By THE STAR
It may be possible by transferring properties to a company, but there are many pitfalls to considerAT the recently concluded budget seminar of our firm, a major focus of the 650 attendees was the proposed real property gains tax (RPGT) of 5% to be imposed on disposals of property after Jan 1.
Resigned to the inevitability of the tax and the futility of objections, the ingenious ones posed the question to us on the possibility of tax minimisation by transferring their current properties to a company before Jan 1.
The plan calls for properties which were acquired many years ago at a cheap price (say RM1mil) to be transferred to a company controlled by them at the prevailing market price (say RM3mil).
The transfer will be effected before Jan 1, thus attracting no RPGT on the disposal.
In the future when the property is disposed off by the company, the company will only be taxed on the capital gain over and above the new cost of RM3mil.
If the disposal price by the company is RM4mil, the company will only pay tax on the capital gain of RM1mil (RM4mil less RM3mil) at the rate of 5%, thus resulting in RPGT of RM50,000.
A very ingenious idea indeed. The comparison of taxes payable shows a tax saving of RM100,000 calculated as seen in the table.
Before anyone embarks on such a potentially lucrative move, one has to bear in mind many of the pitfalls, some of which are discussed below.
Date of disposal
For the purpose of this discussion, the term “chargeable assets” is used to refer to properties and other assets that can be caught under RPGT.
Chargeable assets include shares in real property companies which are companies that predominantly hold assets in the form of properties or shares in other real property companies. Only chargeable assets disposed on Jan 1 or after will be assessed to RPGT. Those disposed of from April 1, 2007 to Dec 31, 2009 will not. A day is literally night and day for tax purposes!
But the term “disposal date” has a technical definition and it is not the date when the sales price is paid over as we usually consider a sale to be. In sales circles, as they say, a sale is not a sale until the money is collected!
However, for RPGT purposes, a sale is a sale on the day a written agreement is entered into.
Hence, the date that a sale and purchase agreement is entered into for the sale of a property is usually the date of disposal for RPGT purposes. But what if there is no written agreement?
The law provides that the date of disposal is the earlier of two dates – the date that the sales price is fully received or the date that the ownership is transferred. Disposals of this nature may have disposal dates being deferred to a later date, which may fall in the 5% taxable period!
Likewise, disposal dates may be deferred even much later if the sale is dependent on securing approvals from the “Government or an authority, or committee appointed by the Government” – for example, the state government, the Securities Commission (SC) or Foreign Investment Committee.
For these “conditional contracts” which are covered by Para 16 of Schedule 2 of the RPGT Act, the disposal date is when the last of the approvals is obtained.
If a sale and purchase agreement is signed in December 2009 that is subject to SC approval which is obtained in February 2010, the disposal will be treated as having taken place in 2010 and thus subject to the 5% RPGT!
Stamp duty on the transfer
Stamp duty is imposed on the documents for the transfer of title; for example, the memorandum of transfer for transfer of property.
The rates applicable are fairly steep for properties which range from 1% to 3% with the highest rate of 3% being applicable for transfer prices which exceed RM500,000.
Transfers of shares attract duty at the rate of RM3 for every RM1,000 of the transfer price or 0.3%.
However, to avoid stamp duty, one may wish to transfer the property without the transfer of title; for example, the owner holds the property in trust for the company.
What if no transfer of title is effected as in these circumstances? Will the issue of tax avoidance then arise? Perhaps.
Anti-tax avoidance in the RPGT Act
Section 25 of the RPGT Act contains the general anti-avoidance provisions which allow the tax authorities to disregard transactions, vary transactions or impose taxes that should have been imposed.
The law specifies that this right is available if the transactions had the effect of “altering the incidence of tax”, “relieving a person from tax liability” or “evading or avoiding any liability which would otherwise have been imposed”.
Besides these general anti-tax avoidance measures which are also found in the Income Tax Act to discourage income tax avoidance, Section 25 of the RPGT Act also provides for persons who provide loans to related parties; for example, Mr A providing loans to Company A which is owned by him.
The law provides that if Company A sells a property and the property was financed by a loan provided by Mr A, the disposal may be regarded as a disposal by Mr A and not by Company A.
However, the cost of acquisition to Mr A is the market value of the property when Company A acquired the property from Mr A. If Company A had acquired the property from Mr A at the true market value, this anti-tax avoidance provision of the RPGT Act should not pose any problem.
Previous rules by Ministry of Finance (MOF)
A few years ago, the Government had granted a similar tax free period from June 1, 2003 to May 31, 2004.
During that period, the MOF had issued some guidelines to curb the avoidance of RPGT by mandating that any disposal of property must be evidenced by a sales and purchase agreement which must be duly signed and stamped within the exemption period.
Sale of property to a company in exchange for shares
Care should be taken if the property owner transfers a property to a company controlled by him in exchange for shares, or at least 75% in the form of shares. If the transfer is done this way, the shares may be considered to be chargeable assets.
In the future when these shares are sold, the gains will be subject to the RPGT of 5%. The cost of shares for RPGT purposes is not the par value of the shares but the price paid by the property owner for the property plus incidental expenses incurred by him on the acquisition; for example, legal fees.
As such, if Mr B transfers a piece of property acquired for RM1mil to his company (Company B) at market price of RM3mil in exchange for 3 million RM1 shares, and the shares are subsequently sold for RM4mil, the gains on disposal are calculated at RM3mil which is RM4mil sales price less the acquisition price to Mr B of RM1mil.
Indirectly therefore, Mr B is taxed on his full capital gains and not merely on the gains made by Company B owned by him.
RPGT or income tax?
Another aspect which has deep implications is whether the disposer had held the property as stock-in-trade or as a long term investment.
If held as stock-in-trade, the gains on disposal will attract income tax whereas if held as a long term investment, the gains will attract RPGT.
Some property investments which are disposed as part of a quick sale, or as a single isolated transaction in circumstances which give it a cloak of “adventure in the nature of trade”, could be caught under income tax.
Due to space constraints, we are unable to elaborate on this issue. If these disposals are caught under income tax, what then is the advantage of disposing the properties before Jan 1 if the disposer has to pay income tax at 25% on the gains upfront?
The obstacles can be quite challenging as seen above and careful navigation of the tax law is necessary. But I am sure good tax advisers will find a way out of the conundrum!
