|
Reform of Corporation Tax: Leasing On 21 July the Government announced that, as heralded in its December 2004 Pre Budget Report, changes will be made as to the UK taxation of plant and machinery leases. For long funding leases (see definition below) of plant or machinery capital allowances, like loan finance will reside with the lessee, with the lessor being taxed on its finance margin only. The changes, albeit not yet fully determined nor fully comprehensive, are to take effect from 1 April 2006. The rationale promulgated for the changes is to remove a perceived distortion between loan and lease finance where the terms of the lease make it an in substance financing. The real driver remains the significant risk that, if challenged, the UK’s restrictive capital allowances rules which effectively prevent leasing to non-UK resident / non-UK taxpayers, would be held to be non-EU compliant. Since December 2004 there has been dialogue between the relevant officials in the Treasury and HMR&C and the leasing industry and its advisers. This discussion has to some extent been reflected in the revised proposals contained in the July technical note but no updated draft legislation has been provided. Although there have been some commercial improvements to the proposals there is a worrying amount of uncertainty around key areas such as the grandfathering rules and definition of plant affected by the new rules for the purposes of property leases for example. The rest of this note sets out the key areas of change since December 2004 and identifies areas where further consideration / action is urgently required if we are to have a functioning system by the April 2006 deadline. Representations to the Revenue on the latest consultation have been invited by 14 October 2005. The draft legislation issued in December 2004 has not been updated for the latest developments, and it is not clear when a further draft will be issued. Changes to the definitions What is a plant or machinery lease ? It is now intended that a plant or machinery lease for the purposes of the new rules should be limited to “leases and transactions that are properly accounted for as leases under GAAP” (ie UK GAAP or IAS). Although the second test - the accounting – should be straightforward the first – whether there is a lease or not (a legal matter) - may give rise to some dispute. Where the transactions fall within the above, they will constitute a funding lease if they satisfy any of the following: 1) The transactions constitute a finance lease under GAAP (UK GAAP or IAS as appropriate to the relevant taxpayer), or 2) The net present value of the minimum lease payments (ignoring payments for ancillary services) is more than 80% of the fair value of the asset (formerly 75%), or 3) The minimum term of the lease is more than 65% of the remaining useful economic life of the asset (formerly 50%). The specialised assets test, formerly included in the December 2004 proposals, has been dropped as it added little and created unnecessary uncertainty. Assets leased more than once An asset that has been leased previously by the current lessor and whenever previously leased has been on a lease that was not a long funding lease (or would not have been if the new regime had then applied) will not be a long funding lease if the total terms of such previous leases exceed 65% of the useful economic life of the asset. This is to prevent the last of a series of operating leases automatically becoming a long funding lease. What is a long funding lease ? A funding lease will not fall within the definition of a long funding lease (and therefore within the new regime) if it has a term up to 5 years or between 5 and 7 years if it meets certain conditions which prevent back loading of the rentals. These terms have increased from the 4 and 6 years respectively suggested in the December 2004 proposals. Start date and grandfathering As noted above the start date for the new regime is 1 April 2006. The existing regime will continue to apply for leases of plant and machinery where there exists a written lease contract between the lessor and the relevant lessee and the asset is made available to the lessee before 1 April 2006. The existing regime will also apply where a written agreement (“the Existing Agreement”) was entered into by the lessor and lessee before 21 July 2005, the asset is under construction by 1 April 2006 and the completed asset is made available before 1 April 2007 under a final lease agreement. The final lease agreement must be between the same lessor and lessee as the agreement subsisting at 21 July 2005; it must be finalised before 1 April 2007 and must not be materially different to the 21 July agreement. The 1 April 2007 deadline may be extended to 1 April 2009 for assets which have extended construction times. There are rules as to construction and similarly to the April 2007 rules the final lease must be between the same parties and be materially the same as the agreement existing on 21 July 2005. The rules do not define Existing Agreement, but state that it should contain sufficient detail so as to be able to determine whether the final lease agreement is materially the same as the Existing Agreement. It notes that the Existing Agreement should set out its main terms including identifying the particular lessee, details of the assets, the lease term and expected rentals. The risk and uncertainty as to what constitutes an Existing Agreement for these purposes is placed on the taxpayer. There are references to provisions to deal with combined assets and apportionments for leases which may contain expenditure in both the existing and new regime. Time apportionment and other anti-avoidance provisions On the positive side the technical note indicates, following industry lobbying, that the time apportionment rules introduced in 1997 (which restrict finance lessors’ capital allowances in the year of acquisition), will be removed for finance lessors and only extended to operating lessors where in both cases the lessor does not use the group’s normal accounting year end date. Where the lessor does not adopt the group year end the apportionment rules will apply to operating leases which are funding leases for tax purposes and have a term in excess of 4 years but not more than 7 years. The note also states that the overseas leasing rules will not apply to leases entered into after 1 April 2006, subject to the transitional rules referred to above. However, the paper ominously refers to the possible retention of some of the overseas leasing rules for future leases. The position on other existing avoidance provisions is left open and it will be interesting to see if the Government takes the opportunity to at least remove some lease provisions which duplicate or have been superseded by other provisions. Chains of leases The latest technical note contains positive developments on the position of lease chains. The December 2004 paper raised the distinctly unattractive position of denying any capital allowances where there was such a chain. The revised proposals establish that the lessor’s / headlessor’s right to claim capital allowances should take precedence over the lessee’s right. This has been extended to cover non UK taxpaying lessors if they would be entitled to claim capital allowances were they within the charge to UK corporation tax or income tax. Accordingly where a lessee takes the view that it has a long funding lease it must establish that no lessor or head lessor is (or would be) entitled to claim capital allowances. There will be provisions dealing with the exchange of information from the lessor to the lessee. There is a rather unhelpful suggestion that lessees might be entitled to neither capital rent deductions nor capital allowances if they cannot establish whether a superior lessor is entitled to allowances. Hire Purchase The existing rules which transfer tax ownership to the lessee under a hire purchase agreement will be extended to apply to contracts with non-UK taxpaying business lessees. Property leases The general rule is that long funding leases of plant or machinery will be within the new regime. For property leases which include “incidental plant or machinery”, the existing rules will continue to apply. The line between incidental and non-incidental plant or machinery is not clearly defined and such uncertainty will be very unhelpful for longer term property projects where there is no existing 21 July agreement. Leases to Tonnage Tax companies As noted in December 2004 these will be exempt from the new regime, provided the lease is either direct to the tonnage tax company, or via a single fellow group member of the tonnage tax company. Areas on which the Government welcome comments • The possibility for lessors (finance and operating) to elect to come within the new regime and be taxed on an accounts basis, • The proposals fore hire purchase, • The proposals for chains of leases and the prevention of double allowances, • Possible restriction of first year allowances of lessors of environmentally beneficial technology. Comments should be received by 14 October 2005. Other areas of uncertainty The Government have identified a limited number of areas on which they request comment. For taxpayers, lessors and lessees, the changes will require significant changes in their compliance systems and tax returns. In many respects the new rules will add further rules rather than result in simplification. This is probably an acceptable price to pay given the flexibility needed to deal with commercial arrangements such as chains of leases, but taxpayers will need certainty in applying such complex provisions. Other key areas of concern / uncertainty include: • Clarity as to what is a lease for these purposes, • A comprehensive definition of incidental plant or machinery in respect of property leases, • Further extension of and clarity in respect of grandfathering of leases and agreements to lease. Imposing, without notice, an unclear definition of what is an existing agreement to lease is commercially damaging to longer term property and other projects, • An early indication as to which existing leasing anti-avoidance provisions are to be abolished and what form any new provisions dealing with the new regime will take. • Draft legislation covering the current proposals should be issued shortly and certainly well before Spring 2006. This is required to clarify a number of terms contained in the technical note, for example what represents the term of a lease for the purposes of determining whether there is a long funding lease? Jonathan Vines Tax Partner –KPMG Leasing and Asset Finance Group 26 July 2005
The information contained herein is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavor to provide accurate and timely information, there can be no guarantee that such information is accurate as of the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. No one should act on such information without appropriate professional advice after a thorough examination of the particular situation
|