Whether you have already moved to the United States or are planning to, there are tax implications for Australian expats to consider. 

For example, how does the Australia-US tax treaty apply to capital gains on the realization of assets, and what will your Australian and US tax obligations be? 

These are just a few questions this article will answer for you.

What Is Capital Gains Tax?

To begin, it is crucial to have a comprehensive understanding of capital gains tax concerning Australian expats. 

Capital Gains Tax or CGT is a tax on the profit made from selling an item classified as an asset. In Australia, as in the United States, CGT is complex and different from other taxes. Let us review both Australian and US CGT and then bring them together.

Australian CGT Tax

In Australia, CGT applies to any asset acquired after 20 September 1985. 

Selling an asset for more than it costs means you have a capital gain and must pay CGT. If an asset is sold for less than it cost, this results in a capital loss that can offset against current or future capital gains.

Generally, if an Australian tax resident makes a capital gain and the asset sold was held for at least 12 months, the 50% capital gain tax discount will apply. This results in half the capital gain being included in assessable income and being assessed at marginal rates of tax – which may vary between financial years. See the ATO website for the current individual tax rates. 

There are potential exemptions from the capital gains tax regime, including the main residence exemption.

A person’s main residence, which was moved into as soon as practicable after purchase and continues to be a person’s main residence for the entire ownership period, and on sale, if still a tax resident of Australia, will be exempt from CGT.

In relation to the main residence exemption, new laws passed in 2019, which came into effect 1 July 2020 now mean a total loss of this exemption if the property is sold while the taxpayer is a non-resident of Australia. There are some exceptions known as life events but careful planning is required to ensure the preservation of this exemption.

US CGT Tax

Under US law, the tax rate applied to capital gains depends on the asset’s holding period.

For assets held more than a year, you pay long-term capital gains tax, usually lower than the tax on ordinary income.

For assets held for less than a year, short-term capital gains tax rates apply, equal to your normal income tax rate.

Your income also determines the percentage of CGT you pay in the United States.

Your US CGT rate will depend on your taxable income. It is best to check the IRS website for the most current income thresholds for which CGT rate applies. 

There are also special circumstances under which your capital gains might be taxed at a higher rate. For example, net capital gains from selling collectibles (such as coins or art) are taxed at a maximum 28% rate.

Australia-US Tax Treaty And Its Impact On Capital Gains Tax

For Australian expats in the US, the Australia-US Tax Treaty is particularly important to understand. First signed into law in 1982, the treaty has been updated several times since then to address changes in areas such as superannuation and non-US investments.  

The Australia-US Tax Treaty determines where your tax obligations lie between the two countries. The overarching goal of the treaty is “avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income.” 

As we explain in this article, the Australia-US Tax Treaty, allows the tax paid in one jurisdiction to be claimed as a tax credit in the other jurisdiction, in the event that the income is assessable in both.  

For example, if the US sourced income is first taxed in the US and the income is then assessed in Australia, the tax first paid in the US will be taken up as a foreign tax credit against the tax assessed on the income. If the foreign tax credit covers the Australian tax, then any excess foreign tax credits are lost. If there is a shortfall after the foreign tax credit is applied to the assessed Australian tax, then extra tax will be required to be paid.

Tax Obligations When Selling A Former Main Residence In Australia

Let us look at an example to demonstrate how the Australia-US Tax Treaty affects Australian expats when selling their former main residence. 

An Australian couple moves to the US and lives there for eight years. They have decided to sell their former main home in Australia (purchased in 2015 for AUD1,000,000 and now worth AUD3,000,000).

Australian Tax Considerations

This couple would be classified as foreign residents and would not qualify for the CGT main residence exemption. As such, they will pay Australian CGT tax on the AUD2,000,000 (AUD3,000,000-AUD1,000,000) capital gain. 

However, if this Australian couple moves back to Australia and are considered residents for tax purposes and they reestablish the home as their main residence, depending on the length of their absence from Australia and whether they rented the property out or left it vacant, will determine whether a full or partial main residence exemption exists.

This example makes it clear that planning the timing of the sale of your former primary residence can and will have material tax implications. With that in mind, it is critical to get professional tax advice to optimize any potential or upcoming CGT liabilities.

It is important to note Australia also offers certain life event exemptions if they occurred during the time this family lived abroad, which could make them eligible for the CGT main residence exemption. 

The life events this includes are:

• You, your spouse, or your child under 18 had a terminal medical condition
• Your spouse or your child under 18 died
• The CGT event happened because of a formal agreement following the breakdown of your marriage or relationship

USA Tax Considerations

Any income earned, including employment income and realized capital gains, is subject to US tax. Australians who have become US tax residents, including green card holders and those in the US for over 183 days in the last two years, are taxed on worldwide income. This would include the AUD2,000,000 capital gain.

However, the U.S. allows a foreign tax credit for U.S. residents on US taxes owed against any tax already paid to Australia or vice versa. 

The Australia-US Tax Treaty requires that the combined taxes paid in both countries cannot exceed the total tax that would otherwise have been payable in the country where the sale occurs.

Australia And USA Combined Tax Considerations

If the Australian couple decided to sell their former main residence in Australia while being a non-resident for tax purposes, they will need to declare this income on both the Australian and US income tax return. 

As the property is situated in Australia, the first taxing rights reside with Australia. Tax will be applied at non-resident marginal rates on their AUD2,000,000 capital gain.  

For the US CGT, the tax on their AUD2,000,000 capital gain would be calculated depending on their combined income and the CGT rate applicable. 

Thankfully, this couple would not have to pay both the full amount of tax in Australia and the US, as the tax treaty allows taxpayers in each jurisdiction to avoid double taxation. In this case as Australia has the first taxing rights, the US would give the couple a tax credit for the tax paid in Australia and the excess tax paid will be carried forward.

CGT On Selling Shares Originally Purchased In Australia

Let us assume an Australian citizen moves to the US for a period of five years. During this time, they decided to sell the shares purchased while they resided in Australia.

The first aspect to consider is what their choice was when then became a non-resident of Australia. If an Australian tax resident moves to the US and becomes a non-resident and they hold a share portfolio, the choices on cessation of residency with respect to the share portfolio is either to take a deemed disposal or ignore the deemed disposal and treat the shares as Taxable Australian Property. 

A deemed disposal involves comparing the purchase price of the shares to the market value of the shares on the date that residency ceased. Importantly, there is no cash received with respect to this type of CGT happening and so if there is a large accumulated capital gain, then there will be a tax bill that requires payment from other funds. 

If the latter option is chosen (ie. they choose to treat the shares as Taxable Australian Property), any future sale of these shares are connected with Australia and a capital gain or capital loss requires calculation and reporting in the Australian income tax return, even as a non-resident.

Fortunately, the treaty provides a paragraph where future sales of this portfolio can be subject to tax solely in the US. If a choice is made to have future sales subject to tax solely in the US, then the deemed disposal on cessation of residency is ignored.

CGT On Inheritance In Australia

If an Australian citizen has lived in the US for 15 years and inherits an investment property and shares, what are the tax implications in both Australia and the US?

Inheriting Property

The original property was purchased for AUD500,000 and has a current market value of AUD2,500,000. If the property was sold on when inherited, there will be a capital gain of AUD2,000,000 (AUD2,500,000-AUD500,000). As Australia has the first taxing rights, tax will be applied at non-resident rates.

If they had no other Australian sourced income for the year in which the property was sold, tax on the capital gain of AUD2,000,000 would be AUD875,350.

The USA CGT tax on their AUD2,000,000 capital gain would be calculated depending on their combined income and the CGT rate applicable.

The Australian citizen would not have to pay both the AUD875,350 Australian CGT and US CGT as the treaty allows taxpayers in each jurisdiction to avoid double taxation. In this case, the US would give the person a tax credit totaling AUD875,350.

Inheriting Shares

If they inherit shares, they can choose to have any future sales solely taxed in the US under the Australia-US Treaty.

Get Help Navigating CGT For Australian Expats

There are many intricacies and challenges to navigating tax laws between countries. The information in this article may not cover some variables relevant to your circumstances and as such it is recommended you seek tax advice for your specific situation.

The U.S. government’s crackdown on offshore tax evasion has placed the Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR) in the spotlight. Many U.S. taxpayers with foreign accounts may not fully understand their obligation to disclose these accounts, and even fewer realize the severe penalties that come with failing to comply. For U.S. citizens, residents, and entities with foreign financial accounts, the stakes are high.

Understanding FBAR requirements and the line between non-willful and willful violations, including recklessness, can mean the difference between a reasonable penalty or a financial disaster. A key case illustrating this legal battlefield is Bedrosian v. United States, a cautionary tale for those who might be unaware—or choose to remain unaware—of their filing obligations.

FBAR Reporting Requirements And Penalties: An Overview

U.S. citizens, residents, and certain entities are required to file an FBAR if the aggregate value of their foreign accounts exceeds $10,000 at any point during the calendar year. This requirement applies even if the accounts don’t generate taxable income. The FBAR is filed annually with FinCEN, separate from tax returns.

Penalties for failing to comply are steep:

• Non-Willful Violations: Penalties for non-willful violations are generally capped at $10,000 per violation unless the taxpayer can show reasonable cause.
• Willful Violations: For willful violations, penalties can be far more significant, often up to 50% of the account balance or $100,000, whichever is greater. In some cases, criminal charges can also be brought.

The difference between willful and non-willful violations is central to determining penalties, and recent court cases and IRS guidance have clarified that recklessness can meet the standard for willful conduct.

Bedrosian Case: Recklessness Redefined

In Bedrosian v. United States, the issue of recklessness in the context of FBAR penalties took center stage. Arthur Bedrosian, a successful businessman from Pennsylvania, had held foreign accounts with UBS in Switzerland. Despite being aware of his FBAR obligations, he failed to report one of his accounts in 2007. The IRS imposed a $975,789 penalty, citing willful failure to file.

Initially, the district court sided with Bedrosian, ruling that his actions were non-willful, and reduced the penalty to $10,000. However, on appeal, the 3rd Circuit Court found that the district court had applied an incorrect standard of willfulness, specifically underestimating the role of recklessness in FBAR violations. The 3rd Circuit clarified that recklessness can indeed qualify as willfulness, and remanded the case for further review. Upon reconsideration, the district court determined that Bedrosian’s failure to report the account demonstrated at least reckless disregard, and the original penalty was reinstated.

Key Case On Recklessness: McBride And FBAR Penalties

A landmark case discussing recklessness in FBAR violations is United States v. McBride. In this case, the taxpayer, Michael McBride, failed to file an FBAR for his offshore accounts. The court found that McBride acted with reckless disregard of the filing requirements, even though he claimed ignorance. The court emphasized that recklessness could be inferred from a taxpayer’s knowledge of the law and his failure to comply with it, even if there wasn’t a clear intent to break the law.

The McBride decision underscored that a taxpayer doesn’t need to knowingly violate FBAR obligations to be penalized severely. Acting recklessly—such as choosing not to learn the rules or ignoring clear indications that filing is required—can be sufficient to trigger the harshest penalties.

IRS’s Approach To Determining Willfulness: The Role Of Evidence

The IRS takes a broad approach when assessing whether an FBAR violation was willful or reckless. In doing so, the agency looks at various forms of evidence to determine whether a taxpayer’s failure to file was due to deliberate intent, recklessness, or negligence. Key factors include:

• Prior Filings And Disclosures: The IRS may review past tax returns and FBAR filings to assess whether the taxpayer has consistently disclosed foreign accounts. A pattern of non-disclosure could suggest willfulness.
• Foreign Bank Communications: Correspondence between the taxpayer and their foreign bank can provide clues about willfulness. For instance, if the bank warned the taxpayer about FBAR requirements, and they still failed to comply, this could indicate recklessness.
• Education and Background Of The Taxpayer: The IRS will also take into account the taxpayer’s background and sophistication. For instance, someone with a high level of financial literacy, such as a business owner or an individual working in finance, is more likely to be held to a higher standard of knowledge regarding their obligations. In Bedrosian, for example, his years of financial dealings and awareness of offshore accounts contributed to the court’s determination of recklessness.
• Taxpayer Behavior: Deliberate concealment, such as moving funds to different jurisdictions or closing accounts after learning of an investigation, can be viewed as willful.

The Internal Revenue Manual also provides guidelines for IRS examiners to follow when assessing willfulness. The IRS is particularly focused on patterns of behavior that demonstrate a conscious choice to disregard the law.

What Does This Mean For Taxpayers?

Taxpayers who hold foreign accounts must be aware of the serious consequences of failing to comply with FBAR requirements. The distinction between willful and non-willful violations is often determined by the taxpayer’s behavior and the totality of the circumstances, not just their direct knowledge of the law. The IRS will scrutinize the individual’s past filings, communications, and behavior to determine whether their failure to file was reckless or deliberate.

As seen in McBride and Bedrosian, recklessness doesn’t require overt intent to evade the law. Simply failing to act on information, or ignoring a known legal duty, can lead to penalties amounting to 50% of the account balance. The IRS’s focus on recklessness means that taxpayers cannot afford to be passive about their foreign accounts. They must actively ensure compliance or risk facing substantial financial penalties.

Conclusion

With the growing focus on offshore tax evasion, the U.S. government has ramped up its enforcement of FBAR penalties. The Bedrosian and McBride cases highlight the importance of understanding the broad definition of willfulness, which includes reckless conduct. Taxpayers who fail to disclose foreign accounts may face severe penalties, even if they claim ignorance. Staying informed and seeking expert advice is critical for anyone with international financial interests.

Declaring Foreign Business Interests

Navigating the U.S. tax code can feel like tiptoeing through a minefield, especially when you throw in international dealings. 

If you’re a U.S. person or corporation with foreign business interests, two forms in particular—Forms 5471 and 5472—might already haunt your dreams. 

Dubbed the “Terrible Twosome” by some beleaguered taxpayers, these forms come with stringent filing requirements and draconian penalties for non-compliance. 

Here’s why you should never forget to file these forms, what the consequences of forgetting are, and some recent developments that might surprise you.

What Are Forms 5471 And 5472?

Form 5471 is essentially an information return that must be filed by certain U.S. citizens and residents who are officers, directors, or shareholders in certain foreign corporations. 

The form requires detailed disclosure about the foreign corporation’s income, assets, and shareholders.

Form 5472 on the other hand, is used by U.S. corporations that are at least 25% foreign-owned, or by foreign corporations engaged in a U.S. trade or business. 

This form requires disclosure of reportable transactions between the reporting corporation and related foreign parties.

While both forms may seem like just another piece of paperwork, failure to file them—or filing them incorrectly—can lead to massive penalties.

The Fines:

Staggering and Unforgiving The IRS takes non-compliance with Forms 5471 and 5472 very seriously, with penalties that could make even the most seasoned tax veteran wince. 

For Form 5471 the penalty starts at $10,000 per year per foreign corporation. 

If the taxpayer fails to correct the omission within 90 days of being notified by the IRS, additional penalties of $10,000 accrue every 30 days, up to a maximum of $50,000. 

Form 5472 penalties are even harsher, starting at $25,000 for each accounting period the form is not filed. 

After the IRS sends a notice of failure, an additional $25,000 penalty kicks in for each subsequent 30-day period of non-compliance, with no cap on the penalties. 

These penalties apply whether the non-compliance was willful or due to an innocent mistake, although options for relief exist in cases of non-willful conduct. 

However, this relief is often difficult to obtain and requires demonstrating reasonable cause for the failure. 

No Statute Of Limitations? Yes, You Read That Right

One of the most terrifying aspects of failing to file these forms is that it can leave your entire tax return open to scrutiny indefinitely. 

Normally, the IRS has three years from the date you file your return to audit it. 

However, if you fail to file Forms 5471 or 5472, that statute of limitations does not apply. The IRS could theoretically go back and audit that return 10, 15, or 20 years later. 

Recent Developments: A Small Ray of Hope?

A recent Tax Court case, Farhy v. Commissioner, had thrown a wrench into the IRS’s penalty regime. 

In April 2023, the court ruled that the IRS did not have the statutory authority to assess penalties under Section 6038(b) for failing to file Form 5471. 

The IRS had been enforcing these penalties for years, but the court found that there was no legal basis for these assessments.

However this Tax Court Ruling was subsequently overturned by the United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit on  3 May 2024.

Conclusion: Don’t Tempt Fate

If you have foreign business interests and think you might need to file Form 5471 or 5472, the best advice is simple: file them. 

Even if the forms are a headache and the rules seem complex, the potential costs of non-compliance—financial and otherwise—are simply too high to ignore. 

And as the Farhy case shows, while there may be occasional victories against the IRS, they are the exception rather than the rule. 

So, stay vigilant, keep those forms in mind, and avoid becoming another cautionary tale in the annals of tax non-compliance. 

The “Terrible Twosome” might be formidable, but with careful attention and professional guidance, they don’t have to be your undoing.

The United States tax code presents a labyrinth of rules and regulations, particularly for U.S. residents with investments in foreign corporations. These complexities are magnified when dealing with Controlled Foreign Corporations (CFCs) and the associated immediate taxation of foreign earnings under Subpart F or the Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income (GILTI) regime. This article delves into Section 962 of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), explaining its significance and utility for U.S. tax residents in managing their foreign investments more effectively.

The Challenge: Immediate Taxation of Foreign Earnings

For U.S. tax residents with investments in foreign corporations, including those held through pass-through entities such as partnerships and S corporations, immediate taxation of foreign earnings is a significant challenge. This taxation arises annually under the Subpart F or GILTI regimes, compelling taxpayers to include foreign income in their U.S. taxable income, often leading to double taxation without relief mechanisms available to corporate taxpayers.

Corporate vs. Individual Taxpayer Treatment

The tax burden disparity between corporate and individual taxpayers under the GILTI regime is stark. U.S. corporations benefit from a reduced federal income tax rate of 21 percent, a Section 250 deduction that allows them to deduct up to 50 percent of GILTI, and the ability to claim up to 80 percent of foreign taxes paid as a foreign tax credit. This combination of benefits significantly mitigates the impact of GILTI on corporate taxpayers.

Conversely, U.S. resident individuals are generally taxed at a federal income tax rate of up to 37 percent on GILTI, without access to the Section 250 deduction or foreign tax credits for GILTI. This discrepancy creates a substantial tax burden for individual taxpayers, necessitating a strategy to level the playing field. This is where Section 962 of the IRC comes into play.

How Section 962 Election Works

A Section 962 election allows U.S. individuals to elect to be taxed on their GILTI and Subpart F income at corporate tax rates. When an individual makes this election, they are effectively treated as if they own their CFC through a hypothetical domestic corporation. This election provides several advantages:

1. Corporate Tax Rate: The taxpayer is subject to the 21 percent corporate tax rate instead of the higher individual rates.
2. Section 250 Deduction: The taxpayer can avail the Section 250 deduction, reducing GILTI by 50 percent.
3. Foreign Tax Credit: The taxpayer can claim an indirect foreign tax credit for taxes paid on the CFC’s net income in the foreign country, up to 80 percent of the foreign taxes paid.

Practical Example Of Section 962 Election

Consider a U.S. individual who wholly owns a CFC in Germany with net tested income of $1,000 for GILTI purposes, having paid $150 in foreign taxes. Without a Section 962 election, the individual faces a 37 percent tax rate on GILTI, resulting in $370 of U.S. tax, without any foreign tax credit or Section 250 deduction.

However, with a Section 962 election:

• The income is taxed at the corporate rate of 21 percent.
• The individual can deduct 50 percent of the GILTI under Section 250, reducing the taxable income to $500.
• Adding back the $150 foreign tax paid (gross-up), the taxable income becomes $650.
• Applying the 21 percent corporate tax rate results in $136.50 of U.S. tax.
• After claiming 80 percent of the $150 foreign tax as a credit ($120), the U.S. tax liability is reduced to $16.50.

Future Distributions And Tax Implications

The tax advantages of a Section 962 election extend to future distributions. In the example above, when the taxpayer eventually receives a distribution of $1,000 from the CFC, it will be taxed at the qualified dividend rate of 20 percent plus the 3.8 percent Net Investment Income Tax (NIIT), resulting in $238 of U.S. tax. Without the election, distributions would typically be subject to ordinary income tax rates, leading to higher tax liabilities.

When To Make A Section 962 Election

Despite its benefits, a Section 962 election is not always advantageous. Some scenarios where the election might not be beneficial include:

1. Same-Year Repatriation: If the CFC’s earnings are repatriated in the same year, the benefits of the election may be negated.
2. State Tax Considerations: Not all states follow the federal tax treatment. States like California do not tax Subpart F or GILTI until a distribution is made, meaning the Section 250 deduction and foreign tax credits may not be available for state tax purposes.
3. Future Tax Increases: Future distributions from previously taxed earnings under a Section 962 election might be taxed at higher rates, potentially offsetting the initial benefits.

Conclusion

Section 962 of the IRC offers a powerful tool for U.S. tax residents with investments in foreign corporations to manage their tax liabilities more effectively. By allowing individuals to be taxed at corporate rates and claim deductions and credits typically available only to corporations, this election can significantly reduce the tax burden associated with GILTI and Subpart F income. However, the decision to make a Section 962 election should be based on a careful analysis of individual circumstances and potential future implications. Consulting with a tax professional is essential to navigate the complexities and determine the best tax strategy.

1. What Is A Trust?

• Trustee;
• Trust Property;
• Equitable Obligation;
• Beneficiaries;

To restate the above in slightly more legalistic terms “a trust is a fiduciary relationship where one person, a trustee, holds an interest in property but has an equitable obligation to use or keep that property for the benefit of another person(s) (beneficiaries) for some committed object or purpose.

There are many types of trusts, however the common ones are:

• Express Trusts;
• Settled Trust;
• Discretionary Trusts;
• Unit Trust;
• Will Trust;

Express Trusts

Are trusts created by the express and intentional declaration of the settlor. Trusts dealt with in practice usually evidence this declaration by way of a formal trust deed.

Settled Trust

One form of an express trust is a settled trust created by settlor (or director). The settlor will intentionally create a trust by gifting the initial trust property to be held on trust by a trustee under an equitable obligation.

The most common trusts we implement are a discretionary trust, unit trust and a will trust (or deceased estate).

Discretionary Trust

A common settled trust dealt with in practice is a discretionary trust. A discretionary trust, which may also be known as a family trust, allows the trustee (who is usually the head of the family) to exercise discretion on an annual basis as to which beneficiaries will receive a distribution and to what extent each beneficiary shall benefit.

Unit Trust

Unit trusts are commonly used when arms length parties wish to enter into a commercial undertaking together.

Each party’s entitlement to income and capital from the trust is proportionate to the units held.

Will Trust

A will trust or a deceased estate arises on the death of a person. Upon death, property of the deceased passes to his or her estate.

The fiduciary obligation to administer the estate and the assets therefore falls upon the executor or administrator who assumes the role of trustee in respect of the property of the deceased estate.

The beneficiaries of a deceased are those nominated in the Will of the deceased.

2. Why Choose A Trust?

3. How Do You Set Up A Trust?

If you have made the decision that a trust is an appropriate structure the next step is to establish a trust.

Approaching a Solicitor

Prior to approaching a solicitor you should not only have considered the commercial and taxation issues noted previously, but you should also have determined:

• The purpose and activities of the trust;
• Nominated beneficiaries and future beneficiaries;
• Who is to be the trustee and settlor;

Review and Understanding

The solicitor will draft the trust deed in accordance with the client’s requirement and at this stage it is critical that a thorough review is done to ensure that the trust deed (or governing rules) reflects your commercial and legal requirements and allows flexibility for future contingencies.

If a solicitor who specialises in trust law is consulted you will often receive an information booklet setting a basic outline of a trust for administration purposes.

At this stage also it is critical that you read through the draft deed and that questions are addressed prior to creating the trust. In this regard the family or business solicitor (if he or she did not draft the deed) may be used to add his/her comments and to provide a different perspective and extra level of comfort to both the client and accountant.

4. Parties To A Trust

The Settlor

The Settlor is the person who brings the trust into being.

Typically the settlor is a family friend or business associate who will contribute initial capital to settle the trust.

For Australian tax purposes it is important that there is not any reimbursement by the trustee in respect of distributions made for children under 18 years old if a parent, who will usually act as trustee or a director of the trustee company of a family trust, settles or creates the trust.

It is also advisable that the advisers to the trust are not the Settlor, for the reason that many trust deeds contain clauses that the Settlor is excluded from any benefit or income under the trust.

The Trustee

A Trustee is the person who holds an interest in trust property for a committed trust object or purpose.
In a discretionary trust situation the trustee exercises control over trust property so the trustee can deal with it on behalf of beneficiaries.

The choice of a trustee is worth proper consideration for the reason that the trustee’s powers and duties are significant. In that regard the person who is appointed to the position must understand his/her role and responsibilities.

Trustees may be individuals but more commonly will be companies to limit liability.  In a family trust a parent or both parents will usually act as directors of a corporate trustee.

The Appointor or Protector

The Appointor or Protector is the person or persons who have the authority under the trust deed to appoint or remove the trustee of the trust. As such the appointor is often said be the controller of the trust.

Many trust deeds empower the appointer to remove the trustee and appoint a new trustee at any time in writing.

Unless specified in the trust deed or in the will of the Appointer, on the death of the Appointor, the legal personal representative of the deceased Appointer will become the Appointor.

Income Beneficiaries

These are beneficiaries who may at the discretion of the trustee receive entitlement to trust income. Most modern trust deeds are drafted very widely in this area to give the trustee very wide discretionary powers for the advantage of flexibility of distribution for taxation purposes. Common classes of beneficiaries are:

• Family members, including children;
• Unborn children of family members such as direct lineal descendants;
• Eligible entities in which the abovementioned beneficiaries of the trust itself has an interest (such as a corporate beneficiary)

Capital beneficiaries

These are beneficiaries who are entitled to the corpus of the trust or the capital in the trust.
This entitlement does not usually arise until vesting day, or the day the trust is to be wound up, but entitlements to capital or corpus of the trust may occur earlier if permitted by the trust deed or agreed to by all beneficiaries.

Default Beneficiaries

A default beneficiary is simply the beneficiary to whom a distribution may default to in the absence of any other nominated beneficiary.
For example should an amended assessment be raised increasing assessable income that income will be distributed primarily in accordance with the relevant trustee’s distribution minute.

However in the absence of any guidance contained therein or in the event the resolution or minute cannot be located or was not made for the reason there was considered to be no income, the distribution may revert to the default beneficiary rather than be assessed in the hands of the trustee at the top marginal rate.

There are very few restrictions on who may be a beneficiary.  A beneficiary may be a resident or non-resident natural person (such as a company) or any legal entity.
Further, persons who have not yet been born or legal entities that have not yet come into existence may subsequently become beneficiaries.  However it is important to nominate who will be and who can become a beneficiary on drafting of the deed.

A trust, as stated above, is a fiduciary relationship.

The adding of unanticipated beneficiaries at a later stage may, in a worst case scenario, lead to a resettlement of a trust or the ceasing of the former relationship and creation of a new relationship, being the creation of a new trust.

Should there be considered to be cessation of one trust and the creation of a new trust, a myriad of unwelcome income tax, capital tax and stamp duty issues may arise.
Thus, upon reviewing the deed detailed consideration must be given to who and who might potentially become income, capital and/or default beneficiaries.

Contact us

Should you be interested in discussing further how a trust may suit your purposes please do not hesitate to contact us at our offices.

Download our eBook “Moving To The US“

Disclaimer:
This document is intended as an information source only. The comments and references to legislation and other sources in this publication do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. You should seek advice from a professional adviser regarding the application of any of the comments in this document to your fact scenario. Information in this publication does not take into account any person’s personal objectives, needs or financial situations. Accordingly, you should consider the appropriateness of any information, having regard to your own objectives, financial situation and needs and seek professional advice before acting on it. CST Tax Advisors exclude all liability (including liability for negligence) in relation to your reliance in this publication.