• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
Parry Field Lawyers
  • Home
  • Our People
  • Services
    • Property
      • Residential
      • Construction
      • Subdivisions
      • Commercial
      • Leasing
    • Advisory
      • Employment
      • Sale & Purchases
      • Financing
      • Governance
      • Technology/IT
      • Capital Raising
    • Disputes
      • Employment
      • Court, Tribunals and Arbitrations
      • Estates & Wills
      • Divorce & Separation
      • Insurance
      • Family
      • Company & Shareholding
      • Debt Collection
      • Construction
    • Trusts & Asset Planning
      • Wills & Enduring Powers of Attorney
      • Estates
      • Succession Planning
    • Charities/For Purpose Organisations
      • Incorporated Societies
      • Hybrid Solutions: Charity/Business
      • Not for Profits
      • Churches
      • Sports Groups
      • Social Enterprises/Impact Companies
      • Impact Investing
      • Community Groups
    • Immigration
      • Work Visas
      • Family Visas
      • Skilled Migrants
      • Business and Investment Visas
      • Potentially Prejudicial Information
      • Employer Assistance
      • Overseas Investment
  • Resources
    • Guides
      • Capital Raising Guide
      • Resources for the Incorporated Societies Act 2022
      • Doing Business In New Zealand
      • Start Ups Legal Toolkit
      • Buying & Selling Property
      • Charities In New Zealand
      • Social Enterprises in New Zealand Handbook
      • Family Trusts
      • Death & Estates
      • Churches Handbook
      • COVID-19 Legal Handbook
    • Articles
      • Heat of the moment resignations – do employees need to be given a chance to cool off?
      • The new Incorporated Societies Act 2022: When will the new Act affect my Society?
      • Racial Harassment in the Workplace
      • Built up annual leave – does an employee have to use it?
      • Resources for the Incorporated Societies Act 2022
      • When can a Trustee delegate their powers?
      • Buying your first home: Key issues (a practical guide from a first home buyer)
      • The new Incorporated Societies Act 2022: What it means for your Incorporated Society
      • The Addington Farm: A case study in setting up a Charity
      • The Bright-Line Test
      • Funds that advance charity: How do they work? 
      • What is a LIM?
      • Charity Founders’ Ongoing Relationship With The Charity They Start: Key points to know
    • Templates
      • Terms and Conditions
      • Terms and Conditions Including Software
      • Non-Disclosure Agreement – One Way
      • Non-Disclosure Agreement – Two Way
      • Independent Contractors Agreement
      • Shareholders’ Resolutions – Written resolution
      • Share Transfer
      • Incorporation – First Shareholder Resolutions
      • Incorporation – First Directors’ Resolutions
    • Videos
      • COVID-19 and Commercial Leases
      • Force Majeure” clauses in Contracts and COVID-19
      • Property sale and purchases and COVID-19
      • Seeds Podcast
  • Careers
  • Terms of Engagement
  • About
  • Contact
  • Introducing our new partners
  • Search
  • Menu Menu

New Zealand Tax Avoidance

Business

In the recent Court of Appeal decision Commissioner of Inland Revenue v Penny and Hooper [2010] NZCA 231 (4 June 2010) it was held that Mr Penny and Mr Hooper entered into a tax avoidance agreement when structuring their affairs in such a way as to avoid paying tax at 39% on the majority of their income.  The surgeons have now decided to appeal the case, but if not successful it will have significant implications for a broad sector of the New Zealand public.


What are the facts of the case?

Two surgeons had restructured their practices to take advantage of the disparity between the highest marginal tax rate and the lower trust tax rate. A company provided the services. The surgeons were in turn employed by the company.
The main point the Court of Appeal took issue with was that the surgeons were being paid very little for their very valuable services.  Expert evidence suggested that the surgeons should have been earning in the order of $500,000 – $600,000.  However, the company they worked for paid them around $100,000.  The rest of the money was retained in the company, and then paid out to a family trust as shareholder. The trust would pay tax on the income at 33%, and no further tax would be paid when the money was finally distributed to the surgeons.
If the surgeons had paid themselves the higher salary, then they would have paid tax at the higher rate of 39% on the majority of that salary.

Why is this case so important?

The case is important because it has the potential to impact on many New Zealand businesses that are structured in exactly the same fashion, and for exactly the same reasons. It is important to note that it is not the structure that the Court of Appeal took issue with, but rather the level of remuneration paid.

Randerson J says in the leading majority judgement: “I am conscious of the practical consequences which may flow from this decision, including the uncertainty which may be created for the Commissioner as well as for taxpayers and their advisors.  To what extent and in what circumstances will it be necessary to review the salary levels of employees (particularly in family companies) to determine on which side of the line their salary may fall? It is important to recognize, however, that this decision should not be regarded as establishing a principle that salary levels in family companies which are below the levels which could be expected in an arms-length situation, are necessarily to be regarded, without more, as evidence of a tax avoidance arrangement.”

However, the IRD issued a Revenue Alert on the 22 June 2010 setting out its interpretation of the case.  Although the Revenue Alert echoes Randerson J’s sentiments, the case has certainly given the IRD carte blanche to investigate any situation where the facts are broadly in line with the Penny and Hooper cases.

What should you do?

If you think that you are in the same situation as Penny and Hooper the IRD suggests you make a voluntary disclosure to the IRD to protect your position.  This would also ensure that you access the greatest amount of reductions in penalties that may apply.

Considering the impending appeal, it may be prudent to await its outcome before any action is taken. However, if you are unsure what to do, then the most prudent course of action would be to talk to your tax advisor before the IRD talks to you.

Parry Field Lawyers provide legal advice on a range of tax matters and are able to assist you with any New Zealand tax questions that you might have.  Please contact Grant Adams at Parry Field’s Christchurch office (348 8480) for help with tax matters. Please note that this is only a high level overview of the case, and there may be specific situations where a different outcome is reached.  Therefore, please don’t rely on this as legal advice.

Tags: new zealand, tax
https://www.parryfield.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/AdobeStock_60633976-resized.jpg 298 474 Leigh Gray https://www.parryfield.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Parry-Field-Lawyers-Logo.png Leigh Gray2011-12-08 22:32:252020-03-20 11:37:41New Zealand Tax Avoidance
You might also like
Christchurch Earthquake Tax Relief
Duties and Liabilities Imposed On A Director of A New Zealand Company
Voluntary Administration In New Zealand
An Overview of Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures In New Zealand
LAQC Changes 3
Tax Issues From the Canterbury Earthquake?
New Zealand Foreign Trusts
New Zealand As Financial Hub

Related Lawyers

Grant Adams
Email Grant
+6433488480
View Profile

Christchurch

PHONE: +64 3 348 8480
FAX: +64 3 348 6305

PHYSICAL ADDRESS:
1 Rimu Street, Riccarton,
Christchurch 8041, New Zealand

POSTAL ADDRESS:
PO Box 8020, Riccarton,
Christchurch, 8440, New Zealand

Hokitika

PHONE: +64 3 755 8673
FAX: +64 3 755 8073

PHYSICAL ADDRESS:
26 Weld Street,
Hokitika 7810, New Zealand

POSTAL ADDRESS:
PO Box 44,
Hokitika 7842, New Zealand

Rolleston

PHONE: +64 3 348 8480
FAX: +64 3 348 6305

PHYSICAL ADDRESS:
68 Rolleston Drive,
Rolleston, 7614, New Zealand

POSTAL ADDRESS:
PO Box 8020, Riccarton,
Christchurch, 8440, New Zealand

Make an enquiry

Parry Field Charitable Foundation

Parry Field charitable members of NZ LAw, Global Cross Legal and SCLA

Privacy Policy

Newsletter signup

70 Years of Excellence logo

GST Rate Change RuleNew Zealand Foreign Trusts
Scroll to top