Private ruling: Foreign fund transfer
Date of advice: 22 August 2022
Published: November 2022

Ruling: Q1: Is the Fund a 'foreign superannuation fund' as defined in section 995-1 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997)? | A1: No. | Q2: Is any part of the lump sum payment received by you from your Fund assessable as applicable fund earnings under section 305-70 of the ITAA 1997? | A2: No. This private ruling applies for the periods: 1 July 20XX to 30 June 20XX

Relevant facts and circumstances: You were an employee of the foreign Employer for a number of years. You were a member of the Employer's foreign Staff Retirement Plan (Fund). Benefits can be withdrawn, prior to normal retirement age, by a member upon the termination of their employment with the Employer. You received a lump sum payment from the Fund during the 20XX income year.

Relevant legislative provisions: Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 99B | Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 305-70 | Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Subsection 995-1(1) | Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SISA) Subsection 10(1) | Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SISA) Section 62

Reasons for decision: Detailed Reasoning - Lump sum payments transferred from foreign superannuation funds: When a person receives a lump sum from a foreign superannuation fund more than six months after they became an Australian resident, the growth they earned on their foreign superannuation fund during the period when they were a resident of Australia is included in their assessable income as 'applicable fund earnings' under section 305-70 of the ITAA 1997. To be eligible, the paying fund must meet the definition of a foreign superannuation fund. A foreign superannuation fund is defined in subsection 995-1(1) of the ITAA 1997 as being a fund that is not an Australian superannuation fund. A superannuation fund has the meaning given by subsection 10(1) of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SISA), which requires that the fund is a 'provident, benefit, superannuation or retirement fund'. | Detailed Reasoning - Provident, benefit, superannuation or retirement fund: The High Court examined both the terms superannuation fund and fund in Scott v Commissioner of Taxation of the Commonwealth (No.2) (1966) 10 AITR 290; (1966) ALJR 265; (1966) 14 ATD 333 ( Scott ). In that case, Justice Windeyer stated: ...I have come to the conclusion that there is no essential single attribute of a superannuation fund established for the benefits of its employees except that it must be bona fide devoted as its sole purpose to providing for employees who are participants money benefits (or benefits having a monetary value) upon their reaching a prescribed age. In this connexion "fund", I take it, ordinarily means money (or investments) set aside and invested, the surplus income therefrom being capitalised. I do not put this forward as a definition, but rather as a general description. The issue of what constitutes a provident, benefit, superannuation or retirement fund was discussed by the Full Bench of the High Court in Mahony v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1967) 41 ALJR 232; (1967) 14 ATD 519 ( Mahony ). In that case, Justice Kitto's judgement indicated that a fund does not satisfy any of the three provisions, that is, 'provident, benefit or superannuation fund', if there exist provisions for the payment of benefits 'for any other reason whatsoever'. In other words, though a fund may contain provisions for retirement purposes, it could not be accepted as a superannuation fund if it contained provisions that benefits could be paid in circumstances other than those relating to retirement. In section 62 of the SISA, a regulated superannuation fund must be 'maintained solely' for the 'core purposes' of providing benefits to a member when the events occur: • on or after retirement from gainful employment; or • attaining a prescribed age; and • on the member's death. (this may require the benefits being passed on to a member's dependants or legal representative). The Commissioner's view is that for a fund to be classified as a superannuation fund, it must exclusively provide a narrow range of benefits that are characterised by some specific future purpose. That is, the payment of superannuation benefits upon retirement, invalidity or death of the individual or as specified under the SISA. In this case, the benefits from your Fund can be withdrawn by a member, prior to normal retirement age, upon the termination of their employment with the Employer. The Fund satisfies some of the requirements of a foreign superannuation fund, however the Fund is not exclusively a provident, benefit or superannuation fund because it does not provide benefits for the specific future purposes of the individual's retirement. Members can withdraw benefits prior to retirement age. In other words, your Fund provides for the payment of benefits for reasons other than retirement and not solely (that is, exclusively) for retirement purposes. Accordingly, any payments from your Fund will not be a payment from a foreign superannuation fund and section 305-70 of the ITAA 1997 will not have any application. The benefits will instead be assessable under section 99B of the ITAA 1936. | Detailed Reasoning - Receipt of trust income not previously subject to tax in Australia: A fund in the nature of a retirement or investment plan/fund is similar to a trust as the fund holds property, such as cash, shares or securities, for the benefit of the account holder. Section 99B of the ITAA 1936 deals with the receipt of trust income 'not previously subject to tax' in Australia and applies where an Australian resident taxpayer receives a lump sum payment from a foreign retirement or investment fund. Subsection 99B(1) of the ITAA 1936 provides that where an amount, being property of a trust estate, is paid to, or applied for the benefit of a beneficiary of the trust who was a resident at any time during the year of income, the amount is to be included in the assessable income of the beneficiary. However, subsection 99B(2) of the ITAA 1936 modifies the rule in subsection 99B(1) and has the effect that the amount to be included in assessable income does not include any amount that represents the corpus of the trust - but not an amount that is attributable to income of the trust which would have been included in the assessable income of a resident taxpayer if it had been derived by that taxpayer. Consequently, the assessable amount is the total amount received less any amounts deposited to the fund (the corpus) by the taxpayer, or on their behalf. The rule is that the taxpayer is taxed only on the earnings of the investment on withdrawal, not on the corpus (personal and employer contributions) returned to them. Any earnings in the funds are only assessable in Australia on withdrawal from the funds. In your case the total lump benefit amount, less employer and personal contributions, would be the assessable amount.