This report addresses three fundamental decisions that face a prospective buyer: — What should be acquired.
This report addresses three fundamental decisions that face a prospective buyer:
Of course, tax is only one piece of transaction structuring. Company law governs the legal form of a transaction, and accounting issues are also highly
relevant when selecting the optimal structure. These areas are outside the scope of this report, but some of the key points that arise when planning the steps in a transaction plan are summarized later in this report.
New Zealand’s recent tax developments with regard to mergers and acquisitions (M&A) are set out in the relevant sections of this report.
A number of court wins for the Inland Revenue Department (IRD) on the application of New Zealand’s general tax
anti- avoidance rule have implications for transactions and structures adopted for inbound investment. For example, the New Zealand Court of Appeal decision in Alesco v CIR
involved a taxpayer unsuccessfully appealing a tax avoidance finding on the use of cross-border optional convertible notes as a funding structure.
A greater level of consideration has been given by the courts (and IRD) to what is regarded as the commercial reality and economic effects of transactions. Reliance on the legal form of the transaction or the structure used is no longer a suitable defense. This has inevitably increased uncertainty over what is acceptable tax planning.
Base erosion and profit shifting
The New Zealand government, like most other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries, has expressed concern about the impact of base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) by multinationals. New Zealand is engaging with the OECD on its Action Plan on BEPS1.
Legislatively, changes have been made to tighten the interest deductibility rules for non-residents, by extending New Zealand’s thin capitalization rules to groups of non-residents ‘acting together’. Changes have also been made to non- resident withholding tax (NRWT) rules, aimed at removing
the ability for non-residents to shift profits out of New Zealand with no or minimal tax paid under the NRWT rules.
Further draft legislation has recently been introduced to prevent multinationals from using:
Once enacted, these measures are generally intended to take effect from 1 July 2018.
New Zealand is also a signatory to the OECD Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS), although it is not yet in force.
Inland Revenue activity
In its annual tax compliance guide for businesses, the IRD has focused on aggressive tax planning (e.g. financing and transfer pricing transactions by multinationals).The IRD’s focus areas largely align with the OECD’s key areas of concerns.
Therefore, for non-residents looking to invest in New Zealand, attention needs to be given to ‘future-proofing’ inbound investment structures, in view of expected legislative changes.
From a New Zealand tax perspective, factors that may influence cross-border inbound investment decisions include:
Tax Working Group
New Zealand’s new government, elected in September 2017, promised a comprehensive review of the New Zealand tax system by aTax Working Group. The terms of reference for the Tax Working Group exclude increases to any income tax rate, the rate of GST and inheritance tax, and changes that affect the family home or land beneath it. All other areas of New Zealand tax law are potentially within the scope of the review.
TheTax Working Group’s interim report is due to the government by September 2018, with a final report to be issued no later than February 2019.The government has announced that any significant changes proposed by theTax Working Group would not be implemented until after the 2020 election.
Update of New Zealand’s treaty network
New Zealand has signed new tax treaties with Canada, Japan, Papua New Guinea, Samoa and Vietnam.
The most significant changes in the new treaties are to withholding tax (WHT) rates, with reductions in rates for dividends, interest and royalties. These new treaties also contain anti-treaty shopping rules.
Ongoing discussions to update and revise existing tax treaties continue in respect of a number of major jurisdictions including China, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands.
Negotiations of a tax treaty with Luxembourg are ongoing.
New Zealand has significantly expanded its tax information exchange agreement (TIEA) network in recent years. TIEAs were signed with a number of traditional offshore jurisdictions, including the British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands and Jersey. Negotiations for TIEAs with Monaco and Macao, among other jurisdictions, are underway.
New Zealand does not have a comprehensive capital gains tax. As a result, gains on capital assets are subject to tax only in certain limited instances, for example, where the business of the taxpayer comprises or includes dealing in capital assets, such as shares or land, or where the asset is acquired for the purpose of resale. The fact that capital gains are usually not subject to tax in New Zealand has an impact on the asset versus share purchase decision.
Purchase of assets (excluding land)
A purchase of assets usually results in the base cost of those assets being reset at the purchase price for tax depreciation (capital allowance) purposes. This may result in a step-up in the cost base of the assets (although any increase may be taxable to the seller).
Historical tax liabilities generally remain with the company and are not transferred with the assets. The buyer may still inherit defective practices or compliance procedures. Thus, a buyer may wish to carry out some tax due diligence to identify and address such weaknesses (e.g. through appropriate indemnities).
Purchase of land
A purchase of land usually results in the base cost being reset at the purchase price. However, there is no allowance for tax depreciation for land or buildings with an estimated useful life of 50 years or more (see further below).
There are disclosure requirements on transferors and transferees of New Zealand land. The requirements include buyers and sellers’ tax details, such as their New Zealand IRD number, tax residence status and foreign tax information if non-resident (e.g. the country of tax residence and foreign tax identification number).
All buyers and sellers, including non-residents, must provide a New Zealand IRD number. To receive an IRD number, a
non-resident must have a fully functioning New Zealand bank account (i.e. capable of withdrawals as well as deposits) and provide evidence of this to Inland Revenue. This requires having the New Zealand bank confirm the non-resident’s identity through anti-money laundering and countering financing of terrorism checks. Alternatively, a non-resident applying for an IRD number can request a customer due diligence certificate from an IRD-approved reporting entity. This certificate confirms that the reporting entity has completed due diligence on the non-resident applicant in accordance with the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act 2009.
No statutory rules prescribe how the purchase price is to be allocated among the various assets purchased. Where the sale and purchase agreement is silent as to the allocation
of the price, the IRD generally accepts a simple pro rata allocation between the various assets purchased on the basis of their respective market values.
Goodwill paid for a business as a going concern is not deductible, depreciable or amortizable for tax purposes.
For this reason, where the price contains an element of goodwill, it is common practice for the buyer to endeavor to have the purchase and sale agreement properly allocate the purchase price between the tangible assets and goodwill to be acquired.
This practice is not normally challenged by the IRD, provided that the purchase price allocation is agreed between the parties and reasonably reflects the assets’ market values.
If the sale and purchase agreement is silent as to the allocation of the price, a simple pro rata allocation between the various assets purchased, on the basis of their respective market values, is usually accepted.
It may be possible to structure the acquisition of a New Zealand investment in such a way as to reduce the amount of goodwill that is acquired. Given that certain intangible assets can be depreciated in New Zealand (see later in this report),
a sale and purchase agreement could apportion part of the acquisition price to certain depreciable intangible assets, rather than non-depreciable goodwill.
Most tangible assets may be depreciated for income tax purposes, the major exceptions being land and, more recently, buildings (see below). Rates of depreciation vary depending on the asset. Taxpayers are free to depreciate their assets on either a straight-line or diminishing-value basis.
As of the 2011–12 income year, no depreciation can be claimed on buildings with an estimated useful life of 50 years or more. (Building owners can continue to depreciate 15 percent of the building’s adjusted tax value at 2 percent per year where all items of building fit-out, at the time the building was acquired, have historically been depreciated as part of the building.)
Capital contributions toward depreciable property must be treated by the recipient as income spread evenly over 10 years or as a reduction in the depreciation base of the asset to which the contribution relates. (Examples include capital contributions payable to utilities providers by businesses to connect to a network.)
While the cost of intangible assets generally cannot be deducted or amortized, it is possible to depreciate certain intangible assets. The following assets (acquired or created after 1 April 1993) may qualify for an annual depreciation deduction, subject to certain conditions:
Other intangible rights that qualify for an annual depreciation deduction include:
Depreciation may be recovered as income (known as ‘depreciation recovery income’) where the disposal of an asset yields proceeds in excess of its adjusted tax value. Special rules apply to capture depreciation recovery income for depreciation previously allowed for software acquired before 1 April 1993 and the amount of any capital contribution received for that item.
Tax losses and imputation credits are not transferred on an asset acquisition. They remain with the company.
Value added tax
New Zealand has a value added tax (VAT), known as the Goods and Services Tax (GST). The rate is currently 15 percent and must be charged on most supplies of goods and services made by persons who are registered for GST.
The sale of core business assets to a buyer by a registered person constitutes a supply of goods for GST purposes and, in the absence of any special rules, is charged with GST at the standard rate.
However, if the business is a going concern, it can be zero- rated by the seller (charged with GST but at 0 percent). To qualify for zero-rating:
Sales consisting wholly or partly of land must be zero-rated by the seller where both the seller and the buyer are registered for GST at the time of settlement and the buyer intends to use the property for GST taxable supply purposes.
‘Land’ is defined broadly and includes a transfer of a freehold interest and, in most circumstances, the assignment of a lease but not periodic lease payments.
Where the sale is of land and other assets, then the whole sale must be zero rated, not just the land component.
As the GST risk is with the seller if it incorrectly zero-rates the supply, the buyer must provide a written statement to the seller attesting to the following points:
If the sale is to a nominee, then it is the status of the nominee that is relevant.
In most cases, the purchase price is expressed as ‘plus GST’, if any, thereby granting the seller the right to recover from the buyer any GST later assessed by the IRD. However, this must be expressly stated. If the contract is silent, the price is deemed to be inclusive of GST.
Where the sale of assets cannot be zero-rated, the buyer may recover the GST paid to the seller from the IRD, provided the buyer is registered for GST or is required to be registered for GST at the time the assets are supplied by the seller. Goods and services are supplied at the earlier of the time that the seller receives a payment (including a deposit) or the seller issues an invoice. An invoice is defined as a document giving notice of an obligation to make a payment.
Assets imported into New Zealand are subject to GST of 15 percent at the border.
New Zealand has a reverse charge on imported services to align the treatment of goods and services. However, the impact of the GST on imported services affects only
organizations that make GST-exempt supplies (e.g. financial institutions). Organizations that do not make GST-exempt supplies are not required to pay a reverse charge.
No stamp duty is payable on sales of land, improvements or other assets.
Purchase of shares
The purchase of a target company’s shares does not result in an increase in the base cost of the company’s underlying assets; there is no deduction for the difference between underlying net asset values and consideration, if any.
Tax indemnities and warranties
In a share acquisition, the buyer acquires the target company together with all related liabilities including
contingent liabilities. Consequently, in the case of negotiated acquisitions, it is usual for the buyer to request, and the seller to provide, indemnities and/or warranties in respect of any historical taxation positions and taxation liabilities of the company to be acquired. The extent of the indemnities and warranties is a matter for negotiation.
To carry forward tax losses from 1 income year to the next, a company must maintain a minimum 49 percent shareholder continuity from the start of the income year in which the tax losses were incurred. Unlike some jurisdictions, New Zealand does not have a same-business test, so the ability to carry forward and use tax losses is solely based on the shareholder continuity percentage.
Where there is a minimum 66 percent commonality of shareholding from the beginning of the income year in which the tax losses were incurred, a company potentially can offset its tax losses with another group company. It is difficult to preserve the value of tax losses post-acquisition, as there is limited scope to refresh tax losses.
Crystallization of tax charges
Caution should be exercised where the buyer is acquiring shares in a company that is a member of a consolidated income tax group, because the target company will remain jointly and severally liable for the income tax liability of the consolidated income tax group that arose when the target company was a member. The IRD may grant approval for the target company to cease to be jointly and severally liable.
In addition, a comprehensive set of rules applies to capture income arising on the transfer of certain assets out of a consolidated tax group where they have previously been transferred within the consolidated tax group to the departing member of that group. The disposal of shares in a company holding the transferred assets constitutes a sale of that asset out of the consolidated tax group; for tax purposes, the company is deemed to have disposed of the asset immediately before it leaves the consolidated tax group and
to have immediately reacquired it at its market value. This rule applies to transfers of ‘financial arrangements’ (e.g. loans), depreciable property and, in some situations, trading stock, land and other revenue assets.
New Zealand operates an imputation system of company taxation. Shareholders of a company gain relief against their own New Zealand income tax liability for income tax paid
by the company. Tax payments by the company are tracked in a memorandum account, called an ‘imputation credit account’, which records the amount of company tax paid that may be imputed to dividends paid to shareholders. New
Zealand- resident investors use imputation credits attached to dividends to reduce the tax payable on the dividend income.
To carry forward imputation credits from 1 imputation year to the next, a company must maintain a minimum of 66 percent shareholder continuity from the date the imputation credits are generated.
Where imputation credits are to be forfeited (e.g. on a share sale that will breach the minimum 66 percent shareholder continuity), then a taxable bonus issue (TBI) generally may be used to preserve the value of the imputation credits that would otherwise be lost.
The advantage of a TBI is that it achieves the same outcome as a dividend in respect of crystallizing the value of imputation credits for the ultimate benefit of the company’s shareholders. However, since a TBI does not require cash to be paid, the solvency of the company is not adversely affected and there is no WHT cost.
The TBI essentially converts retained earnings to available subscribed capital (ASC) for income tax purposes.This ASC can then be distributed tax-free to the company’s shareholder(s)
in the future (e.g. on liquidation of the company or as part of a capital reduction), where certain conditions are met.
The TBI provides a potential benefit to the buyer but no benefit to the seller. This is something the buyer may need to raise with the seller.
No stamp duty is payable on transfers of shares or on the issue of new shares.
A party to a transaction can seek a binding ruling from the IRD on the tax consequences of an acquisition or merger. However, it is not possible to obtain an assurance from the IRD that a potential target company has no arrears of tax and is not involved in a tax dispute.
The following vehicles may be used to acquire the shares and/ or assets of the target:
Local holding company
Subject to thin capitalization requirements, a local holding company may be used as a mechanism to allocate interest- bearing debt to New Zealand (i.e. the local holding company borrows money to help fund the acquisition of the New Zealand target).
From a New Zealand perspective, a tax-efficient exit strategy involves selling the shares of the local holding company as opposed to selling the shares of the underlying operating subsidiary. Where the shares in the underlying operating subsidiary are sold, a WHT liability arises on the repatriation of any capital profit unless an applicable tax treaty reduces the WHT rate (potentially to 0 percent; see below).
The imputation credit regime reduces the impact of double tax for New Zealand-resident shareholders. New Zealand- resident investors use imputation credits attached to dividends to reduce the tax payable on dividend income received from New Zealand-resident companies.
For non-resident shareholders, dividends are subject to NRWT at either 15 percent if fully imputed or 30 percent if not (most tax treaties limit this rate to 15 percent or less in the case of some recently renegotiated treaties).
The domestic rate of NRWT payable is 0 percent where a dividend is fully imputed and a non-resident investor holds a 10 percent or greater voting interest in the company (or where the shareholding is less than 10 percent but the applicable post-treaty WHT rate on the dividend is less than 15 percent; New Zealand currently has no such treaties).
For non-resident investors with shareholdings of less than
10 percent, the 15 percent WHT rate on fully imputed dividends can be relieved under the foreign investor tax credit (FITC) regime.This regime essentially eliminates NRWT by granting the dividend-paying company a credit against its own income tax
liability where the company also pays a ‘supplementary dividend’ (equal to the overall NRWT charge) to the non-resident.
For GST purposes, the holding company and the operating company should be grouped. This allows the holding company to recover GST on expenses paid. Alternatively, a management fee may be charged from the holding company to the operating company.
Foreign parent company
The foreign buyer may choose to make the acquisition itself, perhaps to shelter its own taxable profits with the financing costs.
Non-resident intermediate holding company
Where the foreign country taxes capital gains and dividends received from overseas, an intermediate holding company resident in another territory could be used to defer this tax and perhaps take advantage of a more favorable tax treaty with New Zealand. However, as noted earlier, increased attention
is being paid globally to structures in an effort to target BEPs concerns. In addition, most new tax treaties have anti-treaty shopping provisions that may restrict the ability to structure a deal in a way designed solely to obtain tax benefits.
New Zealand-resident companies and branches established by offshore companies are subject to income tax at 28 percent of taxable profits.
In most cases, the choice between operating a New Zealand company or branch is neutral for New Zealand tax purposes because of the changes to the domestic NRWT rules (for shareholdings of 10 percent or more; see local holding company section) and the application of the FITC regime (for shareholdings less than 10 percent).
A branch is not a separate legal entity, so its repatriation of profits is not considered a dividend to a foreign company and NRWT is not imposed. The effective tax rate on a New Zealand branch operation is therefore 28 percent.
In effect, New Zealand’s thin capitalization and transfer pricing regimes apply equally to branch and subsidiary operations. In practice, however, the application of New Zealand’s transfer pricing rules to branches and subsidiaries can differ in some respects.
Where an acquisition is to be made in conjunction with another party, the question arises as to the most appropriate vehicle for the joint venture. Although a partnership can
be used, in most cases, the parties prefer to conduct the joint venture via a limited liability company, which offers the advantages of incorporation and limited liability for its
members. In contrast, a general partnership has no separate legal existence and the partners are jointly and severally liable for the debts of the partnership, without limitation.
New Zealand has special rules for limited partnerships that may make them more attractive than general partnerships for joint venture investors. The key features of limited partnerships are as follows:
By contrast, an incorporated joint venture vehicle does not offer the same flexibility in respect of the offset of tax losses. Grouping of tax losses arising in a company is limited to the extent that the loss company and the other company were
at least 66 percent commonly owned in the income year in which the loss arose and at all times up to and including the year in which the loss offset arises.
A key issue with limited partnership structures is that thin capitalization is tested for each partner (not the limited partnership), which may restrict the ability to gear New Zealand investments without loss of interest deductions. The thin capitalization rules are discussed later in this report.
A buyer using a New Zealand acquisition vehicle to carry out an acquisition for cash needs to decide whether to fund the vehicle with debt, equity or a hybrid instrument that combines the characteristics of both (care should be taken with hybrid instruments given the proposed legislative changes discussed above). The principles underlying these approaches are discussed later in this report.
Recent changes allow for the recovery of GST paid on costs incurred in issuing or acquiring debt instruments or issuing equity instruments to the extent that the funds raised are expended in an activity of making taxable supplies for GST purposes.
GST on equity acquisition costs (including evaluation of the investment) is recoverable where there is an acquisition of an interest of greater than 10 percent, the investor is able to influence management, and the shares are acquired in a
non-resident or in an entity that makes more than 75 percent taxable supplies.
The principal advantage of debt is the availability of tax deductions for interest (see deductibility of interest below). In addition, a deduction is available for expenditure incurred in arranging financing in certain circumstances. In contrast, the payment of a dividend does not give rise to a tax deduction.
To fully utilize the benefit of tax deductions on interest payments, it is important to ensure that there are sufficient taxable profits against which the deductions may be offset.
In an acquisition, it is more common for borrowings to be undertaken by the new parent of the target (rather than the target itself) and for any cash flow requirements of the
borrowing parent to be met by extracting dividends from the target. Provided the companies are part of a wholly owned group, dividends between the companies are exempt.
Deductibility of interest
Subject to the thin capitalization and transfer pricing regimes (discussed later in this report), most companies can claim a full tax deduction for all interest paid, without regard to the use of the borrowed funds. For other taxpayers, the general interest deductibility rules apply. These rules allow an interest deduction where interest is:
Where a local company is thinly capitalized, interest deductions are effectively removed through the creation of income to the extent that the level of debt exceeds the
thin capitalization ‘safe harbor’ debt percentage. Generally, a New Zealand company is regarded as thinly capitalized where it exceeds a safe harbor of 60 percent in respect of its debt percentage and the applicable debt percentage for
the New Zealand group also exceeds 110 percent of the debt percentage for the worldwide group.
As of 1 April 2015, debt originating from shareholders is excluded when calculating the debt level of a company’s worldwide operations.
The inbound thin capitalization regime also applies when non- residents who appear to be acting together own 50 percent or more of a company. Non-residents are treated as acting together if they hold debt in a company in proportion to their equity, have entered into an arrangement setting out how
to fund the company with related-party debt, or act on the instructions of another person (i.e. a private equity manager) in funding the company with related-party debt. Increases in asset values following internal company reorganizations are ignored, unless the increase in asset value would be allowed under generally accepted accounting principles in the absence of the reorganization, or if the reorganization is part of the purchase of the company by a third party.
The thin capitalization rules also apply to outbound investment by a New Zealand company, i.e., where a New Zealand parent debt-funds its offshore operations. In this case, the relevant debt percentage is 75 percent. An additional safe harbor applies for outbound investments, provided the ratio of assets in the New Zealand group is 90 percent or more of the assets held in the worldwide group and the interest deductions are less than 250,000 New Zealand dollars (NZD).
There is an alternative thin capitalization test for New Zealand companies with outbound investments that have high levels of arm’s length debt (provided certain other conditions
are met). These companies can choose a test for thin capitalization based on a ratio of their interest expenses to pre-tax cash flows, rather than on a debt-to-asset ratio.
Where a New Zealand company becomes subject to inbound thin capitalization due to ownership by a non-resident owning body, it must treat its New Zealand group assets/debt as its worldwide group assets/debt when applying the 110 percent of the worldwide group debt percentage safe harbor test.
Generally, the funding of a subsidiary by a parent through the use of interest-free loans does not produce any adverse taxation consequences. Such loans are not included in
thin capitalization calculations for New Zealand income tax purposes. However, an interest-free loan from a subsidiary to its parent could be deemed to be a dividend, thereby creating assessable income for the parent company. Such transactions are also potentially subject to the transfer pricing regime where the counterparty is a non-resident.
The timing of the deductibility of interest on financial arrangements (widely defined to include most forms of debt) is governed by legislation known as the ‘financial arrangements’ rules.
These rules require that interest be calculated in accordance with one of the prescribed spreading methods. These rules do not apply to non-residents, except in relation to financial arrangements entered into by non-residents for the purpose of a fixed establishment (i.e. branch) situated in New Zealand.
A number of changes are currently proposed to the thin capitalization regime as part of IRD’s BEPS focus. The major change is the deduction of non-debt liabilities from the calculation of total assets for the purposes of calculating the group debt percentage. Non-debt liabilities include all non- interest-bearing liabilities, except some shareholder loans, liabilities for shares (e.g. redeemable preference shares), provisions for dividends, and some deferred tax liabilities.
Once enacted, the proposed changes are intended to take effect from 1 July 2018.
Withholding tax on debt and methods to reduce or eliminate it
WHT is imposed on interest payments and dividend distributions between New Zealand residents (with some exceptions) unless a certificate of exemption is obtained.
Entities with gross assessable income (before deductions) of NZD2 million or more are entitled to an exemption certificate, as are financial institutions, exempt entities, entities in loss situations and certain others. Interest payments and dividend distributions paid and received by companies within the same wholly owned group are not subject to WHT.
NRWT is imposed on interest, dividends and royalties paid to non-residents (including income arising under the financial arrangements rules). The domestic rate of NRWT on payments of interest is 15 percent; however, most tax treaties reduce this rate to 10 percent (and 0 percent in some recent tax treaties in cases where the lender is a financial institution that is not associated with the borrower).
There are limited opportunities to reduce the NRWT on payments of interest by a New Zealand-resident payer to a related non-resident recipient.
The approved issuer levy (AIL) regime can be applied instead of NRWT in the case of interest payments to non-residents who are not associated with the New Zealand payer. On confirmation of ‘approved issuer’ status by the IRD, interest payments to the relevant non-resident lender are exempt from NRWT and instead subject to the payment of a levy equal to 2 percent of the interest.
AIL cannot be applied to:
Checklist for debt funding
Dividends and certain bonus share issues are included in taxable income. Payments of dividends are not deductible. Tax assessed on a dividend may be offset by any imputation credits attached to the dividend of the payer company. There are two main exemptions to the taxability of dividends for companies. These apply when:
The income tax exemption for foreign dividends applies for income years beginning on or after 1 July 2009 (aligned to the start date of New Zealand’s current controlled
foreign company (CFC) regime). Before the exemption was introduced, a ‘foreign dividend withholding payment’ was required to be made by a New Zealand company on receipt of a foreign dividend.
Withholding tax on dividend distributions and methods to reduce or eliminate it
WHT is generally imposed on dividend payments between New Zealand residents (as described earlier). For non-resident shareholders, dividends are subject to NRWT at 15 percent, where fully imputed.
The domestic rate of NRWT payable is 0 percent where a dividend is fully imputed and a non-resident investor holds a 10 percent or greater voting interest in the company (or where the shareholding is less than 10 percent but the applicable post-treaty WHT rate on the dividend is less than 15 percent; New Zealand currently has no such treaties).
For non-resident investors with shareholdings of less than 10 percent, the 15 percent WHT rate on fully imputed dividends can be relieved under the FITC regime, which eliminates the NRWT by granting the dividend-paying company a credit against its own income tax liability where the company also pays a supplementary dividend (equal to the overall NRWT charge) to the non-resident.
A 30 percent NRWT rate applies to unimputed dividends, but most tax treaties limit this to 15 percent or, in recently negotiated treaties, lower.
Selection of a favorable tax treaty jurisdiction for the establishment of a non-resident shareholder may be considered to reduce or eliminate this tax. The buyer should be aware of the increased international focus on BEPs and the use of tax treaties to obtain tax advantages.
Accordingly, New Zealand’s new tax treaties contain explicit anti-treaty shopping provisions (i.e. limitation on benefits clauses and beneficial ownership requirements), including recently renegotiated treaties with Australia, the United States, Singapore and Hong Kong due to their lower WHT rates.
The IRD also recently amended the domestic anti-avoidance law to explicitly override benefits obtained under tax treaties in treaty shopping cases.
A New Zealand-incorporated company can transfer its incorporation from the New Zealand Companies’ Register and become registered on a register of overseas companies. Such a company is no longer considered to be incorporated in New Zealand and, provided the other tests for tax residence are not met, becomes a non-resident for New Zealand tax purposes. This process is known as ‘corporate migration’.
A corporate migration is treated as a deemed liquidation of all assets of the company followed by a deemed distribution of the net proceeds. Income tax consequences such as clawback arise (e.g. depreciation clawback) and NRWT obligations are imposed on the deemed distribution to the extent it exceeds a return of capital for tax purposes.The amount subject to NRWT typically includes the distribution of retained earnings and,
for shareholders owning 20 percent or more of the liquidating company, capital reserves.The WHT cost may be reduced
by attaching imputation credits to the deemed dividend distribution (or under New Zealand’s tax treaty).
Hybrid instruments (except options over shares) are deemed to be either shares (treated as equity) or debt (subject to the financial arrangements rules). Various hybrid instruments and structures potentially offer an interest deduction for the borrower with no income pick-up for the lender. However, proposed legislative changes that aim to address BEPS will largely negate the benefits of hybrid instruments going forward.
KPMG in New Zealand recommends obtaining specialist advice where such financing techniques are contemplated or are already in place.
Common types of instruments and their tax treatment are as follows.
|Convertible note||Debt, subject to financialarrangements rules; possible equity gain on conversion|
|Perpetual debt||Debt, subject to financialarrangements rules|
|Subordinated debt||Debt, subject to financialarrangements rules|
|Floating rate debenture||Deemed to be shares where the rate is linked to profits or dividends of issuer; otherwise debt, subject to financial arrangements rules|
|Share option||Not subject to financial arrangementsrules (gain or loss is generally capital and may be neither assessablenor deductible unless issued to employees, in which case any benefit is taxed as remuneration)|
|Others||Usually debt, subject to financial arrangements rules|
Interest deductions are available for discounted securities as determined on an accrual basis over the term of the security. The applicable spreading method for recognition of the deduction is prescribed under the financial arrangements rules.
Where settlement is to be deferred, the financial arrangements rules may deem a part of the purchase price to be interest payable to the seller.
This may be avoided by having the sale and purchase agreement specifically state whether interest is payable and, if so, the terms. This generally gives rise to a ‘lowest price clause’ in the sale and purchase agreement, stating that no interest is payable due to the deferred settlement. However, from the buyer’s perspective, it may be desirable to have an element of the purchase price deemed to be interest payable to the seller, as this may give rise to a deduction of the portion of the purchase price deemed to be interest.
For deferred property settlements denominated in a foreign currency, as of the 2014–2015 income year (or earlier income years if elected by the taxpayer), buyers using International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are required to follow their accounting treatment to recognize interest and/or foreign currency fluctuations arising in relation to the agreement.
Consolidated income tax group
Two or more companies that are members of a wholly owned group of companies may elect to form a consolidated group for taxation purposes. The effect of this election is that the companies are treated for income tax purposes as if they were one company. The group only has to file one income
tax return and receives one tax assessment. However, all members of the group become jointly and severally liable for the entire group’s taxation liabilities. Approval may be sought from the IRD for one or more group companies to be relieved from joint and several liability in certain circumstances.
Intragroup transactions are disregarded for income tax purposes, although asset transfers result in deferred income tax liabilities. For a consolidated group, the income tax impact of intercompany asset transfers arises when the company that was the recipient of any asset leaves the consolidated group while still holding the property acquired, or when the asset itself is sold.
The main advantage of consolidation is that assets can be transferred at tax book value between consolidated group companies. Companies that are not part of such a regime must transfer assets at market value, realizing a loss or gain on the transaction for income tax purposes.
Note that this only consolidates income tax. Other taxes still need to be reported individually (unless the relevant tax (e.g. GST) allows grouping under its rules and IRD approval is sought).
Concerns of the seller
When a purchase of assets is contemplated, as opposed to the purchase of shares, the seller’s main concern is likely to be the recovery of tax-depreciation (assessable income) if the assets are sold for more than their book value for tax purposes.
The Companies Act 1993 prescribes how New Zealand companies may be formed, operated, reorganized and dissolved.
A merger usually involves the formation of a new holding company to acquire the shares of the parties to the merger and is usually achieved by issuing shares in the new company to the shareholders of the merging companies. Once this step is completed, the new company may have the old companies wound up and their assets distributed to the new company.
Certain companies (i.e. ‘Code Companies’, as defined) must comply with the obligations of the Takeovers Code.
A takeover involving large, publicly listed companies may be achieved by the bidder offering cash, shares or a mixture of the two. Acquisitions involving smaller or privately owned companies are accomplished in a variety of ways and may involve the acquisition of either the shares in the target company or its assets. Again, Code Companies need to comply with the obligations of the Takeovers Code.
An amalgamation is a statutory reorganization under New Zealand law. Concessionary tax rules facilitate
amalgamations. In New Zealand, an amalgamation involves a transfer of the business and assets of one or more companies to either a new company or an existing company.
All amalgamating companies cease to exist on amalgamation (unless one of them becomes the amalgamated company), with the new amalgamated company becoming entitled
to and responsible for all the rights and obligations of the amalgamating companies.
Consideration should be given to any potential impact that IFRS may have on asset valuations and thus on how the deal should be structured. For example, is any goodwill on acquisition recorded as an asset in a New Zealand entity’s
financial statements, and is there a potential impact on asset valuations for thin capitalization purposes?
Companies form a group for taxation purposes where at least 66 percent commonality of shareholding exists. The profits of one group company can be offset against the losses of another by the profit company making a payment to the loss company. Alternatively, a loss company can make an irrevocable election directly to offset its losses against the profits of a group profit company. Companies must be members of the group from the commencement of the year of loss until the end of the year the loss is offset.
There is no requirement to form a consolidated tax group in order to offset losses.
New Zealand has a comprehensive transfer pricing regime based on the OECD’s transfer pricing guidelines.
Generally, the transfer pricing regime applies to cross-border transactions between related parties that are not at an arm’s length price (e.g. the New Zealand company does not receive adequate compensation from, or is overcharged by, the foreign parent/group company). Two companies are generally considered related for transfer pricing purposes where there is a group of persons with voting (or market value) interests of 50 percent or more in both companies.
Where transaction prices are found not to be at arm’s length, the transfer pricing rules enable the IRD to reassess a taxpayer’s income to ensure that New Zealand’s tax base is not eroded. In recent years, the rates of interest charged on intercompany lending have come under increased focus by the IRD.
New Zealand has an anti-avoidance rule that prevents a dual resident company from offsetting its losses against the profits of another company.
Foreign investments of a local target company
New Zealand’s CFC regime attributes the income of an offshore subsidiary to its New Zealand-resident shareholder in certain circumstances.
A company is regarded as a CFC for New Zealand purposes where the New Zealand-resident shareholder meets certain control tests (i.e. one shareholder holds 40 percent or more of the voting interest or five or fewer shareholders collectively hold more than 50 percent voting interests).
An ‘active’ income exemption applies to profits from a CFC, under which:
Advantages of asset purchases
Disadvantages of asset purchases
Advantages of share purchases
Disadvantage of share purchases
18 Viaduct Harbour Avenue Auckland
T: +64 9367 5989
18 Viaduct Harbour Avenue Auckland
T: +64 9363 3288