Questions we've been asked: General issues

QB 09/03: Decisions on application of CA 1(2) - common law interest and income under ordinary concepts

All references are to the Income Tax Act 2007, unless otherwise stated.

Question

We have been asked whether the Commissioner accepts, as a broader principle, all the reasoning in the High Court decisions CIR v Buis and Burston (2005) 22 NZTC 19,278 on the application of section CA 1(2) (income under ordinary concepts) to so-called "common law interest" payments. [Common law interest payments are payments which might be described as akin to "interest" but are not connected with lending eg, late payment "interest" for settlement of a contract, "interest" awarded as part of a damages claim.]

In Buis and Burston France J held that section CD 5 of the Income Tax Act 1994 (now section CA 1(2)) could not apply to tax common law interest payments, because interest could be taxed only under the provision dealing with interest so defined (section CE 1 of the Income Tax Act 1994 (now section CC 4(1)). In his Honour's view, common law interest payments were not taxable because they did not come within the definition of "interest" in section OB 1 of the Income Tax Act 1994 (now section YA 1).

Answer

While the Commissioner decided not to appeal the decisions in the Buis and Burston cases, he does not accept the correctness of this aspect of the decisions as a generally applicable principle. The Commissioner intends to have the matter considered further by the courts when an opportunity arises in the future.

Explanation

CIR v Buis and Burston concerned the taxation of payments received by the taxpayers under section 72 of the Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 (interest paid in relation to the late payment of earnings related compensation). The Commissioner sought to tax those payments as income under ordinary concepts.

The Commissioner and the taxpayers accepted that the payments did not fall within the definition of "interest", which applies only to payments arising from "money lent" (also a defined term).

In the High Court, France J found that the payments were not income, being in the nature of a penalty imposed on the Accident Compensation Corporation. The Commissioner accepts this aspect of the decision.

However, his Honour also concluded that the payments could not be income under ordinary concepts in any event as the payments were in the nature of interest and interest could be taxed only under the provision dealing with interest as defined (section CE 1 of the Income Tax Act 1994 (now section CC 4(1)). In France J's opinion, section CD 5 of the Income Tax Act 1994 (now section CA 1(2)) must be read subject to section CE 1 of the Income Tax Act 1994 and could not be used to tax any interest payments that did not fall within the general interest provision.

The Commissioner does not agree with this aspect of the decision. Section YA 1 defines "interest" as being a payment made to a person by another person for money lent. The Income Tax Act did not originally define "interest". However, in 1983 a definition was inserted by section 3(1) of the Income Tax Amendment Act (No 4) 1983. This definition was inserted to ensure that certain money market transactions that were in the nature of loans, but that in law were not classed as money-lending, would be taxed: Marac Life Assurance Ltd v CIR (1986) 8 NZTC 5,086. The definition was not a codification of the taxation of all forms of interest.

In many instances payments which might be described as akin to "interest" under common law or ordinary concepts are not connected with "money lent" - late payment "interest" for settlement of a contract being a common example. "Interest as damages" where the damages are a reflection of a loss of profits is another. In the Commissioner's view the inclusion of a definition of "interest" in respect of money lent was not intended by Parliament to have excluded from taxation amounts that are akin to interest and are income under ordinary concepts.

The Commissioner considers that the Act must be read in its entirety and section CC 4(1) must be read as applying to situations falling within the definition of "money lent"; leaving those transactions that do not fit within that definition to be governed under the general charge of income under ordinary concepts: section CA 1(2). In those cases, it would be necessary to consider the true nature of the payment in the hands of the recipient to determine whether it is income and therefore taxable: IRC v Ballantine (1924) 8 TC 595 and Riches v Westminster Bank Limited [1947] 1 All ER 469.

Other pages in: General issues

• QB 12/11: Income tax - look-through companies, rental properties and avoidance
• QB 12/10: Do the historic depreciation rates continue to apply to grandparented structures acquired before 1 April 2005?
• QB 12/09: Income tax - look-through companies: interest deductibility where funds are borrowed to make a payment to shareholders to reflect an asset revaluation
• QB 12/08: Income tax - look-through companies: interest deductibility on funds borrowed to repay shareholder current accounts
• QB 12/04: Income tax - deductibility of expenditure on widening or metalling a farm acess road or track
• QB 12/03: Income tax - deductibility of expenditure on cattle stops
• QB 12/05: Income tax - deductibility of expenditure on stock yards
• QB 12/02: Income tax - Treatment of quad bikes for depreciation purposes
• QB 12/01: Income tax - deductibility of expenditure on replacing and extending an inlet race to a dairy shed
• QB 11/03: Income tax - look through companies and interest deductibility
• QB 11/02: Deductibility of expenditure incurred by bloodstock breeders in respect of horses that they race
• QB 11/01: Residential investment property or properties in Australia owned by New Zealand resident - NRWT treatment of interest paid to Australian financial institution
• QB 09/06: GST - Apportionment of the cost of bare land for the purposes of a change-in-use adjustment
• QB 10/06: Elections for qualifying company status
• QB 10/01: Reimbursing shareholder-employees for motor vehicle expenses and the use of the Commissioner's mileage rate
• Are tax sparing disclosures still required?
• QB 09/05: Residential investment property or properties in Australia owned by New Zealand resident - NRWT treatment of interest paid to Australian financial institution
• QB 09/02: Holiday houses - income tax treatment
• QB 09/01: Payments made in addition to financial redress under Treaty of Waitangi settlements - income tax treatment
• QB 08/04: Income Tax Act 2007: research and development credits (subpart LH) - tax avoidance (section BG1)
• Kiwisaver - creditable membership
• QB 08/03: Application for a private ruling or product ruling on an issue dealt with in a mutual agreement made under a Double Tax Agreement - Tax Administration Act 1994, sections 91E(4)(D)(ii) and 91F(4)(D)
• QB 08/02: Commissioner's power to issue a replacement ruling that operates retrospectively
• QB 08/01: Tax Administration Act 1994 - Section 91E(4)(f) and self-assessment
• QB 07/05 - Ability to rule where the Commissioner is auditing or investigating - whether the Commissioner has a discretion to rule or is prohibited
• QB 07/02 - Whether The Minor Beneficiary Rule Exemption In Section HH 3B Applies On A $1,000 "Per Beneficiary" Or On A $1,000 "Per Beneficiary Per Trust" Basis.
• Tax treatment of wooden scaffolding planks
• Exemption from gift duty for dispositions of property made by or under an order of the Court: section 75(A) Estate and Gift Duties Act 1968
• Private and product binding rulings - to whom do they apply?
• Bankrupt's ability to carry forward accumulated losses
• Records for controlled foreign companies or foreign investment funds to be available in English
• Website expenditure - deductibility
• Qualifying foreign private annuity exemption from the Foreign Investment Fund regime
• Tourism service providers' payments made to tour guides or drivers - the income tax liability of those parties and the tour operator employing the guide or driver
• Managing communications associated with a dispute referred to the Adjudication Unit
• When does derivation occur in relation to land sales with a deferred settlement, by business taxpayers who provide vendor finance?
• Section 108 Tax Administration Act 1994 (TAA) - commencement of four year statutory period (November 2002)

Date published: 10 Jun 2009

Back to top