Another problem with marriage breakdowns

When a family court order as a part of a marriage breakdown requires assets held in a family company to be transferred there is no CGT payable due to the 126A rollover.

BUT if the receiving spouse is a shareholder the Commissioner says it is a dividend and taxed under section 44 of the ITAA36. And even if the spouse is not a shareholder but is an associate of a shareholder it is a Division 7A loan.

So you are looking at 46.5% tax and no cash to pay it… But why not frank it I hear you say… Try this…

My ex-wife comes into your office and says she received substantial assets out of our family company as a part of a marriage settlement under a family court order. You explain this is a deemed dividend but you can reduce the tax payable by 30% by franking the dividend.

HOW DO YOU FRANK THE DIVIDEND? You call me up and ask me, as the director of the family company, to agree to frank the dividend… Agree to give up franking credits to my ex wife who left me for some McDreamy doctor – Not likely.

So the answer is either don’t get divorced or don’t have assets transferred out of the family company under a family court order.

Advertisements

About Ken Mansell

As a stay at home Dad most of the week this is my way of pretending I am still the tax counsel of ASX and SEC listed companies, working at big 4 firms, working at the Federal Treasury, on the Henry Review and at Parliament House for the previous government.
This entry was posted in Income Tax, Rulings and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s