|
Publications
and Press Releases : Advance
Ruling Cases : Advance Ruling Case No. 28
Advance Ruling Case No. 28
1. The provisions of the Ordinance
| |
This ruling applies
in respect of sections 14(1), 16(1), 16(1)(ga), 16F(1),
16G(1), 18F(1), 33A(1), 34(1), 34(2), 39B(1) and 39B(2)
of the Ordinance. |
|
|
2. Background
| (a) |
X and Y are related companies dealing
with each other on an arm's length basis. X is a manufacturer
and Y is a distributor. |
| (b) |
Y is X's sole customer and purchases all
of X's production under a long term contract. |
| (c)
| Both companies consider the long-term contract
is only a contract for Y's purchase of X's production.
Under the current accounting standards, Y's purchases
are a deductible expense and X is assessable on its sales
income. |
| (d)
|
Manufacturing assets owned
by X are recorded in its books. X claims the depreciation
allowances and other capital expenditure deductions
allowable under the Ordinance. |
| (e) |
The long-term contract does not contain
any option or provision for the purchase by, or transfer
to, Y of X's fixed assets. The companies have no intention
to transfer the substantive ownership of the fixed assets
from X to Y and X will remain the legal owner of the
assets. |
| (f)
| Notwithstanding the accounting treatment
dictated by HKFRS-Int 4 and HKAS 17, X and Y have never
had any intention to regard X's fixed assets as being
under finance leases to Y. |
3. The arrangement
| (a)
|
HKFRS-Int 4 has been issued
by the Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants
and is effective for accounting periods beginning on or
after 1 January 2006. It provides guidance for determining
whether a transaction (or a series of related transactions)
which do not take the legal form of a lease but conveys
a right to use an asset in return for a payment or series
of payments are, or contain, leases that should be accounted
for in accordance with HKAS 17. HKFRS-Int 4 also provides
guidelines on how payments made for such leases should
be separated from payments for other elements contained
within the arrangement. |
| (b) |
"Take-or-pay" contracts
fall within the scope of HKFRS-Int 4. "Take-or-pay"
contracts are defined as contracts where the purchaser
takes all, or substantially all, of the output or other
utility of the underlying asset. X and Y have determined
that their long-term contract contains leases with service
elements and is subject to HKAS 17. |
| (c)
| The revised accounting standard
will result in the long-term contract being treated as
a lease by Y of X's fixed assets. For accounting
purposes - |
|
| i. |
Ownership of the assets and
the claimant of depreciation will become Y, not X; |
|
| ii. |
There will not be any changes
in the long-term contract nor any sale or transfer of
manufacturing assets from X to Y. Legal ownership of all
manufacturing fixed assets will remain with X; |
|
| iii. |
The long-term contract will,
from a legal perspective, remain an agreement between
X and Y for the sale and purchase of production. |
| (d)
| Under HKAS 17, the lease and
the service elements are accounted for separately, as
follows - |
|
| i. |
Lease element - evaluated to
determine whether they are finance or operating leases.
Due to the unspecified tenure of the long-term contract,
the lease of the manufacturing plant and associated assets
is a finance lease under HKAS 17, |
|
| ii. |
Service element - cost for
services such as fuel, insurance, maintenance and other
general administrative costs; |
| (e)
| Under finance lease accounting
- |
|
| i. |
Y will be regarded as a lessee
and manufacturing fixed assets previously recorded in
X's accounts will be accounted for as Y's fixed assets
under a finance lease, |
|
| ii. |
New production facilities still
under construction will be held in X's books. Upon commissioning,
they will be de-recognised in X's books and recognised
as assets under finance leases in Y's accounts, |
|
| iii. |
Y will allocate the price paid
to X under the long term contract to - |
|
| |
(A) |
the minimum lease payment for the finance
lease, which will then be further allocated between the
reduction of the finance lease obligation in the balance
sheet and finance charges charged to the profit and loss
account; and |
|
| |
(B) |
service/lease rental payments, which will
be charged to the profit and loss account, |
|
| iv. |
X will become the lessor of
the manufacturing assets. Operational fixed assets hitherto
recorded in its books will be de-recognised and corresponding
finance lease receivables recognised in the balance sheet, |
|
| v. |
X will allocate the price received
under the long term contract to - |
|
| |
(A) |
the minimum lease payment for the finance
lease, which is then further allocated between the reduction
of the finance lease receivables in the balance sheet
and finance lease income in the profit and loss account,
and |
|
| |
(B) |
other service/lease rental elements, which
will be recognised as income in the profit and loss account. |
4. The ruling
| (a)
|
The legal form of a transaction
determines its treatment for the purposes of the Ordinance.
If the application of an accounting standard or interpretation
is inconsistent with the form of a transaction, the form
of the transaction will prevail. |
| (b) |
Sums received by X from the
sale of its production pursuant to the long-term contract
will be subject to profits tax under section 14(1). |
| (c)
| X, in respect of machinery,
plant and buildings used by it in producing products for
sale to Y under the long term contract, will continue
to be, pursuant to - |
|
| i. |
sections 34(1), 34(2) and 18F(1)
of the Ordinance, eligible to claim initial and annual
allowances in respect of capital expenditure incurred
by it on the construction of industrial buildings and
structures, |
|
| ii. |
sections 33A(1) and 18F(1) of the Ordinance,
eligible to claim annual allowances in respect of capital
expenditure incurred by it on the construction of commercial
buildings and structures, |
|
| iii. |
sections 39B(1), 39B(2) and 18F(1) of the
Ordinance, eligible to claim initial and annual allowances
in respect of capital expenditure incurred by it on machinery
and plant, |
|
| iv. |
sections 16F(1) and 16(1)(ga) of the Ordinance,
eligible to claim deductions in respect of capital expenditure
incurred by it on the renovation or refurbishment of buildings
and structures (other than domestic buildings and structures),
|
|
| v. |
sections 16G(1) and 16(1)(ga) of the Ordinance,
eligible to claim deductions in respect of capital expenditure
incurred by it on prescribed fixed assets. |
| (d)
| Y will - |
|
| i. |
pursuant to section 16(1) of the Ordinance,
be entitled to a deduction for the cost of the production
purchased from X under the long term contract; |
|
| ii. |
not be eligible to claim deductions or
allowances, as the case may be, under sections 16(1)(ga),
16F(1), 16G(1), 18F(1), 33A(1), 34(1), 34(2), 39B(1) and
39B(2) in respect of any capital expenditure incurred
by X in respect of any prescribed fixed assets, machinery
and plant, industrial buildings and structures and commercial
buildings and structures owned by X, including capital
expenditure incurred on the renovation or refurbishment
of such industrial or commercial buildings or structures. |
5. The period for which the ruling applies
| |
This ruling will apply for the year
of assessment 2006/2007 and all subsequent years of assessment. |
| 6. |
The
material assumptions in respect of a future event or any
other matter made by the Commissioner |
| |
In making this ruling the
Commissioner assumed that - |
| |
(a)
|
Legal ownership of the operational fixed
assets will remain with X; |
| |
(b)
|
The terms of the long-term contract will
remain unaltered. |
7. Date of ruling issued
8. Commentary
| |
The Department's established position,
where a conflict arises between the form of a transaction
and its economic substance, is that for taxation purposes
form will always prevail. This position applies equally
to the application of accounting standards. In any situation
where a disparity of treatment arises between the interpretation
and/or application of an accounting standard and the interpretation
and/or application of the true legal form of a transaction,
the strict legal position and not the economic position
dictated by the relevant accounting standard will prevail. |
| |
|
| |
(This commentary is not a legally
binding statement and it does not form part of the Ruling.)
|
|