Can my SMSF invest in property development?

Clarke McEwan Accountants

Can my SMSF invest in property development?

Australians love property and the lure of a 15% preferential tax rate on income during the accumulation phase, and potentially no tax during retirement, is a strong incentive for many SMSF trustees to dream of large returns from property development. We look at the pros, cons, and problems that often occur.

An SMSF can invest in property development if trustees ensure the investment complies with the rules. And, there are a lot of rules. A key is the sole purpose test. Trustees need to ensure the fund is maintained to provide benefits for retirement, ill health or death. Breaches of this fundamental tenet are serious and include the loss of the fund’s concessional tax treatment and civil and criminal penalties.

By its nature property development is high risk and fund trustees need to ensure that the SMSF is not simply a handy cash-cow for a pipe dream, particularly when the developers are related parties.

There are multiple ways an SMSF can invest in property development if the investment strategy of the fund allows:

Directly developing property
An ungeared unit trust or company (the parties can be related)
Investment in an unrelated entity
A joint venture

Directly developing property from fund assets

An SMSF can purchase land from an unrelated party and develop the property in its own right. Common issues that often arise include:

Acquiring the land from a related party - An SMSF cannot purchase land from a related party (unless it is business real property used wholly and exclusively in a business). This means that the lovely block of land inherited by one of the members, or owned by a family trust, that is perfect for development cannot be purchased by the SMSF.

An SMSF cannot borrow to develop property - An SMSF can borrow money to purchase land using a limited recourse borrowing arrangement but it cannot use a loan to improve the asset. That is, borrowings cannot be used to develop the land. And, where the SMSF has borrowed to purchase land, it cannot change the nature of that asset until the loan has been repaid. That is, no development.

Who will develop the property? - Problems often occur when the property developers are related to the fund members. Whilst it is possible to engage a related party builder to undertake the work, there are strict rules that mean that the work and materials must be acquired at market value. That is, there is no advantage from “mates rates”. If you are using a related party builder, ensure that the paperwork is pristine, any transactions are at market value, and all interactions are documented.

GST might apply - Goods and services tax might apply to the development and the sale of any developed property. If the ATO considers that an SMSF is in the business of developing property or is undertaking a one-off development in a commercial manner then GST could potentially apply.

If your SMSF is not undertaking a property development project in its own right, there are a few ways for an SMSF to invest in property development projects:

Related ungeared trust or company

An ungeared company or trust is often used (under SIS Regulation, section 13.22C) when related parties want to invest in a property development together. The SMSF can invest in a company or trust that is undertaking a property development as long as the company or trust:

Does not lease to a related party (unless business real property)
Does not borrow money or have borrowings (must be ungeared)
Does not conduct a business
Conducts any dealings at arm’s length
And, the assets of the unit trust or company:

o Do not include an interest in another entity (i.e., cannot have shares in a company)

o Do not have a charge over them (i.e., mortgage over any asset)

o Are not purchased from a related party (or was ever an asset of a related party) unless the asset is business real property acquired at market rates.

See section 13.22C for full details.

Profits from the company or trust are then distributed to the SMSF according to its share.

Using the provisions of 13.22C means that the SMSF can invest in property development with a related party without the development being considered an in-house asset. However, if the criteria are not met (at any point), the in-house asset rules apply, and the SMSF might have to sell the units in the trust or shares in the company to return to the maximum 5% in-house asset limit. Generally, this means the sale of the underlying property or a significant restructure.

Problems arise with 13.22C arrangements where the trust or company:

Needs more money to complete the development and borrows money, or issues more units and sells them (is in business)
Accepts a loan from a member of the SMSF
Overdrafts (may be considered loans and breach 13.22C)
Uses a related party builder who either under charges for the work completed or overcharges and strips the profits that should have been returned to the SMSF.

Warning on conducting a business

One of the criteria for the exemption in 13.22C to apply is that the trust or company cannot be conducting a business. This requirement may prevent short-term property developments that are built and sold for profit.

Typically, 13.22C arrangements are used for long term investments where the development enables the creation of an asset that is then leased by the trust or company. This could be commercial premises leased to a related or unrelated party (e.g., premises for a child care centre or manufacturing), or residential premises leased to unrelated parties (e.g., townhouses or small developments).

Unrelated property developments

Investing in unrelated entities for a property development is attractive as there is no limit to how much of the fund’s assets can be invested (subject to the investment strategy and trust deed allowing the investment), and unlike ungeared entities, the entity is able to borrow money/place charge over the assets.

Where related parties are investing in the same entity, there are rules governing the percentage of ownership the SMSF and their related parties can hold. To meet the definition of unrelated entity for in-house asset purposes, the SMSF and their related parties must not own more than 50% of the units available. This is because the SMSF cannot control or hold sufficient influence over the entity and remain an unrelated entity. If the ATO considers the entity is related to the SMSF, then it would become a related party and the investment an in-house asset.

Joint venture arrangements

An SMSF can potentially invest in a joint venture (JV) property development, but the criteria are necessarily strict and there are a range of issues that need to be considered carefully. One of the issues that needs to be considered up-front is determining the substance of the arrangement between the parties, because the term JV can be used to describe a variety of arrangements. The ATO confirms that care must be taken to ensure that arrangements with related parties are true JVs.

Under a JV, the SMSF invests in and has a share of the property being developed (not the entity undertaking the development). Each party bears the costs (time and/or money) of the JV and receives this same proportionate contribution from the returns. If the arrangement is not structured properly then the SMSF’s stake in the JV could be treated as an investment in or loan to a related party and be treated as an in-house asset. For example, this could be the case if the SMSF only provides a capital outlay for the arrangement and has no rights other than a contractual right to a return on the final investment.

It is also necessary to consider whether the arrangement between the parties could be treated as a partnership for tax, GST and legal purposes. For example, this could be the case if the arrangement involves the sharing of income, sale proceeds or profits, rather than sharing the output from the project.

It's essential to get advice well in advance - tax, legal and financial - before pursuing a JV.

Is your SMSF the best vehicle for property development?

Trustees need to carefully consider any investment decisions and have a sound rationale for the investment.

Any advice on a property development needs to be from a licenced financial adviser. A lawyer should be used for any contracts or agreements between parties. And, compliance assistance from a qualified accountant.

< Older Post Newer Post >

Your upcoming tax calendar for May and June

By Clarke McEwan • 06 May, 2024

As we move into the business end of tax planning for 2024, here is a list of key tax dates for May and June 2024. Be aware of your upcoming tax obligations here.

Bill proposing increased threshold for instant asset write off passes Senate

By Clarke McEwan • 27 Apr, 2024

A bill proposing to increase the instant asset write off threshold in Div 328 of ITAA 1997 from $1,000 to $20,000 has been introduced in the Parliament and awaits approval.

Budget 2024-25

By Clarke McEwan • 18 Apr, 2024

Budget 2024-25 The 2024-25 Federal Budget is the third for the Albanese Government and consistent with previous years, the primary themes are expected to be the cost of living and the economic shift to net zero. According to election guru Antony Green , the window for the next election starts on Saturday, 3 August 2024, “the first possible date for an election if writs are issued on 1 July. The election window will stay open until mid-May 2025, the last date being 17 or 24 May.” No doubt, the Government will have the election in mind when it presents the Budget on 14 May at 7.30pm AEST. Stage 3 tax cuts The redesigned stage 3 tax cuts have been passed by Parliament and will apply from 1 July 2024. The amendments broadened the benefits of the tax cut by focussing on individuals with taxable income below $150,000. Investment incentives for small business It remains to be seen whether an increased instant asset write-off threshold will apply to smaller businesses in the 2024-25 income year. The increased threshold to $20,000 announced in the 2023-24 Budget still has not passed Parliament (the Senate increased the threshold to $30,000). If the intent of this measure is to encourage investment, it is essential that legislation enabling these measures is passed by Parliament in a reasonable time to give business operators the certainty they need to commit to any additional investment spending. Energy bill relief The Prime Minister has hinted at another round of energy bill relief to ease cost of living pressures for low-income households and small business. The measure is subject to support from State and Territory governments. Look out for our analysis on how the 2024-25 Federal Budget will impact you, your business, and your superannuation.

The assault on professional services

By Clarke McEwan • 18 Apr, 2024

The assault on professional services The ATO has signalled that it is willing to pursue professional services firms who divert profits to avoid tax. Two new cases before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal demonstrate how serious the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) is about making sure professional services firms - lawyers, accountants, architects, medical practices, engineers, architects etc., – are appropriately taxed. In both cases, the ATO pursued the practices using Part IVA. Part IVA is an area of the income tax law that enables the Tax Commissioner to attack schemes or arrangements undertaken to obtain a tax benefit, enabling him to cancel any benefit derived by the scheme. That is, you could have a legally viable structure in place but if the only purpose of that structure is to reduce tax, then the Commissioner can use Part IVA to remove the tax benefit. And, if Part IVA applies, you may end up with an additional tax liability as well as an administrative penalty of either 25% or 50% of the tax shortfall amount. Broadly, the cases involved a solicitor who controlled a number of practice trusts that derived profits through marketing and facilitating tax planning arrangements. While the arrangement in each case was complex and involved a large number of steps, the practice trusts ensured their business profits weren’t subject to tax by essentially making trust distributions on paper through a series of trusts and ultimately to either a company that had existing tax losses, or a tax-exempt entity. However, the real funds relating to the trust distribution (less a commission paid for the use of these entities) were ultimately received by the solicitor or their associated entities in the form of a loan. Professional practices have been in the ATO spotlight for many years now for the way they distribute profits. Back in 2021, the ATO finalised its guidance on the allocation of professional firm profits, putting in place a series of risk ratings and gateway tests. These two cases however demonstrate the ATO’s willingness to pursue the issue in the courts using the Commissioner’s powers in Part IVA. For professional services firms, it’s important to be aware that there are several ways in which the ATO can potentially challenge arrangements involving the distribution of profits from a professional practice. For example: If a trading entity derives personal services income that mainly relates to the skills and efforts of a particular individual, the ATO has certain expectations around ensuring the profits are assessed to the individual performing the work. If a trading entity doesn’t derive personal services income but income from a business structure involving a professional practice, the ATO has set out its compliance approach to targeting arrangements that don’t result in a reasonable level of profit being taxed in the hands of the individual practitioners. If a trust makes paper distributions to loss entities to ‘soak up’ deductions or losses, there are integrity rules in section 100A, another area of tax law under intense scrutiny, that need to be considered.

How much is my business worth?

By Clarke McEwan • 18 Apr, 2024

How much is my business worth? For many small business owners, their business is their largest asset and for many, one that is expected to help fund their retirement. But what is your business really worth and what sets a high value business apart? Every business owner is naturally curious about just how much their business is worth. However, for every business that sells at an attractive price, there are others that struggle to sell, let alone fetch a premium. The question is, what makes a difference? When you come to sell a business the first question is, what are you selling? In most cases, this is fixtures and fittings, plant and equipment, stock on hand, and the goodwill of the business. Generally, a buyer won’t want to purchase your liabilities or your business structure, nor will they want to collect your outstanding debtors. Most business sales become a sale of business assets. These assets are relatively easy to value with the exception of the goodwill. The value of plant and equipment and trading stock can generally be agreed. The tension tends to be around the value of the goodwill because goodwill is made up of many intangible assets that can’t be readily quantified. We can all agree that there is value in these assets but the question is, how much? Goodwill is basically the value of the future free cashflow of the business. Based on how your business is structured, it is the value of the profits the business can generate in the future. This is what a buyer is prepared to pay for. If a buyer has a reasonable certainty of profits and free cashflow in the future, then this is worth something. By comparison, a start-up business will have a higher level of risk and no certainty that profits can be generated. In general, a new business may need to trade for a number of years at a loss before it can establish itself and generate profits. Goodwill is what you are prepared to pay to avoid the risk and the ‘time to establish’ factor. So, what influences business value and what will people pay for? A history of profits, profits, and more profits Returns on capital invested (better than 30%) Strong growth and growth prospects Brand name and value A business not dependent on the owners A strong, verifiable customer list Monopoly income – exclusive territories A sustainable competitive advantage Good systems and procedures It is possible to get a price that is widely different from the norm. Unique businesses, unique circumstances, and unique opportunities can always produce ‘an out of the box’ price. If you can build something unique, then you may achieve a price beyond normal expectations. At the end of the day however, the market will set the price. If you are planning on selling your business, identify who your buyers might be. There could be a purchaser who is prepared to pay a large premium to own your business because of the accretive value or because it is pivotal to their growth strategy. And, even if you are not thinking about selling your business, the reality is that one day you will. If you build your business with this in mind, then you should look to do the things that will grow your business value from year to year.

Non-compete clauses and worker restraints under review

By Clarke McEwan • 18 Apr, 2024

Non-compete clauses and worker restraints under review A new issues paper from Treasury’s Competition Review questions whether non-competes and other restraints are limiting job opportunities and movement. A recent Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) survey found that 46.9% of businesses surveyed used some kind of restraint clause, including for workers in non-executive roles. The survey also found 20.8% of businesses use non-compete clauses for at least some of their staff and 68.2% for more than three-quarters of their employees. Over the last 30 years, Australia has seen a decline in job mobility. Australia is not alone in this and other advanced economies have experienced the same issue. While restraint clauses are not the only factor contributing to the decline – an ageing population and a rise in post-pandemic market concentration in some industries has also contributed, it is specifically the role of restraints that is the focus of the Competition Review issues paper (submissions close 31 May 2024). From an economic perspective, declining job mobility impacts wage growth and innovation as restraints prevent access to skilled workers within the economy. Productivity is a key concern as Australia’s productivity has declined in the last 20 years. The review states that, “The direct consequence of a non-compete clause is that it hinders competition among businesses: it disincentivises workers from leaving their current job, creating a barrier to the entry of new businesses and the expansion of existing businesses.” For business however, this is the point - restricting the knowledge developed by a worker during their employment from benefiting a competitor, limiting the likelihood of a ‘mass exodus’ of key workers from the business to a competitor, preventing clients from employing key workers, and protecting the value of the business by preventing employees from walking away with customers that were hard won, at a cost, by the business. However, the impact of restraints appears to be a psychological deterrent given that most are not contested. Of the 115 matters relating to restraints of trade between 2020 and 2023 dealt with by Legal Aid NSW, only one business commenced proceedings in court against a former worker. And, a further study indicates that where employers seek legal redress in the courts, they are more likely than not to fail. The international trend is to either ban restraints for workers under a certain income level and time limit restraints for higher paid workers, or to limit the duration of restraints generally but specify a level of compensation to the worker for the restraint period. Non-compete clauses prevent workers from joining a competitor or starting a new business in competition with their current employer for a period of time. Non-solicitation clauses prevent workers from soliciting former customers and co-workers. Non-disclosure clauses prevent workers from disclosing confidential information relating to their employment.