Assessable Income Functioning A Business -Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss About The Assessable Income Functioning A Business? Answer: Introducation According to section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997, deductible expenses are the one that is incurred either while earning the assessable income or while functioning a business that can assist in the attainment of such assessable income. Further, deduction of these expenses is not allowable as a deduction that is private or capital in nature, or the expenses that are in association with the attainment of exempted income. In the case of cost of moving machinery to a new place, the same is related to brand new machinery that is deported from the area of purchase to the site. Moreover, the expense incurred here must be incorporated in the Machinery's capital cost and therefore, it is deemed to be of capital nature. Therefore, such expenses must not be allowable under the above-mentioned section 8-1 because they are of capital origin and the given section does not allow such expenses. Further, adding up to such expenses or allowability of expenses rely upon an assets nature whether it is an old one or brand-new (Fullerton et. al, 2017). If the asset is brand new in nature, every expense that is incurred up to the date of its utilization must be summed up to its cost and it must become a part of the assets cost. For instance, commissioning, installation, and transportation cost, etc. Besides, in the case wherein the accounting is incurred for deporting the old machine from the present location to a new lo cation, it must be deemed to be regarded as transportation cost and therefore, allowable as deduction. In the case of revaluation of assets to effect insurance cover, it can be seen that the expenses incurred for the assets evaluation in order to claim exemption are allowable only if they are incurred for recovery of loss of gain, whether directly or indirectly related to the assessable income. Besides, in relation to an insurance claim, two scenarios can arise. Firstly, in relation to an asset for which insurance claim is attained is of capital nature, this implies that the capital asset is wrecked and the claim is mainly for the recovery of losses. Nevertheless, in such a scenario, the incurred expenses for the recovery of insurance coverage must be subtracted from the original insurance claim amount and the same must not be regarded as business expenditure. Secondly, when the insurance claim is for attaining loss on assets that are directly held as stock in trade, such assets cannot be regarded as capital assets and is therefore directly associated with the assessable income being depicted in the financials. Further, any incurred expenses for such purpose are allowable only as business expenditures so that businesses can attain benefit from the same. Nevertheless, these expenses must be shown in the profit and loss account and considered as expenses for recovering the losses on the stock. On a whole, the expenses incurred for revaluation of assets held as stock in trade can be allowed under 8-1 of the ITAA, 1997. As mentioned previously, under section 8-1 of the ITAA, 1997, it has been stated that deductible expenses are either incurred while earning the assessable income or while operating a particular business that plays the main role in generating such assessable income. Furthermore, the deduction is not allowable of these expenses if they are of domestic nature, capital nature, or nature in association with the attainment of exempted income. A similar instance was held in the case of Newspapers Ltd v FCT(1938) 61 CLR 337) where all losses and payments that include commission, expenses of traveling, expenses and not in the nature of losses and capital outgoing provided in gaining the income that is assessable. Therefore, in computing the taxpayer taxable income, the overall income generated by the taxpayer shall be considered. Therefore, in the given situation, if such ideology is implemented, it can be stated that the legal expenses that the company has incurred for tackling a petition for winding up cannot fall under the purview of the said section. This is because it is not incurred for earning an assessable income and it is not the expenses that are incurred compulsorily to operate the business so that assessable income can be attained. Furthermore, the paid expenses must also be verified in the light of the net amount because bigger the figure, the more impossible it will be to treat such as business expenses. However, since it is a legal expenditure that has been incurred for the purpose of carrying on the business operation, it can be regarded as an expense that is allowable under section 25-5. It can be observed in the given case that the solicitor account does not segregate the expenses in relation to several matters and therefore, many legal expenses fail to be divided into revenue or capital nature. Further, it has been assumed that the legal expenses for each affair mentioned in the situation are incurred for the purpose of the business In addition, such expenses have been incurred for the purpose of income recovery that must further become a relevant part of the assessable income (Kobestky, 2005). Therefore, if the purposes are segregated, it can be stated that the legal expenses that have been incurred for the discharge of mortgage can be regarded as an expense of capital nature and hence, the same cannot be allowed under section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997. Besides, all other incurred expenses can be easily allowable as deduction. Hence, it can be concluded why the previously mentioned expenses are either allowable or disallowable in the businesses.It can be witnessed from the given scenario that Big Bank Ltd is a bank that is registered under the GST scheme and functions on a national basis. This can be supported by the fact that it possesses more than fifty branches and pursues a massive ten-story office and other innumerable call centers for addressing its customers. Nevertheless, Big Bank has been offering various facilities to its customers that include safety deposit and offering of loans. Besides, the bank has also launched its product that is associated with contents and home insurance policies and it is considered as one of the significant initiatives in its business. However, the bank must take adequate steps to alter its computerized accounting system because of the prevalence of GST scheme that must be charged on every premium policy offered by it to its customers (Kenny et. al, 2016). Moreover, th e bank is also under an obligation to advertise and promote such new initiative because it has already made every effort to proceed with enhanced force in the insurance industry. Such effort also includes preparation of appropriate budgeting strategies and promotion through platforms like print media, television, etc that can enable in paving out ways for an effective future. Big Bank has expended an amount of $16,50,000 for the advertising campaign of such new initiative wherein $550,000 has been expended for promoting the newly launched product and the remaining amount for other requirements. Moreover, the advertisement consultant has also offered an invoice amounting to $16,50,000 for its services. The similar instance has been observed in the case of House of Lords inC E CommrsvRedrow Group plc where the issue consisted in claiming of the input tax on the commissions charged to it by the agent services. In relation to this, the input tax credit of the same must be available to the Bank because it is a registered user under the scheme of GST. The business of Big Bank must be allowed the tax credit of the amount paid on the invoice (advertising bill) because it is usual business expenditure and it is incurred especially for the purpose of business only (Martin, 2001). Besides, such expense cannot be capitalized because it is not a one-time expense and it will recur in future. Further, the life of such expense is short in nature and therefore, it must not be summed up or regarded as the companys asset (Pratt Kulsrud, 2013). Nevertheless, whenever any business entity expends for an expense that has been incurred for the purpose of its business and such expense also accommodates GST scheme, then such entity has the complete right to claim the credit for the amount of GST paid on the bill. This claiming of credit on GST is also commonly known as GST or input tax credit. As per Sadiq et. al (2017) claiming of GST can be allowed if the given below conditions comply: The expenses that are incurred for any purchase of items are exclusively for the intention of business and not for personal utilization. GST must be incorporated in the purchase price of the item. There must be a valid consideration for the payment of item purchased. The seller or supplier of such item must issue a tax invoice for such item and it must be inclusive of GST. The expenses that are incurred by the Big Bank is an enormous figure but still, it must be allowed as an advertising expenditure, as it is significantly or exclusively incurred for the purpose of promoting the business operations of the bank. Further, the company also has complete authority to claim the entire input tax credit so that it can be utilized for addressing its additional tax liabilities of GST. A similar observation was noted in the case of Polysar Investments Netherlands BVvInspecteur der Invoerrechten en Accijnzen, Arnhem (Case C-60/90). The question that was put before the court of justice was that whether Polysar can be considered as a taxable entity for the purpose of VAT and whether input tax credit charged on costs will be claimable. The court of justice came with a judgment that a holding company having a primary purpose of holding shares in the subsidiary company and exercising rights with the same will not be a taxable entity for the purpose of VAT and the statu s did not alter because it is under the ambit of the economic grouping (Martin, 2001). Hence, it came to the conclusion that input tax will not be available. Moreover, the payment made by the bank to the advertisement consultants comprise of $550000 that is apportioned to the advertisement, television, and $11,00,000 for other advertising media. Hence, such expense will assist the bank to enhance its business affairs and it must be approximately two percent of its entire business affairs. Thus, the remaining 98% of the business affairs of the bank must accrue to the traditional bank's sources of income that are deposit facilities and distribution of loan to various customers, and for which commission and interest are charged respectively (Renton, 2005). Therefore, since all these scenarios comply in the case of Big Bank Ltd, it is surely eligible to claim input tax credit on the invoice issued by the advertising consultants (Hopewell, 2012). Whenever an individual attains income from a country wherein he is a usual resident and from countries as well, then he has a right to go for the foreign offset of tax. Moreover, if such individual has income from more than one country and he has incurred expenses for attaining such income, he can offset such expenses only if the following conditions are satisfied: Such individual has paid the foreign income tax from income generated from such foreign country, which means that tax on such income has already been paid. Such person has incorporated the foreign income in the net assessable income for computing the total tax payable on income (Hopewell, 2012). Computation of Assessable Income and Foreign Tax Offset: Particulars Amount in AUD$ Employment Income from Australia Employment Income from United States Employment Income from United Kingdom Rental income from property in the United Kingdom Dividend Income from United Kingdom (assumed as grossed up) Interest Income from the United Kingdom Total Gross Income Less: Expenses : Medical Expenses Expenses incurred in deriving employment income from Australia Expenses incurred in deriving employment income from the US Expenses incurred in deriving employment income from the UK Gift to a deductible gift recipient Interest on debt for deriving dividend income Expenses on debt for deriving interest income Total Taxable Income Tax on Total Taxable Income Add: Medicare Levy Total Taxes Payable Less: Foreign Taxes Offset Net Taxes Payable 44,000 12,000 8,000 2,000 1,200 800 68,000 5,000 4,000 900 500 400 140 60 57,000 10,072 1,140 11,212 4,400 6,812 Notes: the income and expenses of domestic and foreign has been totaled where taxes are paid in a foreign country it has been allowed as a set off against overall tax liability the figures are regrouped and totaled when done for the purpose of computation all amount are in Australian dollar The question pertains to the income and expenses allowability done by Johny and Leon. There have been various alterations and events that have been done during the course of business. For the purpose of computation, the figures are regrouped and tax rates are not assumed. Partnership of Johny Leon Net income for the year ending Income $ Sales of sporting Goods 400000 Bank deposits interest 10000 Dividend franked-60% 35000 Recovery of bad debts 10000 Capital Gain (30000-15000) 15000 Closing Stock at cost 16000 Expenses Opening Stock 20000 Salary 10000 15000 Interest on Capital- Johny 2000 Interest on Loan by Johny 4000 Travel Expenses Johny 3000 Legal Fees for renewal of Lease 2000 Legal Expenses 1900 Collection Expenses of debt 500 Council Expenses 500 Staff Salary (25000- 5000) 20000 Purchase of Sports Item 30000 Rent 20000 Loss on doubtful Debt 30000 Business Lunch expenses 10000 Loss due to theft of cash 3000 171900 Gain from Partnership 314100 Less: Last year Loss 40000 274100 137050 137050 Notes: 1. profits are distributed in equality 2. Assumption is done at a Small Business entity (SBE). 3. Theft loss must be considered as a loss. 4. Adjustment of capital loss is done Capital Gain on shares disposal 5. Johny travel from House to office and returns have been allowed as business expenses. 6. Johnnys son salary has been lessened by 5000$ as it exceeded the commercial rate allowable by commissioner. 7. Closing Stock considered at lower of cost or realizable value. 8. doubtful debt of 30000$ (Loss on account) considered as loss of doubtful debt. 9. lunches expenses of business have been allowed as business expenses because it was for buyers of business 10. previous year loss of 40000$ have been reduced from current year profits. It is assumed that they have been carried forward this year. References Martin, In the case of revaluation of assets2001 Input Tax Credits - The Core Mechanism of GST, viewed 11 September 2017 https://www.tved.net.au/index.cfm?SimpleDisplay=PaperDisplay.cfmPaperDisplay=https://www.tved.net.au/PublicPapers/June_2001,_Sound_Education_in_GST,_Input_Tax_Credits___The_Core_Mechanism_of_GST.html Hopewell, L 2012, Australia tax inquiry opens submissions, viewed 12 September 2017, www.zdnet.com.au. Fullerton,I.G, Deutsch, R, management, M.L, Hanley,P Snape, T 2017, The Australian Tax Handbook Tax Return Edition 2017, Thomson Reuters Kenny, P, Blissenden, M, Villios, S 2016, Australian Tax 2017, Thomson Reuters: Australia Kobestky, M 2005, Income Tax: Text, Materials and Essential Cases, Sydney: The Federation Press Pratt, J. W Kulsrud, W N 2013, financeTaxation, Oxford university press. Renton N.E 2005, Income Tax and Investment, 2nd edition, Sydney Sadiq, K, Coleman, C , Hanegbi, R, Jogarajan,S, Krever, R, Obst, R, Teoh, J Ting, A 2017, Principles of Taxation Law 2017, Law book Australia