Private ruling: non-commercial business losses and the Commissioner's discretion
Published: January 2015
Ruling period: Year ended 30 June 2014
Date scheme commenced: 1 June 2013

Ruling: Q1: Is there a discretion that the Commissioner can exercise to exclude a lump sum payment from the calculation of the <$250,000 income requirement set out in subsection 35-10(2E) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997)? | A1: No. | Q2: Will the Commissioner exercise the discretion in paragraph 35-55(1)(a) of the ITAA 1997 to allow you to include any losses from business (the activity) in your calculation of taxable income for the 2013-14 financial year? | A2: No.

Relevant facts and circumstances: You have owned and operated a business for a number of years. You maintained separate employment while operating the business. Due to a redundancy payment received from your employer in the 2013-14 financial year, you do not satisfy the <$250,000 income requirement set out in subsection 35-10(2E) of the ITAA 1997. You state the following in relation to the activity: • it has earned more than $20,000 in assessable income for a number of years • assessable income is lower than usual for the 2013-14 financial year as you decided to change the focus of the business activity during the year, and • based on assessable income to date, you expect assessable income to exceed $20,000 in the later income years.

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)(a)

Reasons for decision: Summary: For the 2009-10 and later financial years, Division 35 of the ITAA 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, or • the Commissioner exercises his discretion. Lump sum payment and the $250,000 adjusted taxable income rule The income requirement set out in subsection 35-10(2E) of the ITAA 1997, prevents you from accessing the four tests where your adjusted taxable income exceeds $250,000 (that is, your taxable income, reportable fringe benefits, reportable superannuation contributions and total net investment losses but excluding your business losses). Not all assessable income is included in calculating the adjusted taxable income. Any assessable income attributed to the business activity incurring the loss is not included in the adjusted taxable income calculation. This is because it forms part of the business losses, which are disregarded (the business losses are calculated by deducting the expenses attributed to the business activity from the assessable income 'from' that business activity). No other income is excluded in the calculation of your adjusted taxable income. Further, there is no discretion that the Commissioner can exercise to exclude other income from the calculation of the adjusted taxable income. Therefore your lump sum redundancy payment must be included in the adjusted taxable income calculation for the purposes of subsection 35-10(2E) of the ITAA 1997. | Detailed Reasoning - Special circumstances and the Commissioner's discretion: As explained above, in your situation you do not satisfy the income requirement for the purposes of subsection 35-10(2E) of the ITAA 1997, and you do not come under any of the exceptions. Your business losses are therefore subject to the deferral rule unless the Commissioner exercises his discretion. The Commissioner's discretion in paragraph 35-55(1)(a) of the ITAA 1997 may be exercised for the financial year where the business activity is affected by special circumstances outside the control of the operators of the business activity. Special circumstances are those circumstances which are sufficiently different to distinguish them from the circumstances that occur in the normal course of conducting a business activity. For those individuals who do not satisfy the income requirement, special circumstances are those which have materially affected the business activity, causing it to make a loss. Taxation Ruling TR 2007/6 sets out the Commissioner's interpretation of the exercise of the Commissioner's discretion under paragraph 35-55(1)(a) of the ITAA 1997. The following has been extracted from paragraphs 47 to 53 of this ruling: Although not limited to natural disasters, paragraph 35-55(1)(a) of the ITAA 1997 refers to special circumstances outside the control of the business activity, including drought, flood, bushfire or some other natural disaster. Cyclones, hailstorms and tsunamis are examples of other natural disasters that would come within the scope of the paragraph. These events are taken to be special circumstances outside the control of the operators of the business activity. The special circumstances must have affected the business activity. In your case, you have received a redundancy payment from your former employer. Receiving this payment did not affect your activity; instead it caused you to fail the income requirement under subsection 35-10(2E) of the ITAA 1997. This is not considered to be 'special circumstances' for the purposes of paragraph 35-55(1)(a) of the ITAA 1997. While we appreciate your situation, there is no other discretion available to the Commissioner in Division 35 of the ITAA 1997 that would allow you to claim your losses in the circumstances you describe.