with the scheme. You and your spouse signed a contract to jointly purchase the property (the Property) after 20 September 1985.A house was located on the Property and the land area of the Property is less than two hectares. Settlement on the purchase of the Property occurred around three months after the purchase contract was signed. The Property was purchased for private purposes, with you and your spouse using the house on the Property as your main residence since it was purchased, raising your family in the semi-rural location. You and your spouse intend subdividing the Property to eliminate your mortgage and potentially reduce the working hours for one or both of you. Your children have now grown-up, and both you and your spouse have health issues and the Property takes considerable time to maintain in an appropriate condition. An additional issue is that the Property is located on a corner block and people are using it as a shortcut instead of walking around it, and it is being used as a dumping ground, which has created liability issues for you and your spouse as the owners of the Property. The Property is currently zoned General Residential. You and your spouse engaged the services of a surveyor (the Surveyor) to prepare a planning permit and provide an estimate of the cost for the subdivision. The Surveyor provided estimated costs for the subdivision of the Property into five subdivided blocks. They estimated that the subdivision would cost over $150,000 (plus Goods and Services Tax (GST)), being over $30,000 per subdivided lot plus GST. Around 18 years after the purchase of the Property, an Application for Planning Permit was lodged for the subdivision of the Property into a number of subdivided blocks. It is you and your spouse's intention to keep the subdivided block on which the house is located (Block 1), and sell the remaining subdivided blocks (the sale blocks). It is estimated that the sale blocks will have various selling prices over $115,000. The market value of the Property prior to subdivision is estimated to be over $450,000. You and your spouse will obtain a bank loan to pay for the subdivision. You and your spouse do not have any plans to undertake any similar activities in the future. For the purposes of this ruling the following will occur: • The Planning Permit will be approved • You and your spouse will engage the services of an entity/ies who will undertake all of the activities in relation to the management and co-ordination of the subdivision and will undertake the absolute minimum that council required to satisfy the development application • You and your spouse will not undertake any activities in relation to the subdivision other than signing the required documentation and paying invoices • You and your spouse will keep Block 1 and will sell the other subdivided blocks, the sale blocks; and • You and your spouse will engage the services of a real estate agent/s to sell the sale blocks.

Relevant legislative provisions: Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 6-5 | Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 102-20 | Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 104-10 | Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 112-25 | Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 995-1 | Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Part 3-1 | Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Part 3-3 | Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Division 115

Reasons for decision: Summary: Legislative references referred to herein are from the ITAA 1997 . Summary The proceeds from the sale of the four subdivided blocks will not be ordinary income and not assessable under section 6-5. The proceeds represent a mere realisation of capital assets which will fall for consideration under the capital gains tax provisions in Part 3-1. Detailed reasoning | Detailed Reasoning - Taxation treatment of property sales: There are three ways profits from property sales can be treated for taxation purposes: 1. As ordinary income under section 6-5, on revenue account, as a result of carrying on a business of property development, involving the sale of land as trading stock; or 2. As ordinary income under section 6-5, on revenue account, as a result of an isolated business transaction entered into by a non-business taxpayer, or outside the ordinary course of business of a taxpayer carrying on a business, which is the commercial exploitation of an asset acquired for a profit making purpose; or 3. As statutory income under the capital gains tax legislation, sections 10-5 and 102-5, on the basis that a mere realisation of a capital asset has occurred. Whether the proceeds are treated as income or capital depends on the situation and circumstances of each particular case. We will consider each of these in relation to your situation as follows: | Detailed Reasoning - Carrying on a business of property development: Section 995-1 states the term 'business' includes any profession, trade, employment, vocation or calling, but does not include occupation as an employee. To determine whether an activity, or series of activities, amounts to a business, the activity needs to be considered against the indicators of a business established by case law. In the High Court of Australia case of Hope v. Bathurst City Council (1980) 144 CLR 1; (1980) 29 ALR 577; (1980) 80 ATC 4386; HCA 16, a business was described in the following ways: It is the words "carrying on'' which imply the repetition of acts and activities which possess something of a permanent character. …activities engaged in for the purpose of profit on a continuous and repetitive basis. Transactions were entered into on a continuous and repetitive basis for the purpose of making a profit…manifested the essential characteristics required of a business. For a one-off land subdivision to be considered to be of a business or commercial nature, it is usually necessary that a taxpayer has the purpose of profit-making at the time of acquiring the property. The Commissioner's view on whether a taxpayer is carrying on a business is found in Taxation Ruling TR 97/11 (TR 97/11) which uses the following indicators to determine whether a taxpayer is carrying on a business: • whether the activity has a significant commercial purpose or character; • whether there is repetition and regularity of the activity; • whether the activity is of the same kind and carried on in a similar manner to that of the ordinary trade in that line of business; • whether the activity is planned, organised and carried on in a businesslike manner such that it is directed at making a profit; • the size, scale and permanency of the activity; and • whether the activity is better described as a hobby, a form of recreation or a sporting activity. In determining whether a taxpayer is carrying on a business, no one indicator will be decisive. The indicators must be considered in combination and as a whole. Whether a business is being carried on depends on the large or general impressions gained from looking at all the indicators and whether these indicators provide the operations with a commercial flavour. Application to your situation In this case, the Property was purchased by you and your spouse after 20 September 1985 with the intention of raising your family in the house located on the Property. You and your family have resided in the house since the Property was purchased. You and your spouse intend subdividing the Property into a number of subdivided blocks. You and spouse will keep the subdivided block on which the house is located (Block 1). The remaining subdivided blocks of land (the sale blocks) will be sold. You and your spouse have engaged the services of a surveyor who has lodged the subdivision permit with the local council for approval. No other subdivision activities will be undertaken by you and your spouse in the future. Based on the information provided, there is nothing to suggest that the subdivision of the Property was the beginning of a continuing business of property development. After reviewing the information and documentation provided, it is the Commissioner's view that your activities in relation to the subdivision are not those of an entity carrying on a business of developing and selling land. Based on the information and documentation provided, it is viewed that the activities being undertaken by you and your spouse do not display the salient indicator of a business, being transactions entered into on a continuous and repetitive basis. The subdivision activities will be undertaken by an entity/ies that you and your spouse engage to manage the subdivision and you and your spouse will not participate in any of the activities involved in the subdivision of the Property other than signing documentation as required and paying invoices. Therefore, any gain made on the disposal of the sale blocks will not be assessable as ordinary income from the carrying on of a business. | Detailed Reasoning - Isolated business transactions: Profits from isolated transactions will be assessable as ordinary income where the intention or purpose in entering into the transaction was to make a profit or gain and the transaction was entered into and the profit was made in the course of carrying out a business operation or commercial transaction Taxation Ruling TR 92/3 (TR 92/3) sets out the Commissioner's view of the general principles and factors that have been considered in determining whether an isolated transaction is of a revenue nature. Paragraph 1 of TR 92/3 outlines that isolated transactions are: a) those transactions outside the ordinary course of business of a taxpayer carrying on a business; and b) those transactions entered into by non-business taxpayers. The ruling outlines at paragraph 6 that whether a profit from an isolated transaction will be ordinary income will depend on the circumstances of the case, however a profit from an isolated transaction will be ordinary income when: a) the intention or purpose of a taxpayer in entering into the transaction was to make a profit or gain; and b) the transaction was entered into, and the profit was made in the course of carrying on a business operation or commercial transaction. TR 92/3 outlines that the relevant intention or purpose of the taxpayer, of making a profit or gain, is not the subjective intention or purpose of the taxpayer. Rather, it is the taxpayer's intention or purpose discerned from an objective consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case. If a transaction or operation is outside the ordinary course of a taxpayer's business, the intention or purpose of profit-making must exist in relation to the transaction or operation in question. The transaction may take place in the course of carrying on a business even if the transaction is outside the ordinary course of the taxpayer's business. Paragraphs 41 and 42 of the ruling outline that where a taxpayer acquires an asset with the intention of using it for personal enjoyment but later decides to venture or commit the asset into a profit-making undertaking or scheme with the characteristics of a business operation or commercial transaction, the activity of the taxpayer constitutes the carrying on of a business operation or commercial transaction carrying out a profit-making scheme, as the case may be. Whether a particular transaction has a business or commercial character depends very much on the circumstances of the case. Paragraph 13 of the ruling outlines the following factors which may be relevant when considering whether an isolated transaction amounts to a business operation or commercial transaction: • the nature of the entity undertaking the operation or transaction • the nature and scale of other activities undertaken by the taxpayer • the amount of money involved in the operation or transaction and the magnitude of the profit sought or obtained • the nature, scale and complexity of the operation or transaction • the manner in which the operation or transaction was entered into or carried out • the nature of any connection between the relevant taxpayer and any other party to the operation or transaction • if the transaction involves the acquisition and disposal of property, the nature of the property, and • the timing of the transaction or the various steps in the transaction. The direction provided within TR 92/3 and in case law indicates that profits in this context are more likely to be considered ordinary income if they are made in the ordinary course of carrying on a business. Further, ordinary income may be derived from an isolated transaction which becomes commercial in nature, or as a result of profits on a transaction in which the initial intention was to make a profit on sale. Paragraph 36 of TR 92/3 notes that the courts have often said that a profit on the mere realisation of an investment is not income, even if the taxpayer goes about the realisation in an enterprising way. However, if a transaction satisfies the elements set out above it is generally not a mere realisation of an investment. Application to your situation In this case, you and your spouse did not acquire the Property for the purpose of subdivision and resale. Instead, it was originally acquired for the purpose of residing in the house on the Property and raising your family. You and your spouse's intention in relation to the Property changed due to your health issues, your children have now grown up and the time it takes to maintain the Property. Also, the additional issue arising in relation to liability issue due to the usage of the Property by others who use it as a shortcut and a dumping area which has created a liability issue for you and your spouse. You and your spouse want to continue residing in the house located on the Property and the subdivided block on which it is located on. The remaining subdivided blocks will be sold to help pay off the mortgage and the amount borrowed to fund the subdivision. You and your spouse will engage the services of others to undertake the subdivision activities and they will only undertake the minimum required under the development approval for the subdivision of the Property. Making an overall assessment on the factors set out in TR 93/2, it is the Commissioner's view that the subdivision of the Property and sale of the sale blocks will not be considered commercial in nature but will be a mere realisation of a capital asset, being a long-held privately owned property. Therefore, any profit arising from the sale of the sale blocks will be accounted for under the capital gains tax provisions in Part 3-1. | Detailed Reasoning - Capital gains tax: The capital gains tax (CGT) provisions are contained in Part 3-1. Broadly, the provisions include in your assessable income any assessable gain or loss made when a CGT event happens to a CGT asset that you own. CGT event A1 happens if you dispose a CGT asset. A CGT asset is any kind of property or a legal or equitable right that is not property. When a CGT asset (the original asset) is split into two or more assets (the new assets), such as when land is subdivided, the subdivision of the land into subdivided blocks is not a CGT event, according to subsection 112-25(2). The subdivided blocks will be viewed as having been acquired on the date the original parcel of land was acquired. You make a capital gain is the proceeds from the sale of the CGT asset are more than the asset's cost base. You make a capital loss if the proceeds from the sale of the CGT asset are less than the cost base of the asset. You can apply a 50% CGT discount to any capital gain made on the disposal of the CGT asset if you are an individual who meets the following conditions: • The CGT event occurred after 21 September 1999 • The cost base of the CGT asset was not calculated using the indexation method; and • The asset must have been acquired at least 12 months before the CGT event. Application to your situation In this case you and your spouse jointly acquired the original Property after 20 September 1985. Therefore, you and your spouse are viewed as each having a 50% ownership interest in the Property. As the Property was purchased after 20 September 1985, the Property is a post-CGT asset. When the Property is subdivided, you and your spouse will each have a 50% ownership interest in each subdivided block. CGT event A1 will occur when the sale blocks are sold. As you and your spouse's 50% ownership interests are post-CGT, any capital gain or capital loss made on the disposal of you and your spouse's ownership interests in each of the sale blocks cannot be disregarded and will be calculated in accordance with the CGT provisions. Note: If you meet the conditions as listed above for the 50% CGT discount to apply, you can reduce any capital gain made on the disposal of your ownership interest in the sale blocks by 50%.