Business Taxes

Chapter 7Disposals of Business Assets and Investments

AIM

To teach students the taxation treatment of disposals of business assets and investments.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

On completing this chapter, you will be able to:

7.1 Apply the rules of CGT to gains of a company when disposing of a business asset or investment 197
7.2 Explain the possible treatments of interest charged to capital for CGT purposes 208

PRE-READING

Capital Taxes Fundamentals Manual

Personal Taxes Manual

Chapter 14: Development land

Chapter 32: Anti-avoidance

MAIN LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

Part 2, Part 19, Chapter 2 of Part 22, Sections 4, 78, 243 and 290 of TCA 1997

FURTHER READING

The Taxation of Capital Gains, Finance Act 2016, Irish Tax Institute

Chapter 10 Company Chargeable Gains

Corporation Tax, Finance Act 2010, Irish Tax Institute

Chapter 10A Companies’ Capital Gains

RELEVANT PAST EXAM QUESTIONS

2015, Summer, Question 5

2015, Autumn, Question 5(a)

2016, Autumn, Question 2(b)

2017, Autumn, Question 2(c)

2018, Summer, Question 2(a)–(d)

7.1.Apply the rules of CGT to gains of a company when disposing of a business asset or investment

7.1.1.Scope of CGT for a company

As already mentioned, under the general charge to corporation tax, Irish tax resident companies are taxable in respect of all income and gains wherever arising (Section 26(1) TCA 1997 and Section 4(1) TCA 1997).

Generally, companies do not pay CGT, except on gains from the disposal of development land. Instead, companies generally pay corporation tax (“CT”) on chargeable gains. However, the TCA provisions relating to CGT still apply to companies (Section 78(7) TCA 1997).

The territorial scope of tax on a company’s chargeable gains is as follows:

Resident companies

A resident company is liable to corporation tax on any chargeable gain it realises except on disposals of development land (Section 21(3) TCA 1997 and Section 649(1) TCA 1997). The Personal Taxes manual has a full discussion on what is meant by development land.

Chargeable gains arising on the disposal of development land by a company are always liable to CGT and not CT, irrespective of the company’s residence (Section 649(1) TCA 1997).

Non-resident companies

A non-resident company is not within the charge to corporation tax unless it carries on a trade in Ireland through a branch or agency (Section 25(1) TCA 1997). Where such a non-resident company does carry on a trade through a branch or agency in Ireland, it is chargeable to corporation tax on:

1) any trading income arising directly or indirectly through or from the branch or agency together with any income from property or rights used by or held by the branch.

2) chargeable gains on the disposal of assets on which a non-resident company would normally be liable to Irish tax (Section 25(2) TCA 1997).

Section 29(3) TCA 1997 lists the assets that a non-resident company will be liable to Irish tax on in the event of a disposal. These are commonly referred to as “specified assets”. The basic rule that a non-resident is only chargeable on gains on the disposal of specified assets will always apply, no matter whether the disposal is chargeable to CT or CGT.

In summary, a non resident company is chargeable to CT in respect of gains arising on the disposal of specified assets (i.e. Irish land, minerals, assets situated in the State which were/are used for the purposes of a trade carried on in the State, etc.) provided the non-resident company carries on a trade in Ireland through a branch or agency. If the non-resident company is not carrying on a trade in the State through a branch or agency, the company is liable to CGT on any gain arising on the disposal of specified assets. In either case, a non-resident company is liable to CGT on any gain on the disposal of development land (in the same way that an Irish tax resident company is liable to CGT on such disposals).

7.1.2.Calculation of chargeable gains

Unless an asset is not a chargeable asset, any gain on disposal is a chargeable gain (Section 545 TCA 1997). A loss on disposal of an asset is an allowable loss if a gain on the disposal of that asset would have been a chargeable gain (Section 546 TCA 1997).

The preparation of the computation for CT on chargeable gains is largely the same as a CGT computation (Section 78(2) TCA 1997). The following steps should be taken in calculating the chargeable gain:

1. Remember that the accounting profit/loss on the disposal of an asset (for example a building or shares) is not taxable/deductible in the computation of the tax adjusted Case I Income and any accounting profit or loss on disposal must be adjusted for in calculating taxable Case I income.

2. A separate calculation of the capital gain/loss must be computed in accordance with capital gains tax rules.

3. Current period capital losses and unutilised capital losses incurred in previous accounting periods are deducted from any capital gains calculated using CGT rules and arising in the current period (Section 78(2) and Section 31 TCA 1997).

4. The tax payable is calculated using the applicable CGT rate (Section 28(3) TCA 1997) currently 33%.

5. One must then work backwards to calculate the chargeable gain to be included in the company’s corporation tax computation that will give the same corporation tax as that above using the CGT rate (Section 78(3) TCA 1997).

6. A company’s chargeable gains are included in the total profits for the period (Section 78(1) TCA 1997). Therefore, any of the losses, charges or allowances which can be used to shelter total profits can be used to shelter chargeable gains (see Chapter 5).

Allowable losses are calculated in the same manner as chargeable gains (Section 546(2) TCA 1997). The following points are of special relevance to capital losses realised by companies:

1. A company can offset a capital loss against capital gains of the current accounting period (Section 78(2) TCA 1997). Capital losses cannot, however, be offset against the company’s total income.

2. Where the capital loss exceeds the capital gain of the current period, the excess can be carried forward indefinitely to be set off against capital gains subject to corporation tax of future periods (Section 31(b) TCA 1997). Note, only capital losses incurred when the company is within the charge to corporation tax can be carried forward and offset against future capital gains (see Section 78(4) – meaning of “relevant allowable loss”).

3. A loss arising on the disposal of development land by a company is offsetable for corporation tax purposes against chargeable gains on development land subject to CGT and to the extent not relieved against such gains, may be treated as part of a “relevant allowable loss” under Section 78(2) TCA 1997 (Section 653(2) TCA 1997).

4. A gain arising from the disposal of development land is liable to CGT and not CT. This gain can effectively only be offset by a loss arising from the disposal of development land (Section 653 TCA 1997).

Example 7.1

Company A acquired a premises in October 1990 for €100,000. This was subsequently sold in June 2018 for €273,000. The accounting profit on disposal shown in the accounts is €173,000. A Ltd prepares accounts to 31st December 2018.

Steps:

1. Deduct profit on disposal of €173,000 in corporation tax computation of tax adjusted Case I income.

2. Calculate the capital gain on the disposal in the tax year to 31st December 2018.

Sale Proceeds 273,000
Less: Cost of Acquisition October 1990 100,000 × 1.442 = 144,200
128,800
Less: Capital Losses (current & brought forward) Nil
128,800

3. The CGT on this capital gain is:

€128,800 × 33% =
42,504

4. The chargeable gain required to give a tax liability of €42,504 using the CT rate of 12.5% is as follows:

€340,032

5. Therefore, the amount of €340,032 is included as a chargeable gain in the company’s corporation tax computation. Taxed at the standard rate of 12.5%, this will give tax payable of €42,504.

Task 7.1

B Ltd. acquired the freehold interest in a factory in January 1984 for €75,000. It subsequently sold this factory on 20 December 2018 for €350,000. The accounting profit on the disposal of this fixed asset shown in the accounts is €311,000. B Ltd prepares its accounts to 31 December each year. Assess the tax implications of this transaction for B Ltd.

7.1.3.Wasting assets – Restriction of allowable expenditure (Section 560Section 561 TCA 1997)

Remember from Capital Gains Tax that a wasting asset is one that has a predictable useful life of 50 years or less. Plant and machinery will always be deemed to be a wasting asset while freehold land is excluded from the definition.

The definition of a wasting asset can be found in Section 560 TCA 1997.

Remember, Section 561 TCA 1997 outlines an exception to the restriction of the allowable base cost of wasting assets. A business asset used solely for trade purposes which qualifies for capital allowances is not subject to the wasting expenditure rule.

You learned about the CGT treatment of wasting assets in Capital Taxes Fundamentals. You should revise this area.

Example 7.2

W Ltd. acquired a 3 year right of way in January 2017 for €60,000. The right of way allowed W Ltd access land owned by it using larger vehicles than could access the land using the normal access route. The right of way is a wasting asset with an expected life of 3 years, at the end of which time it will be worthless. If W Ltd subsequently sold this right of way in June 2018, the allowable cost of the right of way would be restricted to €60,000 × 1.5/3 = €30,000.

7.1.4.Development land (Section 648Section 653 TCA 1997)

Development land is defined in Section 648 TCA 1997. Essentially, where land is sold and the sales price exceeds the current use value of that land, it is treated as development land.

In your Personal Taxes: Application and Interaction module, you will learn the meaning of development land for CGT purposes, as well as how to calculate the gains or losses arising on the disposal of development land (taking into account losses, indexation relief, etc).

You should study this carefully as the same principles apply to disposals of development land by individuals as by companies. However, remember, the disapplication of the provisions dealing with development land to disposals where the total consideration in a year does not exceed €19,050 is only available to individuals and not to companies (Section 650 TCA 1997).

As mentioned earlier in the chapter, a company is always liable to CGT and not corporation tax on gains arising on the disposal of development land (Section 649(1) TCA 1997). This is an important distinction as this will impact on the payment dates of the company’s tax liability i.e. the CGT payment deadlines will apply for gains on disposals of development land and not the normal corporation tax payment deadlines.

Development land gains are not treated as part of the company’s total profits (Section 649(1)(a) TCA 1997) and therefore any reliefs which can be set off by a company against its total profits (such as non-trade charges under Section 243 TCA 1997 or excess Case V capital allowances under Section 308 TCA 1997) may not be set off against development land gains.

Example 7.3

Alpha Ltd acquires a parcel of land in May 1990 for €300,000. At the date of acquisition this land had a current use value of €100,000. Incidental cost of acquisition totalled €9,000.

In December 1994, the company undertook various works to improve the site – this expenditure totalled €50,000.

Alpha Ltd sold the land in July 2018 for €670,000 at which time the current use value of the land was €240,000.

Sales Proceeds 670,000
Less: cost of acquisition

1. 1990/91 current use value €100,000 × 1.442 =

144,200

2. Incidental costs referable to Current Use Value

4,326

3. Balance of original cost (no indexation)

200,000

4. Balance of Incidental costs (no indexation)

6,000

5. Enhancement Expenditure (no indexation)

50,000 (404,526)
Gain 265,474
CGT @ 33% 87,606

Remember - CGT on development land is not included in the CT computation and is not re-grossed to the CT rate as gains on development land are always liable to CGT (Section 649(1) TCA 1997).

Task 7.2

Develop Ltd. purchased a greenfield site in August 1991 for €250,000 at which time the current use value (CUV) was €110,000. Incidental costs of acquiring the site were €10,000.

Site development work at a cost of €40,000 was undertaken in June 1993. The company sold this prime site in July 2018 for €700,000. At that date, the site had a CUV of €300,000. The site did not have either outline or full residential planning permission.

Calculate the CGT liability of Develop Ltd for 2018.

Note that the company has unutilised capital losses of €50,000 which arose on the disposal of a factory (non development).

7.1.5.Chargeable gains examples

The following examples are based on your studies from the Personal Taxes: manual and show the capital gains treatment in particular circumstances from a company point of view.

'

Example 7.4 – Section 550 TCA 1997 - Disposal of assets in a series of transactions

Alpha Ltd owns 4 adjoining sites in a greenfield area in Dublin. The market value of each site on an individual basis is €100,000. However, the market value of the 4 sites if sold together is €500,000.

If Alpha Ltd disposes of the 4 sites in 4 distinct and separate transactions over a period to Beta Ltd. which is a 60% subsidiary, then the proceeds of disposal for each transaction will be deemed to be:

Task 7.3

Assume the same facts as in Example 7.4 above except that Beta Ltd is a 25% subsidiary of Alpha Ltd. Would the provisions of Section 550 TCA 1997 apply in this case? Why or why not?

Task 7.4

Quart Ltd owns three derelict warehouses in a prime industrial area in Sligo. The site covered by the three warehouses is very suitable for development and is valued at €200,000 whereas the value of each warehouse taken separately is only €30,000, total €90,000.

Quart Ltd disposes of these warehouses to Gamma Ltd, its 90% subsidiary in 3 separate transactions.

What anti-avoidance provisions take effect?

Example 7.5 – Section 290 TCA 1997 - Deferral of balancing charges

An asset is sold and the balancing charge arising is €3,000. A similar replacement asset was acquired for €13,000. The new asset was acquired on 30.11.18 and 12.5% Straight Line W & T applies. Basis period for these transactions is 31.12.18.

Cost of replacement asset 13,000
Less: Balancing charge on original asset (3,000)
Qualifying cost of asset for capital allowances 10,000
W & T @ 12.5% 1,250
TWDV 31.12.18 8,750
If this asset were sold in y/e 31.12.19 for €14,000
Sale Proceeds on replacement asset 14,000
Less: TWDV at date of disposal 8,750
Balancing charge (subject to overall restriction) 5,250

The balancing charge is restricted to the actual total of capital allowances granted. This figure includes the deferred balancing charge on original asset.

Max balancing charge of €1,250 + €3,000 = €4,250

Example 7.6 – Section 555 TCA 1997 - Capital allowances and capital gains interaction

A Ltd acquired a factory for €150,000 in 2007. Industrial buildings allowances of €60,000 were received prior to disposal for €300,000 in January 2018.

CGT: Sale proceeds 300,000
Cost (ignoring indexation) 150,000
Gain 150,000

As a gain arises on the disposal, the base cost is not reduced by the capital allowances claimed. However, a balancing charge of €60,000 of allowances already received will arise.

In the above example assume sale proceeds of €100,000 were received.

1. Capital Allowance Computation

TWDV at date of disposal 90,000
Sale proceeds 100,000
Balancing charge 10,000
Total capital allowances 60,000
Balancing charge (10,000)
Net position 50,000
2. CGT: Sale Proceeds 100,000
Base cost 150,000
Loss on disposal 50,000
Restricted by allowances previously granted (50,000)
Allowable loss Nil

Task 7.5

Gamma Ltd purchased an industrial building for €110,000 in 2007. Over the years, IBAA of €44,000 were received. The building was sold in 2018 for €70,000.

Calculate the tax implications of the above transaction.

Example 7.7 – Section 565 TCA 1997 – Grants

A Ltd spent €500,000 in 2008 on the acquisition of a new distribution unit. The company received non-refundable grants totalling €75,000 towards the building. The company sold the building in September 2018 for €600,000. Calculate the corporation tax liability of A Ltd.

CGT computation 2018
Sale proceeds 600,000
Cost of acquisition 500,000
Less: Grant received (75,000)
(425,000)
Gain 175,000
Tax @ 33% €57,750

Re-grossed for inclusion in CT computation €462,000

p13

Example 7.8 – Section 536 TCA 1997 - Insurance and compensation relief

A cottage was acquired in July 1985 for €50,000 by Homely Ltd. It was subsequently partly damaged by a fire in January 1990. Insurance compensation of €30,000 was duly received in March 1990 and was entirely used to restore the cottage. The cottage was sold in September 2018 for €95,000. The €30,000 spent on restoring the cottage was treated as repairs in the company’s corporation tax computation.

Capital Gains Tax treatment:

2018
Sale proceeds 95,000
Less: cost of acquisition July ’85 Cost 50,000
Compensation (30,000)
20,000 × 1.713 34,260
Gain 60,740

Re-grossed for inclusion in CT computation €160,354

p14

The €30,000 insurance proceeds was not taxed in the year it was received on the basis that it was a capital sum and was therefore deducted from the profit before tax in determining the Case I tax adjusted profits.

If the €30,000 spent on the cottage was regarded as improvements as opposed to repairs such that it were capital in nature it would not have been a deductible expense in the company’s corporation tax computation and would be treated as enhancement expenditure for the purposes of determining the capital gain.

Task 7.6

Dam Ltd. purchased a building in March 1992 for €60,000. It was partly damaged by fire in December 1994. Insurance compensation of €20,000 was received in January 1995 and this was fully re-invested to restore the building. It is agreed that the restoration work undertaken is of a capital nature and not simply repairs.

The building was sold in May 2018 for €100,000. Calculate the corporation tax implications for the company.

Example 7.9

Unlucky Ltd. built a modern factory in December 1990 at a cost of €170,000. In September 1994, the factory was completely destroyed by fire. In January 1995, the insurance proceeds of €210,000 relating to the fire were received. The company used these proceeds to build a new factory in December 1995 – the total cost of the new factory being €300,000. In June 2018, the company sold the factory for €450,000.

CGT implications

Ordinarily the company would be deemed to have sold the original factory in 1994/95 for €210,000 and acquired a new factory for €300,000. However, if the company lodges the appropriate claim the following treatment applies;

1. Destruction of factory in 1994/95 – disposal at no gain/no loss. The factory is deemed to have been disposed of for consideration of €170,000 which gives rise to a no gain/no loss. Note that indexation relief cannot be applied to the base cost.

2. The CGT base cost of the replacement factory is reduced by the excess of:

1. compensation received of €210,000 over

2. amount of deemed proceeds in 1994 – 95 of €170,000 i.e. €40,000

The gain arising in 2018 is:

Sale Proceeds 450,000
Less: cost of acquisition
Dec 1995 Cost 300,000
Less: excess (40,000)
260,000
@ 1.277 332,020
Gain 117,980

Re-grossed for inclusion in CT computation €311,467

The company is not obliged to claim the relief.

Calculate the aggregate of the gain in 94/95 on the deemed disposal and the actual disposal in 2018 (ignoring in both cases the insurance relief) and see whether the company should claim the relief.

The gain arising on the deemed disposal in 94/95 is:

Deemed sale proceeds 210,000
Less: cost of acquisition
Dec 1990 Cost (’90/’91) 170,000
@ 1.102 187,340
Gain
In this year the gain is not adjusted as both CT and CGT were 40%. 22,660
The gain arising on the disposal in 2018 is:
Sale proceeds 450,000
Less: cost of acquisition
Dec 1995 Cost (’95/’96) 300,000
@ 1.277 383,100
Gain 66,900

Re-grossed for inclusion in CT computation €176,616

Total gains of €89,560 would arise on the deemed disposal in 94/95 and the actual disposal in 2018, which is less than the gain of €117,980 which arises where the relief is claimed. However, given the time value of money and given that the rate of CGT in 94/95 was 40% compared with the current rate of 33%, the company is still better off making the claim for relief and deferring the liability until 2018. Students should note that Unlucky Ltd would have had to decide on whether to claim the relief in 94/95 without the benefit of knowing the position in 2018.

Example 7.10

Taking the same facts as the previous example for Unlucky Ltd except that the company spent €200,000 in constructing the replacement factory.

CGT Implications

1. Disposal of Factory in 1994/95
Sales proceeds 210,000
Less: cost of acquisitions
1990/91 €170,000 × 1.102 187,340
22,660
Proceeds not reinvested 10,000
Gain immediately chargeable
In this year the gain is not adjusted as both CT and CGT was 40%.
Deferred gain 12,660
2. Disposal of replacement factory in 2018
Sale proceeds 450,000
Less: Cost of acquisitions
1995/96 Cost 200,000
less: Deferred Gain (12,660)
187,340 × 1.277 239,233
Gain 210,767

Re-grossed for inclusion in CT computation €556,425

Remember that none of the above forms of relief are available for wasting assets.

Task 7.7

Firey Ltd. purchased a factory in July 1991 for €150,000. This factory was completely destroyed by fire in June 1994. A month later, insurance proceeds of €180,000 were received. The company used these proceeds to build a new factory, the total cost of which was €220,000. In December 2018, this factory was sold for €400,000.

Quantify the corporation tax implications for the company.

Task 7.8

Taking the facts from the previous task above except that Firey Ltd. spent €175,000 in constructing the replacement factory in July’95.

7.2.Explain the possible treatments of interest charged to capital for CGT purposes

7.2.1.Interest is not a deductible expense

See Chapter 2, Section 2.1 for a discussion on the general rule regarding the disallowance of interest against capital gains tax. It is generally allowed against income.

7.2.2.Allowable interest charged to capital (Section 553 TCA 1997)

There is one exception to the general rule noted above. This is set out in Section 553 TCA 1997. This Section concerns the situation where expenditure has been incurred on the construction of any “building, structure or works” and an interest expense on borrowings used for that purpose has also been incurred and the interest has been capitalised to the company’s accounts. The interest expense will be allowable as part of the base cost of the asset on its ultimate disposal for capital gains tax purposes, if not claimed as a deduction against CT in earlier years.

This exception is only available in limited circumstances. The legislation only refers to interest on borrowings used in the “construction” of any building, etc (Section 553(a) TCA 1997). Interest incurred on borrowings used to buy a building already constructed would not qualify. This capitalised interest deduction is only available to a company and not to an individual (Section 553(a) TCA 1997). Also, the company must incur the interest expense and must charge that interest expense to capital in its accounts (Section 553(b) and (c) TCA 1997).

Task Answers

Task 7.1

1. The profit on the disposal of the building of €311,000 must be deducted from the profit per the accounts in the Case I tax adjusted profit computation.

2. The capital gain on the disposal in the tax y/e 31st December 2018 is as follows:

Sale proceeds 350,000
Less: Cost of acquisition
January 1984 €75,000 × 2.003 150,225
Capital gain 199,775

3. The CGT on this capital gain is €199,775 × 33% = €65,926

4. The chargeable gain required to give a tax liability of €65,926 using the CT rate of 12.5% is as follows:

Therefore, €527,406 is included as a chargeable gain in B Ltd’s corporation tax computation for the AP ended 31 December 2018.

Task 7.2

CGT computation 2018

Sale proceeds 700,000
Less: Cost of acquisition
1. 1991/92 CUV €110,000 × 1.406 154,660
2. Incidental costs referable to CUV
6,186
3. Balance of original cost (no indexation) 140,000
4. Balance of incidental costs (no indexation) 5,600
5. Enhancement expenditure (no indexation) 40,000
(346,446)
Gain 353,554
CGT @ 33% 116,673

Note that Develop Ltd cannot offset its excess capital losses against the development land gain as only losses arising on the disposal of development land can be offset against such gains.

Task 7.3

The provisions of Section 550 TCA 1997 would not apply in the case where Beta Ltd is only a 25% subsidiary of Alpha Ltd as the companies would not be connected persons within the meaning of Section 10 TCA 1997.

Task 7.4

The anti-avoidance provisions of Section 550 TCA 1997, which relate to the disposal of assets in a series of transactions, take effect. The proceeds of the disposal to Gamma Ltd in each case are not €30,000 but instead are deemed to be:

As the land is development land, it is not regrossed and capital gains tax is charged.

Task 7.5

1. Capital allowance computation

TWDV at date of disposal 66,000
Sale proceeds 70,000
Balancing charge 4,000
Total capital allowances claimed 44,000
Balancing charge (4,000)
Net position 40,000

2. CGT

Sale proceeds 70,000
Base cost (110,000)
Loss on disposal 40,000
Less allowances granted (40,000)
Allowable loss Nil

Task 7.6

1994/95: The company re-invested the full insurance proceeds in the building ⇒ no chargeable gain is realised.

2018
Sale proceeds 100,000
Less: Cost of acquisition
March’92 €60,000 × 1.406 84,360
Dec’94 enhancement expenditure 20,000
Less: compensation (20,000) 84,360
Gain 15,640

Re-grossed for inclusion in CT computation €41,290

p19

Task 7.7

1. Destruction of factory 1994/95: disposal at no gain/no loss. The factory is deemed to have been disposed of for consideration of €150,000 thus giving rise to a no gain/no loss.

2. The CGT base cost of the replacement factory is reduced by the excess of:

a) The compensation received - €180,000 over

b) The amount of deemed proceeds in 1994/95 - €150,000 i.e. €30,000

3. Sale of factory 2018

Sale proceeds 400,000
Less: cost of acquisition
July’94 cost 220,000
Less: excess 30,000
190,000 × 1.309 = 248,710
Gain 151,290

Re-grossed for inclusion in CT computation €399,406

p19

Task 7.8

1. Disposal of factory in 1994/95

Sales proceeds 180,000
Less: cost of acquisition
July’91 €150,000 × 1.075 161,250
Total gain 18,750
Proceeds not reinvested = portion of gain
Chargeable to corporation tax immediately 5,000
In this year the gain is not adjusted as both CT and CGT was 40%.
Deferred gain 13,750
2. Disposal of factory in 2018
Sale proceeds 400,000
Less: cost of acquisition
July’95 cost 175,000
Less: deferred gain (above) (13,750)
161,250 × 1.277 = 205,916
Gain 194,084

Re-grossed for inclusion in CT computation €512,382

p19