Unpaid present entitlements have long been one of the most misunderstood areas of Division 7A.
For business owners, accountants and tax advisers, the treatment of UPEs can affect private company tax risk, trust distributions and compliance exposure. The decision in Commissioner of Taxation v Bendel is central to the discussion, particularly for advisers dealing with UPEs, trusts and private company tax issues.
In Part 2 of this Explain That series on Division 7A, the discussion turns to tax risk, unpaid present entitlements and what the Bendel decision means for business owners and advisers.
The discussion covers:
- what UPEs really are and why they have been misunderstood;
- what the Bendel decision changes;
- what the Bendel decision does not change;
- why advisers should not assume clients are “home and hosed”;
- Subdivision EA risks and why they still need to be considered;
- what business owners, accountants and tax advisers should do next;
- whether legislative reform may be coming; and
- what advisers should watch for when advising clients with private companies, trusts and unpaid present entitlements.
Following Part 1, which focused on common Division 7A tax traps involving private companies, company loans, deemed dividends and use of company assets, this episode looks more closely at UPEs and the tax risks that remain after Bendel.
A practical discussion for business owners, accountants and tax advisers dealing with private companies, trusts, unpaid present entitlements, Division 7A compliance or ATO risk.
For advice on Division 7A, unpaid present entitlements, private company tax issues or trust-related tax risk, contact Velocity Legal’s Tax team.