McLEAN AND CO.
There can be problems with this approach. Struck off companies can be reinstated by application of an creditor. If money is owed to the IRD, they too can seek reinstatement.
For example, sometimes companies are allowed to lapse where a shareholder has an overdrawn current account. An overdrawn current account means that the shareholder has borrowed money from the company ( eg drawings). The company is required to charge interest on the amount owing, using the FBT prescribed rate. If the company does not charge interest there will either be an FBT liability for the company or the shareholder will owe tax on a deemed dividend. If the company is struck off and the overdrawn current account is still in place the liability for the interest will continue to tick on. The company will owe income tax on the interest income, even if nothing else is happening.
Under a formal wind up process the company is required to give public notice of the intention to remove the company. A specified notice period permiits objection to the removals. If no objections are received the removal proceeds. Reinstatements will be more difficult to obtain.
Although a formal wind up process takes time and involves some cost, it is more difficult for the company to rise from the grave!
TAX AUDITS- WHAT IS IRD FINDING
IRD recently announced the major tax discrepancies identified in tax investigations.
The results represent a good indicator for you of common errors made by taxpayers, which may assist with checks that can be made to minimise the risk of you falling into the same trap as those taxpayers who have suffered the pain of getting it wrong and being caught by IRD. The interesting factor is that the list bears a striking resemblance to one we saw a few years ago.
The major discrepancies are:
losses ineligible to be carried forward
capital expenditure claimed in error
taxable income treated as a capital receipt
failure to deduct and account for NRWT
group loss offsets
non-compliance of the accruals regime
reserves disallowed
GST- time of supply
losses on sale of assets claimed in error
FBT on vehicles
FBT on free or subsidised goods
Superannuation
Failure to deduct PAYE/ Withholding Tax
We all know that it is a fudamental requirement of the GST system that a registered person must hold a tax invoice before an input deduction can be claimed for supplies over $50. The only exception is for second-hand goods claims.
IRD regularly uncover errors in an audit situation that include:
no tax invoice being held
the words "Tax Invoice" missing from the Invoice
An incorrect GST number is being used
The name of the recipient incorrect or missing (e.g. trading names on the tax invoices that have not been registered with IRD rather than the taxpayer's name?
No GST content being shown
A simplified Tax invoice is relied on for supplies over $200
The invoice does not include a date
If taxpayers do not hold a technically correct tax invoice, IRD may disallow the imput tax deductions claimed and impose penalties.
The "tax invoice" requirements are carefully described in the GST Act and IRD can be very pedantic in enforcing them
The ability to dispense with the requirement to hold a "tax invoice" if a supply is less that $50 is a GST rule.
There is no such rule for income tax purposes. If the taxpayer wishes to claim a deduction for $1 sufficient records must be kept to support deduction
The conclusion is therefore quite simple...........request and retain Invoices for every business purchase.
We are often required to make a decision about the income tax and GST treatment of fines or late payment penalties.
Examples include: fines for overloading vehicles, fines for inadequate road user kilometres on trucks, late payment penalties, speed camera and parking fines.
The traditional IRD view has been no deduction is available, for income tax purposes, for any penalty or fine paid for a breach of the law. You do the crime: you pay the fine--- no tax deduction.
That view has been modified over time by a series of legal cases to a point where current IRD practice allows a deduction for fines incurred by an employee. Similarly, a professional adviser who pays a fine on behalf of a client for some statutory breach which occurred because of negligence or bad advice, the fine will be a deductible expense in the hands of the adviser.
But where a self employed person or partner in a partnership incurs a fine in their own name there is generally no tax deduction available.
Late payment fees on local body rates are not fines. They are simply treated as additional rates and will be fully deductible, where they are charged in respect to a farm or other business premises, Similarly , late payment fees on ACC Levies are not fines; rather they are treated as additional ACC Levies and are tax deductible.
The decision as to whether to claim GST on fines will follow the deductibility for income tax rule. Thus parking fines, speeding fines, overloading fines etc do not have any GST content and cannot be claimed for GST. Late payment on rates and ACC Levies will have GST content and GST should be claimed. The problem is there are many items which are loosely called fines e.g. overdue library book fines. In fact, these are not fines at all but penalties or further charges imposed on the extended use of the book, and therefore include GST.
DOMAIN NAMES FOR McLEAN AND CO.
INTERNET TAX PAYMENTS
Three banks are now offering a tax payment service on their internet sites which meet IRD electronic payment requirements. These are:
ANZ
Kiwibank
Westpac
Customers of these banks are able to make payments to IRD for most revenues, including student loans and child support. Payments relating to income equalisation and most duties cannot be made this way.
If you are making payments over the internet, it is most important that you check with your bank to find out what their daily cut-off time is for processing payments so that due dates are not missed.
If we can assist further, please email McLean and Co as follows: