Private ruling: Foreign superannuation payment
Date of advice: 6 December 2019
Published: February 2020
Ruling period: 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2019
Date scheme commenced: 25 February 2019

Ruling: Q1: Is any part of the lump sum benefits paid from the Employee Provident Fund Country A (EPF) assessable as applicable fund earnings under section 305-70 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997)? | A1: No


Relevant legislative provisions: Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 Subsection 99B(1) | Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 Paragraph 99B(2)(a) | Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 305-70

Reasons for decision: Summary: When determining whether an amount is assessable under subdivision 305-B of the ITAA 1997, it is necessary to ascertain whether the payment is being made from a foreign superannuation fund. If the entity making the payment is not a foreign superannuation fund, then Subdivision 305-B of the ITAA 1997 will not apply. | Detailed Reasoning - Meaning of 'provident, benefit, superannuation or retirement fund': The High Court examined both the terms superannuation fund and fund in Scott v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (No. 2) (1966) 10 AITR 290; (1966) 40 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 benefit of employees except that it must be a fund 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 held that a fund had to exclusively be a 'provident, benefit or superannuation fund' and that 'connoted a purpose narrower than the purpose of conferring benefits in a completely general sense...". This narrower purpose meant that the benefits had to be 'characterised by some specific future purpose' such as the example given by Justice Kitto of a funeral benefit. Furthermore, Justice Kitto's judgment 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 Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (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). Though section 62 of the SISA also allows a superannuation fund to provide benefits for ancillary purposes, such as, benefits paid on the termination of employment in the event of ill-health and benefits for dependants following the death of a member after retirement or attaining the prescribed age, it should be noted that they do not extend to general or non-retirement purposes such as education, home purchases or medical expenses. Notwithstanding that the SISA applies only to regulated superannuation funds, as defined in section 19 of the SISA, and foreign superannuation funds do not qualify as regulated superannuation funds, as they are established and operate outside Australia, the Commissioner views the SISA (and its regulations) as providing guidance as to what benefit or specific future purpose a superannuation fund should provide. In view of the legislation and the decisions made in Scott and Mahony , 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. | Detailed Reasoning - Taxation of funds received from a foreign superannuation fund: The applicable fund earnings in relation to a lump sum payment from a foreign superannuation fund, that is received more than six months after a person has become an Australian resident, will be assessable under Subdivision 305-B of the ITAA 1997, in particular section 305-70 of the ITAA 1997. The applicable fund earnings are subject to tax at the person's marginal rate. The remainder of the lump sum payment is not assessable income and is not exempt income. The applicable fund earnings is the amount worked out under either subsection 305-75(2) or 305-75(3) of the ITAA 1997. Subsection 305-75(2) of the ITAA 1997 applies where the person was an Australian resident at all times during the period to which the lump sum relates. Subsection 305-75(3) of the ITAA 1997 applies where the person was not an Australian resident at all times during the period to which the lump sum relates. Before determining whether an amount is assessable under section 305-70 of the ITAA 1997, it is necessary to ascertain whether the payment is being made from a foreign superannuation fund. If the entity making the payment is not a foreign superannuation fund then Subdivision 305-B of the ITAA 1997 will not have any application. | Detailed Reasoning - Application to your circumstances: The EPF consists of two accounts, the funds contained within EPF Account 1 are for retirement purposes and cannot be fully withdrawn before: · you reach age 55, · become incapacitated, · To invest up to 20% in other investments (as approved by the government) for the purposes of generating funds to provide for retirement · leaving the country or · upon death. 70% of monthly contributions are allocated to the EPF Account 1. However, withdrawals from EPF Account 2 are allowed: · upon attaining age 50 · for providing a down payment for a first house, · settling the balance for a first house loan and for · financing education and medical expenses. 30% of monthly contributions are allocated to the EPF Account 2. It is considered that the restrictions upon the ability to access the funds contained within the EPF Account 1 are similar to the purposes outlined in section 62 of the SISA. As the benefits in the EPF Account 2 can be accessed for pre-retirement purposes, we confirm that the EPF Account 2 does not meet the 'sole purpose test' imposed by the SISA and therefore cannot be considered a 'foreign superannuation fund' for Australian income tax purposes. Notwithstanding the fact that is considered that the restrictions upon the ability to access the funds contained within Account 1 are similar to the purposes outlined in section 62 of the SISA, Subdivision 305-B of the ITAA 1997 clearly states that the test is to be applied at the entity level rather than the account level. Consequently, as the benefits in the EPF Account 2 can be accessed for pre-retirement purposes, it is considered that the fund, as a whole, is not exclusively a 'provident, benefit or superannuation fund' as it does not 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. Therefore, Subdivision 305-B of the ITAA 1997 does not apply to any amount of your lump sum from the EPF. | Detailed Reasoning - Tax consequences of proceeds from a foreign trust: As an Australian resident, unless Subdivision 305-B of the ITAA 1997 applies to your payment from foreign funds, you will be subject to the general tax rules applicable to your circumstances - for example, the general tax rules relating to trust income. | Detailed Reasoning - Assessability of trust income: Section 6-10 of the ITAA 1997 provides that the assessable income of a resident taxpayer includes statutory income amounts that are not ordinary income but are included in assessable income by another provision. Subsection 6-10(4) of the ITAA 1997 provides that for an Australian resident, assessable income includes statutory income derived from all sources, whether in or out of Australia, during the income year. Section 10-5 of the ITAA 1997 lists certain statutory amounts that form part of assessable income. Included in this list is income derived pursuant to section 99B of the ITAA 1936. Subsection 99B(1) of the ITAA 1936 provides that where, during a year of income, a beneficiary who was a resident at any time during the year is paid a distribution from a trust, or has an amount of trust property applied for their benefit, the amount is to be included in the assessable income of the beneficiary. 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 under subsection (1) is not to include any amount that represents either: · the corpus of the trust (paragraph 99B(2)(a) of the ITAA 1936) · amounts that would not have been included in the assessable income of a resident taxpayer (paragraph 99B(2)(b) of the ITAA 1936), and · amounts previously included in the beneficiaries income under section 97 of the ITAA 1936 (paragraph 99B(2)(c) of the ITAA 936). Paragraph 99B(2)(a) of the ITAA 1936 requires regard to be had to whether or not the amount derived by a trust estate was of a kind that would have been assessable if derived by a resident taxpayer. Thus, for example, if, in accordance with the terms of the trust, income were accumulated and added to corpus and the capitalised amount is subsequently paid or applied for the benefit of a beneficiary, the beneficiary would be assessable on the amount provided (subject to other paragraphs of subsection 99B(2) of the ITAA 1936). 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 returned to them. Any earnings in the funds are only assessable in Australia on withdrawal from the funds.

· You joined the Employee Provident Fund (EPF) in 2005 while employed overseas, you were not an Australian resident at the time. | · In April 20XX you ceased foreign employment, and as a result the contributions stopped being made by your employer. | · In April 20XX you arrived in Australia on a 457 visa organised by your new employer. A few days later you started employment with your Australian employer. | · In 20YY you obtained Australian permanent residency, then in 20ZZ you became an Australian citizen. | · In 2019 you received correspondence from EPF providing your withdrawal amount. | · In February 2019 you received a cheque from EPF for your withdrawal amount, which you deposited in your bank account.