So you think your relationship can’t get any worse…

When you think your relationship can’t get any worse, and you’ve given until it hurts, you can then find yourself with a gift duty assessment…

With the Government Tax Policy Work Programme having confirmed that further legislative exemptions from gift duty are under consideration, it is perhaps timely to review relationship property agreements and gift duty, an area where gift duty and filing obligations are often over-looked or misunderstood.

divorce-couple

There is a specific exemption for dispositions pursuant to a relationship property agreement (Estate and Gift Duties Act 1968, 75A (2)).  However, this exemption only applies where the parties share equally in the pool of relationship property.  Further, regardless of the value of any disposition (that is the $12,000 threshold that applies to other gifts does not apply) the parties are required to file a copy of the relationship property agreement (75A (6)).  The parties can file an IR 183 together with the relationship property agreement.  Although good practice, this is not essential. The penalty provisions of the Tax Administration Act 1994 apply for the purposes of s. 75A (6).

What this all means is that if you are the loser in the relationship property divvy up, you have made a gift for gift duty purposes to the extent of half the value of the difference between what you got and what the other party got.  If this difference is less than the gift duty threshold (together with any other gifts you have made) your pain has ended.  However, if the difference is significant, you could have a gift duty liability.

However, where a disposition of property to a spouse, partner or dependent child is made pursuant to a Court order under section 25 of the Property (Relationships) Act 1976, s. 75A (6) does not apply as s. 75A (5) provides that such a disposition pursuant to a Court order is not a gift.

No Responses

Be the first to leave a comment!

Write a Comment

Take a moment to comment and tell us what you think. Some basic HTML is allowed for formatting.

Recent comments

  • Simon G: Both of my parents are in residential care which is being paid for by their residential care loan. In the...
  • Carla Cross: I agree with you entirely. Transparency and certainty are crucial for a self-assessment tax system....
  • Daniel Hunt: It depends on the reason for the shareholding change. What is your reason for changing the shareholding...
  • Viny: Just wondering if we can change shareholding if we are moving to LTC from LAQC or whether this will seen as...
  • Robynne Sutton: My Father is currently being assessed (since May!) Stephen I think you mean “are not limited...
  • Paul: We find the write up, comments, questions and answers very useful. Based on below we have some queries: LAQC...
  • Elizabeth Mitchell: On 4th September, 2011, Daniel Hunt published an article in the Herald on Sunday titled...
  • Sandra: Very nice info. Was looking forward to the reply you had for Anne, but it is sent to her by email. Any...
  • Lynda: My husband and I own a LAQC since 2004 which we are looking at putting on the market in the next few months....
  • Daniel: The Supreme Court has been busy – two Avoidance Judgments in a week (Penny & Hooper & JG...

Poll

In the past 12 months, do you think the amount of IRD investigations being undertaken has?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...