Interest on Interest – good news from the ATO

---

ATO Interpretative Decision
ATO ID 2006/298
Income Tax
Deductibility of compound interest on a line of credit facility

FOI status: may be released

CAUTION: This is an edited and summarised record of a Tax Office decision. This record is not published as a form of advice. It is being made available for your inspection to meet FOI requirements, because it may be used by an officer in making another decision.

This ATOID provides you with the following level of protection:

If you reasonably apply this decision in good faith to your own circumstances (which are not materially different from those described in the decision), and the decision is later found to be incorrect you will not be liable to pay any penalty or interest. However, you will be required to pay any underpaid tax (or repay any over-claimed credit, grant or benefit), provided the time limits under the law allow it. If you do intend to apply this decision to your own circumstances, you will need to ensure that the relevant provisions referred to in the decision have not been amended or repealed. You may wish to obtain further advice from the Tax Office or from a professional adviser.

Issue

Is the taxpayer entitled to a deduction under section 8-1 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) for compound interest incurred on funds borrowed, under a line of credit facility, to acquire an income producing asset?

Decision

Yes. The taxpayer is entitled to a deduction under section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997 for compound interest incurred on funds borrowed, under a line of credit facility, to acquire an income producing asset.

Facts

The taxpayer took out a line of credit facility, with a financial institution, which was divided into two sub-accounts.

One sub-account was used to acquire an income producing asset (investment sub-account) and the other sub-account was used for non-income producing purposes (private sub-account).

There were no fixed minimum principal and interest repayments required by the lender.

The taxpayer made no payments off the investment sub-account until the private sub-account had been repaid in full.

As interest was capitalised on the investment sub-account, compound interest, being interest on the capitalised interest, accrued on the investment sub-account.

Reasons for Decision

Section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997 allows a deduction for any loss or outgoing that is incurred in gaining or producing assessable income to the extent that it is not of a private, capital or domestic nature.

The deductibility of an outgoing is determined by its essential character ( Lunney & Hayley v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1958) 100 CLR 478; (1958) 11 ATD 404; (1958) 7 AITR 166).

The character of interest is determined by the purpose of the borrowing. Generally, the purpose of a borrowing can be determined from the use of borrowed funds and outgoings of interest ordinarily draw their character from that use ( Fletcher & Ors v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1991) 173 CLR 1; 91 ATC 4950; (1991) 22 ATR 613, Kidston Goldmines Limited v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1991) 30 FCR 77; 91 ATC 4538; (1991) 22 ATR 168).

It is therefore generally accepted that ordinary interest incurred on funds borrowed to acquire an income producing asset is an allowable deduction.

In Hart v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (2002) 121 FCR 206; 2002 ATC 4608; (2002) 50 ATR 369 it was held that compound interest, as with ordinary interest, derives its character from the use of the original borrowings.

In this case compound interest was incurred on funds borrowed, under a line of credit facility, to acquire an income producing asset. As such, the compound interest was incurred in earning assessable income and is an allowable deduction under section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997.

Note: While the general anti avoidance provisions of Part IVA of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 are not considered applicable in this case, the application of Part IVA depends on a detailed analysis of the facts of each case. The Commissioner considers that a scheme in relation to a loan facility would need to have the same features as those set out in paragraphs 16 to 19 in Taxation Ruling TR 98/22 before Part IVA could be applied.

Date of decision: 5 October 2006

Year of income: Year ended 30 June 2006

Legislative References:
Income Tax Assessment Act 1936
Part IVA

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997
section 8-1

Case References:
Fletcher & Ors v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation
(1991) 173 CLR 1
91 ATC 4950

Hart v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation
(2002) 121 FCR 206
2002 ATC 4608

Kidston Goldmines Limited v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation
(1991) 30 FCR 77
91 ATC 4538

Lunney & Hayley v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation
100 CLR 478
(1958) 11 ATD 404
(1958) 7 AITR 166

Related Public Rulings (including Determinations)
Taxation Ruling TR 98/22
Taxation Ruling TR 2000/2
Taxation Determination TD 1999/42

Keywords
Borrowings & loans
Deductions & expenses
Interest expenses
Part IVA

Date of publication: 27 October 2006

ISSN: 1445-2782

---

This work is copyright. Click here for notice of copyright.

© Commonwealth of Australia
This work is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in unaltered form only (retaining this notice) for your personal, non-commercial use or use within your organisation. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, all other rights are reserved.

Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to Commonwealth Copyright Administration, Attorney General’s Department, Robert Garran Offices, National Circuit, Barton ACT 2600 or posted at http://www.ag.gov.au/cca

Simon Macks
Residential and Commercial Finance Broker
[email protected]
0425 228 985

Comments may not be relevant to individual circumstances. If you intend making any investment, financial or taxation decision you should consult a professional adviser.