Your client was affected by the recent floods and their insurance company has decided to pay them out. Your clients decided to sell instead of getting the repairs done on their property. They forget that the property would be subject to the Brightline rules. How do you treat the insurance payout?
This will depend on whether the property can be repaired or not.
The insurance proceeds would be treated as consideration received for the loss of the building. This assumes the proceeds related solely to the building. If the building was held on capital account, arguably all the proceeds would be capital in nature and not taxable. The building would be removed from the Fixed Asset Register.
If the building had been depreciated, that depreciation would be recovered as taxable depreciation recovered income. Note that the taxable income is capped at the amount of depreciation claimed, although this will still present a cashflow issue for cash strapped businesses who need to start again.
This would leave the cost base of the land as the tax book value. A future sale could then use that tax book value of the land as a cost base.
There is currently draft legislation containing tax relief for qualifying flood-hit North Island businesses. Proposed tax relief means that if your client has received insurance proceeds for a destroyed business asset, they may be able to access rollover relief that will defer the recognition of this income for tax purposes, provided there is a commitment to rebuild or replace the destroyed buildings or plant. This deferral of tax on the insurance receipt allows time for businesses to rebuild or purchase replacement assets (within a maximum five year period). The concession also recognises that the Government is considering a managed retreat from some locations. Because of that, there is no requirement that the replacement buildings be located in the same region.
Generally, these concessionary rules will mean that instead of calculating depreciation recovered on the loss of the building (or plant), you could adjust the tax book value of the replacement asset. However, a couple of key points:
Your client must be in business. Generally, the IRD does not accept a rental property as being a business.
The asset must be destroyed. This concession does not apply if the asset is repairable.
The rules are not yet signed off.
The key difference is that if the asset is repairable, the cap on depreciation recovered does not apply.
To the extent that the insurance proceeds exceed the cost of repairs, the insurance proceeds need to be deducted from the tax book value of the asset. Where the excess insurance proceeds exceed the tax book value of the asset, that amount is treated as depreciation recovery income. There is no cap on the depreciation recovered – so even if this is more than any depreciation claimed on the building – it is still taxable income.
The reasoning behind this appears to be that if your client received an insurance pay out and used it for the repairs, those repairs would have been tax deductible, and so the insurance payout would have been taxable income. As the building was not rendered useless or marked for demolition, the pay-out wasn’t for the capital loss of that building and so the insurance proceeds wouldn’t be capital proceeds/non-taxable income.
Here is an example of how this could work in real terms. Let’s say that the house/building had a cost base of $173K. The owner was paid out $265K.
This will be the case where no tax concessions for adverse events apply – for example, a fire damaged building. However, there are tax concessions planned for qualifying businesses hit by the 2023 North Island Floods.
The Taxation (Annual Rates for 2023-24, Multinational Tax, and Remedial Matters) Bill also includes a concession for qualifying flood hit North Island taxpayers. New section EZ 84 applies to depreciable assets (remembering buildings are depreciable assets, even if they have a depreciation rate of 0%) that have been damaged by a North Island flooding event but are repairable, and limits depreciation recovery income to the amount of depreciation deductions previously taken. There are also timing rules in new section EZ 87.
This means that if your client qualifies for this relief, the depreciation recovered on damaged assets should be capped at the previous depreciation claimed.
The Government has recently confirmed plans for tax concessions for owners of flood and cyclone-damaged properties that take up buy-out offers. This concession is to ensure that they are not inadvertently caught by the Brightline Rules.
Outside of Government buy-outs we are not aware of any planned concessions for taxable Brightline gains.
If you need further advice, reach out to Angela and her team, they’re happy to help.
*This publication contains generic information only. NZ Tax Desk Ltd is not responsible for any loss sustained by anyone relying on the contents of this publication. We recommend you obtain specific taxation advice for your circumstances.
The post Selling a flood-affected property subject to the Brightline rules appeared first on .