Enquire Now
Fill out the form below and we will get back to you as soon as we can.
Error: Contact form not found.
Error: Contact form not found.
PUBLISHED ARTICLES
Articles associated with Matthew Burgess.
The asset protection strategy often referred to as a ‘gift and loan back’ arrangement (and various iterations of it) has arguably had a chequered history.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 12 April 2024
A trust instrument with a variation power that is considered too narrow to achieve wider objectives can be difficult to vary, warns a legal specialist.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 12 April 2024
In a decision handed down this week, the Federal Court of Australia found that the DG Institute, operated by former solicitor and barrister Dominique Grubisa (pictured), engaged in conduct that was misleading or deceptive and made false representations about an asset protection it promoted as the Vestey Trust or Master Wealth Control Package.
By Miranda Brownlee and Matthew Burgess
Published by Lawyers Weekly, 11 April 2024
In a decision handed down this week, the Federal Court of Australia found that the DG Institute engaged in conduct that was misleading or deceptive and made false representations about an asset protection it promoted as the Vestey Trust or Master Wealth Control Package.
By Miranda Brownlee and Matthew Burgess
Published by Accountants Daily, 11 April 2024
The recent decision in Kirk as trustee of the Property of Smith (a Bankrupt) v Smith [2024] FCA 240 provides a timely reminder of the key rules in relation to the ways in which superannuation benefits that might otherwise be assumed to be protected are in fact at risk on the financial misadventure of the member.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 3 April 2024
A comprehensive power of variation is one of the most important aspects of any trust deed, says a leading legal expert.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 25 March 2024
Previous articles in this Bulletin have considered various aspects of the rules in relation to any role that grants a party the right to change the trustee of a trust (for example see 2022 WTB 39 [458] and 2023 WTB 17 [226]).
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 22 March 2024 (Issue 11) Paragraph [180]
Many – although certainly not all – trust deeds have a role that allows for the unilateral removal of an incumbent trustee, most often referred to as an appointor, however also referred to as a principal, guardian, protector or nominator.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Accountants Daily 22 March 2024
With the increasing incidence of blended and non-traditional families, deciding who is legally designated as a parent is not as cut-and-dried as it once was, warned a leading solicitor.
by Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 15 March 2024
In holistic tax and estate planning, one of the key issues in relation to superannuation entitlements is determining whether a person is financially dependent on another – and therefore entitled to be treated as a death benefit dependant and receive the payment tax free.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 8 March 2024 (Issue 9) Paragraph [149]
SMSF advisers should have a checklist to ensure that digital assets of a deceased are protected including social media, online storage facilities, and digital finance assets, says a leading legal specialist.
By Matthew Burgess
SMSF Adviser, 27 February 2024
One common strategy to achieve appropriate restructuring of corporate groups to provide flexibility and manage asset protection risks is to ‘interpose’ a holding company, by inserting a company between the existing shareholders and the original company.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 23 February 2024 (Issue 7) Paragraph [101]
The recent Private Binding Ruling 1052187560814 featured in this publication is one of several Tax Office publications confirming its view of what is required to establish financial dependency.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 13 February 2024
The belief that discretionary trusts are being used as a tax haven is “monolithic thinking”, says a top legal specialist.
Matthew Burgess, director of View Legal, told SMSF Adviser that the narrative from the government that only the wealthy use trusts to avoid paying higher tax is misinformed and egregious.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 9 February 2024
Arguably a near certainty for 2024 for holistic tax and estate planning advisers is ever increasing work flows.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 2 February 2024 (Issue 4) Paragraph [50]
With inconsistent EPOA rules across different states likely to remain an issue for some time, having EPOAs in more than one jurisdiction is still the safest option for some clients.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Accounting Times, 25 January 2024
To avoid confusion and potential litigation in regards to an Enduring Power of Attorney, multiple EPoAs should be produced for the different jurisdictions a person may live or have assets in, says an SMSF legal expert.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 25 January 2024
As is the case in many areas of holistic estate planning, perhaps the only certainty for specialist self managed superannuation fund (SMSF) advisers in 2024 is that there will be no slow down in work.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 25 January 2024
Testamentary trusts can refer to any arrangement set out under a will where the intended beneficiaries are not absolutely and immediately presently entitled, says a specialist SMSF legal expert.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 2 January 2024
In light of ongoing changes to the taxation regime and the expanding wealth of Australia’s ageing population, there has for many years been a growing need for holistic estate planning to utilise appropriate tax structuring.
By Matthew Burgess, CTA, Director, View Legal
Published by Taxation in Australia, December 2023 / January 2024 Volume 58(6) 325–332
[I]t is important to note that if a trust deed does not have any, or any adequate, power of variation a trustee may apply to the court to implement changes.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 20 December 2023 (Issue 52) Paragraph [931]
Lessons from cases involving discretionary trusts can be instructive for all advisers, including those in the SMSF space, says a top legal specialist.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 18 December 2023
Death benefits have to be paid to the death benefit dependent by the transfer of ownership of assets out of the SMSF, and not just by a journal entry, warns a legal specialist.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 7 December 2023
The trustee of any form of trust … will generally have a right of indemnity against the assets of the trust.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 10 November 2023 (Issue 46) Paragraph [791]
The evolving interpretation of the rules in relation to so-called ‘fast death tax’ has continued with a further Tax Office private binding ruling.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 24 November 2023 (Issue 48) Paragraph [836]
A recent private binding ruling serves as a stark reminder of complexities that can arise when estate planning is overlooked and an SMSF member loses capacity, according to legal expert Matthew Burgess.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 28 November 2023
A new private binding ruling from the ATO has highlighted the evolving nature of the rules around the “fast death tax”, says a leading legal specialist.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 10 November 2023
The trustee of any form of trust (including self managed superannuation funds and limited recourse borrowing arrangements) will generally have a right of indemnity against the assets of the trust.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Accounting Times, 8 November 2023
A recent legal case emphasises the importance of having witnesses present at the signing of a will or a binding death benefit nomination, says a specialist legal adviser.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 8 November 2023
Personal assets of individual trustees in a trust could be exposed if indemnity is not available, warns a legal expert. Matthew Burgess, director of View Legal, said to avoid this it’s good practice to set up a trust as a company and use a special-purpose vehicle with nominal assets.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 2 November 2023
Even if an individual satisfies all the criteria needed to get a court-ordered will, the final decision is at the discretion of a court as to whether it will approve the application, says a leading superannuation solicitor.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 16 October 2023
A recent court case has emphasised the importance of caution that SMSFs must take when lending money and adhering to all the regulations of the SIS Act, says a legal expert.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 29 September 2023
Unless there is a power to vary included in the terms of a testamentary trust, the only way to change its terms is by way of a court application warned a legal superannuation expert.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 21 September 2023
When preparing for the incapacity of an SMSF trustee, practitioners must be aware of the legislative requirements of each state and territory where the fund may hold assets or interests.
By Todd Wills and Matthew Burgess
Published by Self Managed Super, 5 September 2023
One of the most responsible decisions for a trustee to make if a trust deed cannot be found is to wind up the trust, but it can also trigger a range of tax and stamp duty consequences, says an SMSF legal expert.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 1 September 2023
…Appointing an enduring power of attorney (EPOA) before a potential incapacity event is crucial for SMSF trustees as the process of obtaining authorisation afterwards may entail additional administrative costs and processes.
By Todd Wills and Matthew Burgess
Published by Self Managed Super, 22 August 2023
A recent court decision provides further guidance about the operation of the NALI rules in relation to SMSFs investing via unit trusts.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Accounting Times, 18 August 2023
Although it is usually only possible for death benefits to be paid to a member’s dependants or legal personal representative, there is a wide class of potential recipients set out under the superannuation regulations, says a top legal expert.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 16 August 2023
A key planning issue for self managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) that have invested in a related unit trust is whether any income derived via the structure is in fact ‘non-arm’s length income’ (NALI)…
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 11 August 2023 (Issue 33) Paragraph [551]
…Matthew Burgess, director of View Legal, said in light of fundamental changes to the taxation regime and the expanding wealth of Australia’s aging population, there is a growing need for estate planning to utilise appropriate structuring.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 9 August 2023
The single greatest asset in the SMSF sector is human capital despite the increasing use of technology, says a leading legal expert.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 1 August 2023
Artificial intelligence (AI) has been present in the SMSF and financial advice sectors for a longer time than commonly acknowledged and those worried about its impact should approach its use with a balanced view…
By Todd Wills and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 28 July 2023
The ‘know your client’ rule can become instrumental in lost trust deeds if they end up before the courts, a legal expert says, as decisions continue to evolve around the ever-increasing problem.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 13 July 2023
A lawyer specialising in superannuation has emphasised the need for advisers to ensure their SMSF clients look beyond the survival of one member over another in order to formulate an effective estate planning strategy.
By Darin Tyson-Chan
Published by SMSF Adviser, 29 June 2023
Lost trust deeds are becoming a more frequent issue for SMSFs and the legal ramifications are no longer set by precedent, warns a legal expert.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 27 June 2023
The case law in relation to lost trust deeds appears to be growing at an exponential rate in recent years.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 2 June 2023 (Issue 23) Paragraph [341]
It may not be romantic, but a leading SMSF legal specialist says putting in place a Binding Financial Agreement when drawing up an SMSF makes economic sense and could save court action and legal fees in the long-run.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 2 June 2023
The case law in relation to lost trust deeds appears to be growing at an exponential rate in recent years.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Accounting Times, 30 May 2023
Advisers need to adhere to the KYC (Know Your Client) mantra in light of a rash of court cases in relation to lost trust.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 30 May 2023
Divorce has many complex issues for SMSFs but one of those is becoming even more complicated, according to a leading legal specialist.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 25 May 2023
SMSF Trustees need to keep separate bank accounts for the fund and personal use said a leading legal adviser.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 11 May 2023
The importance of good quality documents, especially in regard to BDBN, was highlighted last week in a Queensland Supreme Court decision.
By Keeli Cambourne and Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 9 May 2023
A recent SMSF Adviser article mentioned the decision in Clayton v Clayton [2023] NSWSC 399 in the context of what amounts to a de facto relationship.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 4 May 2023
As explored in other articles in this Bulletin (for example, see 2022 WTB 39 [458]), generally from a trust law perspective, it is possible for the appointor or principal provisions of a trust deed to be amended.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 28 April 2023 (Issue 17) Paragraph [226]
The question of whether two (or more) people are in a de facto relationship is critical for superannuation purposes, including with reference to the ability to have access to entitlements on a relationship breakdown or death. However, situations that are accepted as evidencing the existence of a de facto relationship continue to evolve.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 26 April 2023
Advancements in automation and generative AI could blur the lines around the provision of legal advice and create dangers for accountants, [Matthew Burgess] warns.
By Miranda Brownlee
Published by Accounting Times, 13 April 2023
Machine learning and AI have been at the heart of many changes in the legal industry… ChatGPT and analogous platforms … will have a significant impact on all advisers and in turn their clients.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 13 April 2023
Arguably one of the most critical duties of a trustee of any trust is to know the terms of a trust deed and keep the original, and at least before November 2021, wet (that is, not electronically) signed trust instrument safe and secure.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 24 March (Issue 12) Paragraph [150]
… Arguably, one of the biggest impacts of Alan Bond’s financial demise in the early 1990s relates to superannuation.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 21 March 2023
Previous articles in this Bulletin have considered what seems to be an increasing trend in relation to court decisions concerning lost trust deeds…
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 10 March (Issue 10) Paragraph [118]
… one of the key trustee duties of any form of trust is to know the terms of the trust deed and keep the original wet (ie not electronically) signed trust instrument safe and secure.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 3 March 2023
A recent case handed down by the Supreme Court of Victoria offers some important lessons on lost SMSF trust deeds.
By Miranda Brownlee
Published by SMSF Adviser, 28 February 2023
In 2023, it appears a further certainty is the fascination with government and the revenue alike to change the rules in relation to superannuation.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 24 February (Issue 8) Paragraph [85]
As ChatGPT continues to trend globally, more legal professionals are exploring how the platform… But Lawyers Weekly can reveal that only a small number of lawyers actually trust the tech fully.
By Lauren Croft
Published by Lawyers Weekly, 23 February 2023
The time-based billing model has come under significant scrutiny in recent years, and now, with the emergence of technologies like ChatGPT, billables are at further risk.
By Jerome Doraisamy
Published by Lawyers Weekly, 19 February 2023
So called ‘fast death’ tax arises where superannuation benefits that could otherwise be withdrawn tax free…remain in the fund at the date of death of the member and are then subject to tax…
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 15 February 2023
SMSF professionals that choose to avoid dealing with incapacity may be exposing themselves to potential litigation risk, a specialist lawyer has warned.
By Miranda Brownlee
Published by SMSF Adviser, 2 February 2023
A previous article in this Bulletin (reported at 2022 WTB 25 [489]) explored recent developments in relation to the asset protection strategy often referred to as a ‘gift and loan back’ arrangement.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 13 January 2023 (Issue 2) Paragraph [13]
The gift and loan back arrangement (and various iterations of it) has arguably had a chequered history, and often seen branding developed to conveniently label the steps involved…
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 12 January 2023
The ability of the Family Court to divide the assets owned personally by a couple – including via superannuation – on a relationship breakdown is largely without question.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 6 January 2023 (Issue 1) Paragraph [2]
The ability of the Family Court to divide the assets owned personally by a couple – including via superannuation – on a relationship breakdown is largely without question.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 19 December 2022
A previous article in this Bulletin (reported at 2021 WTB 24 [521]) explored what was arguably a quintessential example of a trust structure going horribly wrong…
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 11 November 2022 (Issue 47) Paragraph [910]
As explored in other articles in SMSF adviser, complying with trust law requirements on establishment of an SMSF is critical.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 10 November 2022
Understanding holistic tax and estate planning is critical for all tax advisers.
By Matthew Burgess, CTA, Director, View Legal
Published by Taxation in Australia, November 2022 Volume 57(5), 271
In holistic estate planning it is invariably the case that tax awareness has a critical role to play.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 14 October 2022 (Issue 42) Paragraph [808]
As explored in other articles in this Bulletin, generally from a trust law perspective, it is possible for the appointor or principal provisions of a trust deed to be amended.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 23 September 2022 (Issue 39) Paragraph [758]
As explored in other articles in SMSF adviser, generally from a trust law perspective, it is possible for the appointor or principal provisions of a trust deed to be amended.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 23 September 2022
Advisers and their clients have been warned on the importance of ensuring that children in an SMSF appoint an enduring power of attorney once they turn 18.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 9 August 2022
The ability of a court to review, and potentially unwind, a decision of a trustee is in many respects predicated on the trust adviser’s mantra profiled often in this Bulletin, namely: ‘read the deed’.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 5 August 2022 (Issue 32) Paragraph [608]
As featured in this publication recently, the Victorian Court of Appeal has ordered the removal of a trustee from a family trust in an appeal from a previous decision, namely the case of Owies v JJE Nominees Pty Ltd [2022] VSCA 142.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 1 August 2022
With every state having different laws and requirements regarding enduring power of attorneys, SMSF clients living on state borders may want to consider having two, says a specialist lawyer.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 1 August 2022
Where asset protection strategies are problematic due to related tax and stamp duty asset transfer costs, a relatively well known approach is to implement a “gift and loan back” arrangement.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 17 June 2022 (Issue 25) Paragraph [490]
For many years there was a level of debate about whether self managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) were permitted to offer binding death benefit nominations (BDBNs) and if so, whether any such BDBN would automatically lapse after 3 years.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 17 June 2022
Self-managed super fund trustees are increasingly becoming targets of legal claims from estranged children who claim they have been unfairly excluded from an inheritance, say lawyers.
By Duncan Hughes
Published by Australian Financial Review, 5 June 2022
In the estate planning arena there are many debatably unique outcomes that have developed from the interplay of tax legislation and case law over time.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 3 June 2022 (Issue 23) Paragraph [459]
It is generally accepted by specialist advisers that superannuation death benefits are not an estate asset; despite the fact that such benefits may be paid to a legal personal representative (LPR) for distribution under a will.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 2 June 2022
In light of the recent Benz v Armstrong decision, some SMSFs may need to consider a binding death benefit nomination that is non-lapsing and “double entrenched” in the trust deed, says a specialist lawyer.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 24 May 2022
The ‘notional estate’ rules that apply in New South Wales, provide that in certain circumstances assets or estates that have a connection to New South Wales, that are not owned personally by a deceased, can still be subject to attack when the estate itself is challenged.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 20 May 2022
The trust adviser’s go to mantra of ‘read the deed’ is ultimately subject to the nuances of interpretations handed down by the courts from time to time.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 13 May 2022 (Issue 20) Paragraph [411]
The recent discretionary trust related case of Cihan v Cihan [2022] NSWSC 538 appears to confirm that appointors (including of SMSFs) may not owe any fiduciary duties.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 10 May 2022
A recent decision involving a discretionary trust appears to confirm that appointors may not owe any fiduciary duties, according to a law firm.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 10 May 2022
While SMSF wills can be a useful strategy for some clients, there are some important risks to consider with deed updates, a specialist law firm has warned.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 4 May 2022
Clients appointing an enduring power of attorney should make the commencement date immediate to avoid unnecessary debate around when the document is legally effective, said a specialist lawyer.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 3 May 2022
Advisers have been reminded on the importance of reading the deed before implementing any death benefit nominations, particularly those that are binding.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 27 April 2022
Generally, there is a 4 year limit on the ability of a trustee in bankruptcy to clawback assets formerly owned by a bankrupt.
There is however no time limit where the main purpose in making an asset transfer is shown to be to prevent the property from being attacked by a trustee in bankruptcy.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 14 April 2022 (Issue 16) Paragraph [351]
The High Court has this week delivered the much anticipated decision in relation to trust disclaimers in the case of FCT v Carter [2022] HCA 10.
In a sentence, the High Court has unanimously allowed the ATO’s appeal and confirmed that a beneficiary’s present entitlement under s 97(1) of the ITAA 1936 must be determined immediately prior to the end of an income year.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 8 April 2022 (Issue 15) Paragraph [322]
The Tax Office has, arguably understandably, had ongoing attempts to narrow the range of information that taxpayers can keep as private and confidential between themselves and their advisers – including in relation to strategies involving SMSFs.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 30 March 2022
For self managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) the issues in relation to member removal can be particularly complex, due to the legislative requirement for all trustees (or directors of a corporate trustee) to be members, and vice versa.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 10 March 2022
Backdating legal documents is never permissible, regardless of the phrase used to describe the approach (eg “retro dating”, “pre-dating”, “intended date”).
Indeed in most professions, involvement in backdating can result in an action for professional misconduct. Similarly, charges of fraud may also be imposed on those involved.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 18 February 2022 (Issue 7) Paragraph [131]
Appropriate tax and estate planning strategies will remain critical in 2022 in light of ongoing changes to the taxation regime, expected further amendments to fund COVID-19 government spending and the massive intergenerational wealth transfer of Australia’s “baby boomer” population.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Taxation in Australia, February 2022 Volume 56(7)
The AAT has affirmed a decision to impose stamp duty on a property involving an SMSF, which provides important lessons on accessing duty relief.
Generally, there are stamp duty exemptions in each state for transfers between individual family members of farming properties (with some iterations for transfers involving related entities, for example in New South Wales a transfer from a company to a person can be exempt from duty).
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 29 January 2022
The AAT has recently affirmed the decision to impose stamp duty on a property involving an SMSF, providing important details on different implications and legal issues involved that can impact the access to duty relief.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 25 January 2022
Many previous articles in this Bulletin have explored the fact that, particularly in relation to trusts, details – and effective legal documentation – matter.
In turn, without appropriately drafted, legally enforceable documentation, often the only remedy will be court proceedings; with the inevitable costs and (often) unwanted attention that then result.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 17 December 2021 (Issue 51) Paragraph [1222]
The decision in Mantovani v Vanta Pty Ltd (No 2) [2021] VSC 771 (“Vanta”) was discussed in the article at 2021 WTB 49 [1171].
While not the focus of the case, the related revenue consequences that likely flow from similar situations of lost trust deeds creating a resulting trust in favour of the settlor are significant.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 10 December 2021 (Issue 50) Paragraph [1201]
The decision of Frigger v Trenfield provides some important reminders for SMSF trustees and their advisers on record keeping and ensuring funds stay compliant.
The judgement in the decision of Frigger v Trenfield (No 10) [2021] FCA 1500 runs to over 700 paragraphs, and is only one of a series of cases involving the same parties.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 10 December 2021
A decision by the Federal Court of Australia relating to bankruptcy and superannuation assets provides some important lessons for SMSFs on record keeping and compliance, said an SMSF lawyer.
The case, Frigger v Trenfield (No 10) [2021] FCA 1500, is one of a series of cases involving the same parties and examines a number of issues.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 7 December 2021
A recent case has highlighted the importance of ensuring that original trust deeds are kept securely, and also read and complied with.
An article in SMSF Adviser from July 2021 explored the decision in Jowill Nominees Pty Ltd v Cooper [2021] SASC 76 and the issues a court will generally consider where a trust deed has been lost.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 4 December 2021
The decision in Jowill Nominees Pty Ltd v Cooper [2021] SASC 76 (“Cooper”) discussed by the author in an earlier article (see 2021 WTB 28 [626]) underlined the importance of one of the key trustee duties of any form of trust. That is, the duty of a trustee to know the terms of the trust deed and keep the original, and at least before November 2021, wet (not electronically) signed trust instrument safe and secure.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 3 December 2021 (Issue 49) Paragraph [1171]
The meaning of the term “absolutely entitled” for CGT purposes continues to be the subject of significant contention and debate. This is perhaps best evidenced by the ongoing failure of the ATO to issue a final version of Taxation Ruling TR 2004/D25 (2004 is not a typo!).
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 12 November 2021 (Issue 43) Paragraph [1105]
At the heart of the self-managed superannuation fund (SMSF) regime is whether the Commissioner will issue a Notice of Compliance.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 5 November 2021 (Issue 45) Paragraph [1088]
From an asset protection perspective, most specialist advisers recommend that an SMSF intending to invest in real property (ignoring any borrowing arrangements) should do so via a unit trust.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 11 November 2021
At the heart of the self-managed superannuation fund (SMSF) regime is whether the Commissioner will issue a Notice of Compliance.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 30 October 2021
The recent, high-profile, decision in Cardaci v Filippo PrimoCardaci as executor of the estate of Marco Antonio Cardaci [No 5] [2021] WASC 331 provides further context in relation to a line of cases focused on the need to “read the deed”, whenever considering the extent of variation powers of a trust. The issues in this regard are particularly stark when considering variations that potentially impact on the ultimate control of a trust.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 15 October 2021 (Issue 42) Paragraph [996]
One of the key benefits, of self-managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) that are well managed and have access to ongoing specialist advice, is the level of understanding members enjoy.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 14 October 2021
One of the key trust related areas that continues to be subject to court attention is the ability of beneficiaries to access the records of a discretionary trust.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 8 October 2021 (Issue 41) Paragraph [977]
One of the key trust-related areas that continues to be subject to court attention is the ability of beneficiaries to access the records of a discretionary trust.
The rules in this area are a stark reminder of one of the reasons that the SMSF legislation mandates that all members of a fund are trustees (or directors of the corporate trustee).
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 1 October 2021
The High Court’s decision in Fischer v Nemeske Pty Ltd [2016] HCA 11 is one of the most important trust- related cases in recent years, given the fundamentally critical role that loan accounts can play in a range of situations, not least of which, tax and estate planning.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 10 September 2021 (Issue 37) Paragraph [882]
A previous article in this Bulletin (reported at 2021 WTB 17 [340]) explored recent developments in the approach of the family court in relation to discretionary trusts.
The ability of the Family Court to attack assets held via a discretionary trust has been in little doubt, at least since the decision in Kennon & Spry [2008] HCA 56 (Spry).
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 3 September 2021 (Issue 36) Paragraph [847]
The ability of the Family Court to attack assets held via a discretionary trust has been in little doubt, at least since the decision in Kennon & Spry [2008] HCA 56 (Spry).
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 31 August 2021
A previous article of mine in this Bulletin (see ‘Changing trustees of trusts – Simple in theory … not so simple in practice’, at 2017 WTB 6 [160]) explored some of the fundamental issues to be aware of with the ‘simple’ concept of changing the trustee of a trust.
Last year’s decision in Advanced Holdings Pty Limited as trustee for The Demian Trust v FCT [2020] FCA 1479 provided a stark example of a range of issues, centred on a purported change of trustee.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 13 August 2021 (Issue 33 Paragraph [757])
In a range of respects, binding death benefit nominations (BDBNs) are often seen as analogous to a key aspect of any holistic estate plan, namely an SMSF member’s personal will. Similarly, some advisers recommend a “hardwired” BDBN, which, depending on the exact mechanics, is marketed as an “SMSF will”.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 10 August 2021
While enduring powers of attorney (EPA) are generally a key component of a holistic estate plan, it is critical to remember that special rules apply in relation to incapacity and self-managed superannuation funds (SMSF).
As SMSF specialists know, a superannuation fund is an SMSF where all members of the fund are trustees or directors of a corporate trustee – see sections 17A(1) and (2) of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 29 July 2021
In a previous article in this Bulletin (reported at 2021 WTB 23 [502]), I considered an (argued) requirement for tax equalisation under a will; reiterating the conclusion that many specialist estate planning advisers argue that these style of clauses are rarely appropriate.
The decision in Craven v Bradley [2021] VSC 344 further highlights the difficulties that can arise in this area, particularly where adjustments are required for estimated CGT consequences.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 23 July 2021 (Issue 30) Paragraph [672]
One of the key trustee duties of any form of trust is to know the terms of the trust deed and keep the original wet (not electronically!) signed trust instrument safe and secure. This duty is very difficult to discharge however if the trust deed is lost.
The case of Jowill Nominees Pty Ltd v Cooper [2021] SASC 76 (“Jowill”) provides a recent insight into the issues a court will consider where a trust deed has been lost.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 9 July 2021 (Issue 28) Paragraph [626]
One of the key trustee duties of any form of trust is to know the terms of the trust deed and keep the original wet (not electronically!) signed trust instrument safe and secure. This duty is very difficult to discharge however if the trust deed is lost.
The case of Jowill Nominees Pty Ltd v Cooper [2021] SASC 76 (“Jowill”) provides a recent insight into the issues a court will consider where a trust deed has been lost.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 2 July 2021
Many previous articles in WTB have featured explorations of how trust law can often be an example of the adage of Murphy’s Law, ie “anything that can go wrong will go wrong”.
The case Re McGowan & Valentini Trusts [2021] VSC 154 is arguably a quintessential example of a trust structure going horribly wrong.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 11 June 2021 (Issue 24) Paragraph [521]
Many tax and estate planning specialists argue tax equalisation provisions in wills are rarely appropriate.
The case of Todd v Todd & Ors [2021] SASC 36 further reinforces a number of the issues in this regard.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 4 June 2021 (Issue 23) Paragraph [502]
Many tax and estate planning specialists argue that tax equalisation provisions in wills generally, and particularly in relation to superannuation death benefit payments, are rarely appropriate.
The case of Todd v Todd & Ors [2021] SASC 36 further reinforces a number of the issues in this regard.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 26 May 2021
The recent decision by ASIC to ban a financial adviser for 8 years is a timely reminder of the strict nature of the rules in relation to witnessing legal documents such as binding death benefit nominations BDBNs).
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 21 May 2021 (Issue 21) Paragraph [457]
The recent decision by ASIC to ban a financial adviser for eight years is a timely reminder of the strict nature of the rules in relation to witnessing legal documents such as binding death benefit nominations (BDBNs).
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 11 May 2021
The decision in Hill v Zuda Pty Ltd [2021] WASCA 59, reported at para [387] of this Bulletin, further reinforces the oft-cited mantra in relation to all trusts – and particularly self-managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) – to: Read the Deed. I know (and readers know!) that I harp on about Read the Deed, but the mantra, if observed, really does repay itself many times over.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 7 May 2021 (Issue 18) Paragraph [363]
In theory, decisions from the UK are not necessarily of utility in Australia. In practice, however, UK cases can give insights as to the likely position in Australia, and the UK decision in MWB Business Exchange Centres Limited v Rock Advertising Limited [2019] AC 119 is a useful example how even what would otherwise be seen as abundantly obvious, is not necessarily so.
A timely reminder of this fact was made last week in the decision in Martin v Dee-Tech Pty Ltd [2021] NSWSC 434.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 3 May 2021
Many previous articles in WTB have explored how trusts are considered in family law matters.
The decision in Balken & Vyner [2020] FamCA 955 provides another example of the approach the courts take in relation to family trusts.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 30 April 2021 (Issue 17) Paragraph [340]
The decision in Hill v Zuda Pty Ltd [2021] WASCA 59 further reinforces the often-cited mantra in relation to all trusts — and particularly self-managed superannuation funds (SMSFs): read the deed.
In this case, the court confirmed that section 59 of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 and regulation 6.17A of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Regulations 1994 (SISR) do not apply to SMSFs.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 28 April 2021
One of the main advantages of a testamentary trust (“TT”) set up under someone’s will is that the terms can be drafted such that it complies with the requirements set out in s 102AG(2)(a)(i) of the ITAA 1936.
This means the income allocated to minor children each year is not subject to the same tax rates as if it were a normal family discretionary trust established during a person’s lifetime (where the first $700 distributed to a child is tax-free, but then any further income is taxed at the highest rate which could be up to 66%).
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 12 March 2021 (Issue 10) Paragraph [180]
One of the main advantages of a testamentary trust (TT) set up under someone’s will is that the terms can be drafted such that they comply with the requirements set out in s 102AG(2)(a)(i) of the ITAA 1936
By Matthew Burgess
Published by SMSF Adviser, 8 March 2021
In light of ongoing changes to the taxation regime and the expanding wealth of Australia’s ageing population, there has for many years been a growing need for estate planning to utilise appropriate structuring.
This time last year, an article in this journal argued that 2018 had seen more changes in key estate planning areas in that calendar year than in each of the previous 30 years combined — and yet, 2019 had seen somewhat of a stagnation in relation to a number of key issues.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Taxation in Australia, February 2021 Volume 55(7)
With an ageing population, the issues that arise in relation to ensuring appropriate authority is created for people to act under a power of attorney seem to be ever increasing.
Like many laws, the power of attorney legislation is frustratingly inconsistent, with different acts applying in each Australian state.
In theory, there is also legislation requiring each jurisdiction to recognise the documentation prepared in each of the states. In practice, however, it is often extremely difficult to normally expect to see what is in fact legally binding.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 20 November 2020 (Issue 47)
Paragraph [1239]
Arguably, the highest profile decision in relation to trusts and asset protection in recent years has been the decision in Richstar (that is – Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Carey (No 6) (2006) 153 FCR 509).
It is generally accepted that Richstar is the high watermark in relation to how the assets of a trust may be exposed in the context of a bankruptcy related decision.
What then is the position for trust advisers in relation to Richstar?
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 13 November 2020 (Issue 46)
Paragraph [1211]
An important tax and estate planning issue to understand is the way in which assets are owned jointly.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 4 September 2020 (Issue 35)
Paragraph [917]
The ability for the Family Court to “look through” trust structures and attack the underlying assets is an ongoing issue for all trust advisers.
Two key cases in this area are explored further below.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 7 August 2020 (Issue 31)
Paragraph [809]
In light of ongoing changes to the taxation regime and the expanding wealth of Australia’s ageing population, there has for many years been a growing need for estate planning to utilise appropriate structuring.
This time last year, an article in this journal argued that 2018 had seen more changes in key estate planning areas in that calendar year than in each of the previous 30 years combined.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Taxation in Australia, February 2020 Volume 54(7)
As regularly addressed by View, a methodical approach is needed when preparing trust distribution resolutions to ensure the intended outcomes are achieved.
With another 30 June fast approaching, it is timely to consider 3 key issues often over-looked.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 15 May 2020 (Issue 19)
Paragraph [474]
In an election year, the historical announcement by the then Treasurer (Hon. JB Hockey, MP) on 12 May 2015 that “new businesses create new jobs. That is why we will … [allow] … business owners to … receive tax relief when restructuring their existing business” is perhaps a timely reminder.
The above statement, heralding the introduction of Subdiv 328-G of the ITAA 1997, being the Small Business Restructure Roll-Over relief, has been followed by many (arguably expected) limitations overlaid on what was otherwise pitched as a deliberately generous regime.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 10 May 2019
In light of ongoing changes to the taxation regime and the expanding wealth of Australia’s ageing population, there has for many years been a growing need for estate planning to utilise appropriate structuring. Estate planning related areas have largely been outliers from radical simultaneous rule overhauls — indeed, the framework of the specific relevant laws have stayed largely unchanged for over 30 years. However, 2018 will likely be seen as an exception to this position, at least in recent years. Indeed, arguably, 2018 has seen more
changes in key estate planning areas in a single year than each of the previous 30 years combined. With the post-baby boomer intergenerational wealth transfer wave gathering pace, it is argued that the 2018 changes mean that it is critical for tax and estate planning advisers to fully understand the impact of the changes and invest to monitor their ongoing impact.
By Matthew Burgess Published by Taxation in Australia, January 2019 Volume 53(6)
The heyday of trust cloning for all forms of inter vivos discretionary trusts largely ended with the abolition of the CGT “cloning” exemption on 31 October 2008. However as previously reported, trust cloning is again be available for trusts carrying on a business which satisfy the genuine restructure test from 1 July 2016 (see 2016 WTB 12 [350]).
Furthermore, the removal of the exemption around 10 years ago did not extend to trusts that are subject to CGT event E4 (that is, unit trusts).
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 26 October 2018 (Issue 45)
Paragraph [1456]
As reported at 2018 WTB 35 [1149], the ATO has now issued its ruling in relation to trust vesting with Draft Taxation Ruling (“TR”) 2017/D10 now finalised as TR 2018/6.
As also reported at 2018 WTB 36 [1160], the ATO has published details of its administrative approach.
In theory, the combination of these publications, after what is understood to be the extensive industry consultation, should be the definitive statement of all key issues with trust vesting. Arguably for many trust specialists however, it is difficult to instead not be asking “is that it” from the ATO on trust vesting?
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 31 August 2018 (Issue 37)
Paragraph [1193]
Increases in globalisation, trade and technology have meant that it is now common for Australians to have assets and business interests in multiple jurisdictions and to be based overseas for extended periods of time, making them non-residents for tax purposes. Due to the nature of international law, potential conflicts of laws, different taxation rules in each country and (in some instances) double tax agreements, it is generally no longer possible for one adviser to provide holistic advice in relation to all aspects of international estate planning. Given the complexity in the laws in different jurisdictions, best practice is generally achieved by advisers developing a methodical, checklist-based approach and engaging with specialist foreign advisers to advise on specific aspects of an international or cross-border estate plan.
By Matthew Burgess Published by Taxation in Australia, July 2018 Volume 53(1)
The ATO has released its views on trust splitting in Draft Taxation Determination (TD 2018/D3), reported at 2018 WTB 30 [990].
There are a range of concerns with TD 2018/D3 for all trust advisers.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 20 July 2018 (Issue 31)
Paragraph [1000]
The announcement in the 2018-19 Federal Budget that “the concessional tax rates available for minors receiving income from testamentary trusts will be limited to income derived from assets that are transferred from deceased estates or the proceeds of the disposal or investment of those assets” (see 2018 WTB 19 [535]) was for many a surprise.
As is usually the case with Budget announcements attacking perceived arbitrage revenue opportunities, the exact impact of the changes will revolve almost entirely around how the legislation is crafted – the 2017 Budget changes to the small business CGT concessions being a recent a high-profile example of what appeared at announcement to be a narrowly focused change that in fact has proven to be significantly wider.
By Matthew Burgess and Hannah Whippy
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 18 May 2018 (Issue 21)
Paragraph [618]
The recent appeal decision in Ellison v Sandini Pty Ltd [2018] FCAFC 44 (reported at para [387] of this Bulletin) provides clarity (pending any further appeal) for tax practitioners assisting clients involved in a relationship breakdown. In particular, the split decision of the Full Federal Court has reconfirmed the generally accepted historical position in relation to CGT rollover relief on marriage breakdowns.
By Patrick Ellwood and Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 6 April 2018 (Issue 14)
Paragraph [361]
The “read the deed” mantra has been regularly highlighted by us and many others in this Bulletin (see for example 2013 WTB 38 [1642] and 2014 WTB 43 [1426]).
The need to embrace this mantra, even in relation to relatively “simple” transactions such as changes of trusteeship, has also been highlighted this year, see 2017 WTB 6 [160].
With hindsight, each of our earlier articles have focussed on discretionary trust deeds. The “read the deed” mantra
is however at least as important, if not more so, in relation to SMSF trust deeds.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 16 February 2018 (Issue 7)
Paragraph [158]
As it seems is tradition, the Tax Office has delivered another substantive release on a long-standing issue in the last month of the calendar year with the publication on 13 December 2017 of Draft Taxation Ruling TR 2017/D10 (see para [1817] of this Bulletin).
Subject to being issued as a final ruling, Draft TR 2017/D10 arguably resolves many of the uncertainties surrounding trust vesting.
By Matthew Burgess and Patrick Ellwood
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 15 December 2017 (Issue 52)
Paragraph [1797]
The Subdiv 328-G roll-over, originally considered a “one stop shop” for small business owners to restructure their businesses into appropriate entities, has started to show its cracks. A little more than a year on from its commencement, the limitations of the Subdiv 328-G roll-over have become starkly apparent due to the complexity of the legislation and the narrow interpretation adopted by the ATO on issues such as “ultimate economic ownership”. The drafting of the relevant provisions and the ATO’s subsequent interpretation have meant many small businesses that philosophically should be able to access the roll-over relief have been left unable to qualify. This article explores the circumstances in which small businesses are unable to be restructured under Subdiv 328-G and highlights that the roll-over should be relied on with caution, as much will
hinge on the application of technical requirements to the specific client circumstances and structure.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Taxation in Australia, December 2017/January 2018 (Volume 52 Issue 6)
Discretionary trusts are regularly used in commercial transactions, and of course tax issues are always present. But, there is a more fundamental issue that deserves attention – fettering of a trustee’s discretion. Take for example an insurance funded buy-sell arrangement that uses options under the contractual arrangement to help facilitate any ultimate buyout. This is a widely used, and generally very sensible, approach to take. A significant difficulty can arise however where the parties to the buy-sell agreement include trustees of discretionary trusts.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 20 October 2017 (Issue 44)
Paragraph [1508]
As reported at 2017 WTB 37 [1302], the Federal Court’s decision in Cunningham (Trustee) v Gapes (Bankrupt) [2017] FCA 787 (Federal Court, Collier J, 13 July 2017) (Cunningham) is vital guidance for all advisers in relation to the interplay between superannuation death benefits and the Bankruptcy Act 1966.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 8 September 2017 (Issue 38)
Paragraph [1310]
As reported at 2017 WTB 29 [1014], Draft Practical Compliance Guideline 2017/D12 (Draft PCG 2017/D12) contains guidance from the ATO in relation to the liability of an executor or legal personal representative (LPR) of a deceased estate for the deceased’s tax debts.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 14 July 2017 (Issue 30)
Paragraph [1031 ]
As reported at 2017 WTB 28 [956], one area that seems to be receiving an increasing amount of interest from the ATO in recent times concerns the distinction between a unit trust and a fixed trust.
Often, the differences between these 2 types of trusts can be quite subtle.
As with most trust interpretation issues, the interpretation of the trust deed will be critical in this regard.
In other words, as regularly explained in this Bulletin, the starting point in any trust related matter is to read the trust deed.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 7 July 2017 (Issue 29)
Paragraph [995]
The need for effective structuring of business and personal assets has been brought into sharp focus for high net worth individuals and business over recent years. The benefits of family trusts are generally still sufficient to make them the preferred structure for asset protection, tax planning and succession purposes.
However, the capital gains tax and commercial issues raised in the context of umbrella trusts, trust cloning and trust splitting are significant, and care should be taken when restructuring and establishing discretionary trusts. The author argues that, in this regard, the optimal approach is to methodically follow a tailored checklist.
This article provides a starting point for the development of such a list.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Taxation in Australia, July 2017 (Volume 52 Issue 1)
The 2017 superannuation reforms are widely acknowledged as being the most fundamental changes to the superannuation landscape in over a decade.
While the reforms will have a significant impact across a range of areas, the consequences from an estate planning perspective are at risk of being overlooked.
By Matthew Burgess and Patrick Ellwood
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 12 May 2017 (Issue 20)
Paragraph [611]
The recent case of Thomas & Anor v FCT [2017] FCAFC 57 (reported at 2017 WTB 15 [457]), contains some particularly interesting comments in relation to the distribution of franking credits by the trustee of a discretionary trust, including the ability to stream franking credits as a separate class of income.
It follows the well-publicised decision of the Queensland Supreme Court in Thomas Nominees Pty Ltd ACN 010 049 788 v Thomas & Anor [2010] QSC 417 (reported at 2010 WTB 49 [1884]). That decision held that franking credits could form part of the income of a trust estate for trust law purposes and be streamed to particular beneficiaries. There then followed the Commissioner’s subsequent (successful) application in Thomas v FCT [2015] FCA 968 (reported at 2015 WTB 38 [1424]), which concluded that franking credits were not net income of the trust and therefore could not be “streamed” independently from the net income.
By Matthew Burgess and Patrick Ellwood
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 21 April 2017 (Issue 16)
Paragraph [465]
A previous article in this Bulletin explored the key revenue issues in relation to changing the trustee of a discretionary trust (see ‘Changing trustees of trusts – Simple in theory … not so simple in practice’, at 2017 WTB 6 [160]).
An equally important and related issue concerns a decision to change the principal or appointor role of a family trust. That is, the person, people, or company having the unilateral right to remove and appoint a trustee.
As regular readers of this Bulletin will know, there does not necessarily need to be an appointor or principal provision under a trust deed. However, where there is one, a trust deed itself will normally set out in some detail the way in which the role of appointor is dealt with on the death or incapacity of the person (or people) originally appointed.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 24 March 2017 (Issue 12)
Paragraph [352]
It’s one of life’s biggest questions: ‘What happens to us when we die?’
But it seems Australians are increasingly choosing to answer it for themselves with
many requesting in their wills to be made into snow globes, vinyl records and other
unusual things.
Published in News – Megan Palin
The decision in Balcaskie Investments Pty Limited v Chief Comr of State Revenue [2017] NSWCATAD 19 (“Balcaskie”) was reported at 2017 WTB 4 [120].
The case is a timely reminder of the critical issues that can arise from a revenue perspective in relation to the superficially simple area of changing the trustee of a trust.
The starting point for any change of trusteeship is always the terms of the trust deed. In this regard, the ‘read the deed’ mantra has been regularly highlighted in this Bulletin (see for example 2013 WTB 38 [1642] and 2014 WTB 43 [1426]).
By Matthew Burgess and Patrick Ellwood
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 10 February 2017 (Issue 6)
Paragraph [160]
The ongoing maintenance of any trust structure is critical for all advisers working in the area. In
particular, the starting point for all trust-related matters is ensuring trustees understand the exact terms and rules of a trust. However, when a trust’s rules are uncertain due to the loss of the original deed, there is a threshold issue of a likely breach of the trustee’s duty to ascertain the terms of the trust. This can have serious implications for the beneficiaries, as well as impact the trustee’s future ability to administer the trust from a tax perspective. This article explores a number of pathways and issues that trustees and advisers should consider when a trust deed has been lost or misplaced. This article also provides a summary of the key advantages and
disadvantages for each of the main pathways explored.
By Matthew Burgess and Hayden Bennett
Published by Taxation in Australia, January 2017 (Volume 51 Issue 6)
The case of Re Breakwell and FCT[2015] AATA 628 (25 August 2015, reported at 2015 WTB 37 [1393]) highlighted a common trap in relation to the circumstances where a related party debt will be statute barred. The decision, which was upheld on appeal in Breakwell v FCT [2015] FCA 1471 (22 December 2015, reported at 2016 WTB 1 [27]) remains a timely reminder of the critical interplay between various legislative provisions that practitioners must be constantly aware of.
By Matthew Burgess and Patrick Ellwood
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 11 October 2016 (Issue 42)
Paragraph [1420]
As previously reported in the Weekly Tax Bulletin, there are a range of issues often overlooked in relation to trust distributions (see 2014 WTB 43 [1426]) and extensions to vesting dates (see 2014 WTB 44 [1446]). Rarely, however, do these issues arise together in the same factual scenario. In the lead up to another 30 June, the decision in Domazet v Jure Investments Pty Limited [2016] ACTSC 33 (7 March 2016) is a timely example of the problems that can arise when a deed is not carefully reviewed before trust distributions are made.
by Matthew Burgess and Hayden Dunnett
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 10 June 2016 (Issue 25)
Paragraph [799]
Following the federal government’s jobs and small business package introduced during the 2015-16 federal Budget, Subdiv 328-G was crafted to “provide greater flexibility for small business owners to change their legal structure”. Compared with the traditional roll-over relief, the scope and restructuring possibilities provided for by the provisions represent a significant liberalisation of historical rules and is set to make them a “one-stop shop” for small business restructures. The new roll-overs cover a range of potential transferor-transferee combinations, making them the likely starting point for most small businesses wanting to access tax-effective restructuring. This article explores a number of specific restructuring opportunities — for example, trust cloning, trust splitting, transferring non-CGT assets and exiting trusts with “heritage” issues — that are available under the new rules. This article also explores the fundamental issues in relation to how to satisfy the provisions in any factual scenario.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Taxation in Australia, June 2016 (Volume 50 Issue 11)
The new Subdiv 328-G rollovers (the provisions) commencing 1 July 2016 provide significant opportunities for Small Business Entities (SBE) to restructure into a more appropriate entity, assuming the “genuine restructure” provisions can be satisfied.
This article considers a number of opportunities to restructure discretionary trusts. In particular:
· trust cloning with or without a Family Trust Election (FTE);
· trust splitting and effectively limiting the range of potential beneficiaries without causing a resettlement; and
· restructuring out of trusts with heritage issues.
The new rollovers were introduced via the Tax Laws Amendment (Small Business Restructure Roll-Over) Bill 2016 which passed all stages without amendment and received Royal Assent on 8 March 2016.
by Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 24 March 2016 (Issue 12)
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 24 March 2016 (Issue 12)
Any business enterprise may, at some stage of its life, find it necessary or desirable to restructure, for any of a variety of practical, business and even personal reasons. The revenue consequences of restructuring a business would often be prohibitive, but for various concessions provided under the tax and stamp duty laws.
This article sets out and discusses the main revenue concessions available in relation to the restructuring of businesses operated via companies. In particular, the article considers individual to company roll-overs, partnership to company roll-overs, company to company roll-overs, scrip-for-scrip exchanges, the tax consolidations regime, and other transaction costs. In each case, the article discusses the relevant legal requirements, and offers insights into potential traps. In conclusion, the author believes that if a methodical approach is adopted, it will generally be possible to achieve all of the client’s commercial objectives without triggering adverse revenue consequences.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Taxation in Australia, December 2015 (Volume 50 Issue 6)
The recent Tax Office Private Binding Ruling Authorisation number 1012846046513 (Ruling), reported at para[1477] of
this Bulletin, considers a number of key issues relating to the distribution of assets via testamentary trusts under
deceased estates.
The Ruling largely follows the well-publicised Practice Statement Law Administration PS LA 2003/12 (PSLA 2003/12), which was republished in April 2014 (reported at 2014 WTB 16[561]), and then updated in August 2015 to the new LAPS format
and style.
The Ruling is a timely reminder of the need to ensure care is taken with any intended distributions from a testamentary trust.
By Matthew Burgess and Patrick Ellwood
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 18 September 2015 (Issue 40)
The recent case of Thomas v FCT [2015] FCA 968, reported at para [1424] of this Bulletin, considers a number of key issues relating to the distribution of franking credits by the trustee of a discretionary trust, including the ability to stream franking credits as a separate class of income.
It follows the well-publicised decision of the Queensland Supreme Court in Thomas Nominees Pty Ltd ACN 010 049 788 v Thomas & Anor [2010] QSC 417 (reported at 2010 WTB 49 [1884]), which relevantly held that franking credits could form part of the income of a trust estate for trust law purposes and be streamed to particular beneficiaries.
The Commissioner was not a party to that earlier decision. The Thomas case explores the interaction between s95 and s97 of the ITAA 1936 dealing with trust income and Div 207 of the ITAA 1997 dealing with the imputation system.
The decision is a timely reminder of the need to ensure that trust distributions are made in compliance with the trust deed, the ITAA 1936 and the ITAA 1997, and of the complexities that can a rise when streaming different classes of income.
By Matthew Burgess and Patrick Ellwood
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 4 September 2015 (Issue 38)
Matthew Burgess is a speaker, consultant and author. He started speaking as part of his vocation as a lawyer.
Matthew has more than 40 independently published books including business books, children’s books and joke books.
He was accredited as a Certified Speaking Professional (CSP) in 2014.
Published by Professional Speakers Australia Monthly News Bulletin September 2015
It is clear that there is a growing need for estate planning to utilise appropriate structuring. Wills using testamentary trusts should be the starting point for any comprehensive estate planning exercise. The difficulty
in many such exercises is that serious attempts to devise and implement a plan are often not made until some triggering event, such as financial or matrimonial misfortune, life-threatening illness or death, stimulates
action. This article considers options available for implementing trust structures after death when appropriate planning was not done during a person’s lifetime, and the post-death strategies which can be used to fix
estate planning problems. In such a case, it is possible to establish a trust following a person’s death, including an estate proceeds trust or a superannuation proceeds trust. The article discusses the benefits and limitations of these strategies in turn, and also includes a summary of child maintenance trusts.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Taxation in Australia, April 2015 (Volume 50 Issue 2)
A superannuation proceeds trust (SPT) is a trust established solely to receive superannuation proceeds on the death of a fund member. A SPT can be established by a will or by deed after the death of an individual, although establishing the structure post death can be problematic and is outside the scope of this article.
The ITAA 1997 provides that a superannuation death benefit, paid to a death benefit dependant as a lump sum, is not assessable income. A death benefit dependant (defined under s 302-195 of the ITAA 1997) is a:
- spouse or former spouse of the deceased;
- child, aged below 18, of the deceased;
- person with whom the deceased had an “interdependency relationship”, as defined by s 302-200 of the ITAA 1997; or
- person financially dependent on the deceased just before they died
By Matthew Burgess and Patrick Ellwood
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 3 July 2015 (Issue 29)
In the context of deceased estates (and specifically with the use of testamentary trusts), the excepted trust income rules under Div 6AA of the ITAA 1936 are well known.
In particular, the rules allow income derived by infant children via distributions from a testamentary trust to be assessed at the normal, individual adult rates. As a result, each infant beneficiary can receive over $20,000 of income tax-free and the balance is taxed at the adult marginal rates. For most families, this can mean significant tax planning opportunities.
By Matthew Burgess and Patrick Ellwood
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 20 March 2015 (Issue 11)
Succession planning is a critical issue for any jointly owned business, and the unexpected exit of a principal can have adverse ramifications for the business. Appropriate structured insurance funding can be an important step in mitigating these risks. Changes were recently made to the type of total and permanent disablement insurance policies which can be owned through superannuation. Total and permanent disablement policies commonly feature in insurance-funded buy–sell agreements. The purpose of this article is to review the various ways in which these agreements can be structured. The article considers how most insurance-funded buy–sell agreements operate, the alternatives available when determining how the insurance policies should be owned, and the taxation consequences of the different ownership approaches.
By Matthew Burgess and Patrick Ellwood
Published by Taxation in Australia, March 2015 (Volume 49 Issue 8)
Since the withdrawal of the ATO’s draft Buy Sell Discussion Paper in 2010 there has been some uncertainty about many aspects of insurance funded buy-sell arrangements, particularly those that utilise insurance trusts.
Recent changes introduced as part of the Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (2014 Measures No 7) Bill 2014 (now awaiting Royal Assent after having been passed by Parliament without amendment appear to have clarified the position.
By Matthew Burgess and Patrick Ellwood
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 6 March 2015 (Issue 9)
Brisbane legal eagle Matthew Burgess enjoyed his own little 50 Shades of Grey moment.
Published by The Courier Mail, 17 October 2014
Often a key reason for seeking to extend the vesting day of a trust will be to defer the likely tax and stamp duty implications that would arise where the trust vests and assets are distributed to the beneficiaries.
The recent Queensland case of Re Arthur Brady Family Trust; Re Trekmore Trading Trust [2014] QSC 244 (see 2014 WTB 42 [1416]), provides a useful illustration of the way in which the Courts respond to applications where deferring revenue costs are arguably the primary driver for the application. The case follows previous decisions such as Stein v Sybmore Holdings Pty Ltd [2006] NSWSC 1004 in NSW andRe Plator Nominees Pty Ltd [2012] VSC 284 in Victoria, each of which are discussed.
By Patrick Ellwood and Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 17 October 2014 (Issue 44)
A methodical approach is needed when preparing trust distribution resolutions to ensure the intended outcomes are achieved. There are a range of issues often overlooked in relation to distribution resolutions. Where a purported trust distribution is subsequently found to be invalid, several potential ramifications arise, including:
- The “knowing recipient” principle.
- Disallowed deductions.
- Disclaimers.
- Equity and rectification.
- Impact of any default provisions.
By Matthew Burgess and Tara Lucke
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 10 October 2014 (Issue 43)
Longstanding views about the form and level of asset protection afforded by trusts have been challenged and made less certain by a number of recent court decisions and legislative changes. This article explores the
key issues to consider when seeking to “bust-proof” a trust, that is, to render a trust structure less vulnerable to challenge on taxation grounds.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Taxation in Australia, May 2014 (Volume 49 Issue 2)
With another 30 June fast approaching, it is timely to consider 3 key issues often overlooked, namely:
- ensuring that the intended recipient of a distribution is in fact a valid beneficiary of the trust;
- avoiding distributions to beneficiaries who appear to be validly appointed under a trust deed, however are in a practical sense excluded; and
- complying with any timing requirements under a trust deed, regardless of what the position at law may otherwise be.
By Patrick Ellwood and Matthew Burgess
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 20 June 2014 (Issue 27)
If is often said, there is nothing certain in life but death and taxes… and adjustments to the limits for superannuation contributions. In recent times, particularly given the ongoing adjustments to the limits for con- cessional superannuation contributions, the way in which to maximise contributions has been an area of focus
By Matthew Burgess and Tara Lucke
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), May 2014 (Issue 22)
Questions have been raised about comments that CGT event E4 should apply only to fixed trusts and, by implication, not unit trusts. This article explores the various issues, including the potential consequences of the decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court in FCT v Clark, and the relevance of ATO pronouncements.
By Matthew Burgess, Tara Lucke and Liam Polkinghorne
Published by Taxation in Australia, May 2014 (Volume 48 Issue 9)
Part II of this article will focus on distributions from testamentary trusts to beneficiaries and the abandonment of the previously announced legislative changes.
By Matthew Burgess and Patrick Ellwood
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 16 May 2014 (Issue 21)
In December 2013, the Federal Government announced its decision to abandon a number of proposed legislative changes in relation to various aspects of the taxation of testamentary trusts. As a result, there has been a refocus on what is likely to be the approach of the ATO in this area. Part I of this 2-part article considers the taxation aspects of:
- the transfer of assets under a deceased estate;
- distributions from a will maker to a legal personal representative (LPR);
- distributions from a LPR to a testamentary trust.
By Matthew Burgess and Patrick Ellwood
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 9 May 2014 (Issue 19)
This article focuses on the creative use of testamentary trusts in the context of estate planning. The article considers assets that do not form part of an estate, testamentary trusts, tax treatment of testamentary trusts, the attitude of the Australian Taxation Office towards testamentary trusts, trust cloning, trust splitting, bespoke company constitutions and fettering of a trustee’s discretion, and changing of domicile.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Taxation in Australia, April 2014 (Volume 48 Issue 9)
This article considers the specific requirements for a trust qualifying as a fixed trust and the relevance of the fixed trust concept for taxation purposes. Specifically, this article examines whether fixed trusts and unit trusts are the same, unit trusts and franked dividends, the status of distributions that are not fixed, borrowing by unit trusts, unit trusts as investment vehicles, risks posed by trust loss rules, the tax implications of converting a non-fixed trust into a fixed trust, and the consequences of CGT event E4 for unit trusts.
By Matthew Burgess, Tara Lucke and Liam Polkinghorne
Published by Taxation in Australia, December 2013/January 2014 (Volume 48 Issue 6)
A separate issue that practitioners must be aware of whenever reviewing existing structures or establishing new entities, arises under the Corporations Act2001. In particular, the Act expressly prohibits companies from owning shares in themselves.
By Matthew Burgess and Kate Timmerman
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 15 November 2013 (Issue 48)
There is a range of issues that can potentially undermine the intentions of a trustee when attempting to make distributions from the trust to beneficiaries. This article focuses on a number of the more common scenarios where purported distributions fail, in the context of a typical family discretionary trust with a range of beneficiaries, including family members and related trusts and companies. It also addresses the potential resulting tax consequences. The article considers trust distributions to a “beneficiary”, distributions to particular beneficiaries, ATO requirements for tracing distributions, areas of ATO focus, and the ramifications of failed distributions.
By Matthew Burgess and Darius Hii
Published by Taxation in Australia, October 2013
Even where distributions are made validly to a potential beneficiary, they can prove extremely problematic from an asset protection perspective.
One scenario that seems to arise regularly in this regard is the distribution by a trust to a corporate beneficiary, the shares in which are owned personally by an at-risk individual.
By Matthew Burgess and Liam Polkinghorne
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 4 October 2013 (Issue 43)
Practitioners will be aware, from many previous articles in this Bulletin (and elsewhere), of the critical importance that trust deeds should be read before making any distribution of income or capital. While the “read the deed” mantra should be indelibly etched in practitioners’ minds, regular reminders of the dangers of not doing this are not out of place.
By Matthew Burgess and Darius Hii
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 4 September 2013 (Issue 38)
The High Court decision in Kennon v Spry appears to alter longstanding principles relating to the asset protection advantages of trusts. This article considers the consequences of that decision, discusses the treatment of trust assets in a relationship breakdown and the distinction between assets forming part of the pool of property or being treated as a financial resource, examines the application of these principles in recent decisions, and offers some practical recommendations.
By Matthew Burgess and Tara Lucke
Published by Taxation in Australia, May 2013
The ATO appears to have recently changed its position in relation to the forgiveness of debts owed by deceased estates.
By Matthew Burgess and Tara Lucke
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 16 November 2012 (Issue 48)
At 2012 WTB 34 [1373] and 2012 WTB 39 [1586], the Family Court decisions in Morton v Morton [2012] FAM CA 30 and Harris v Harris [2011] FAM CAF 245, respectively, in relation to the potential exposure of assets held via family trusts on a matrimonial breakdown, were analysed.
This article considers a tax specific issue arising as part of Harris v Harris, relating to distributions from the trust in question to a company which was found not to be a beneficiary.
By Matthew Burgess and Tara Lucke
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 12 October 2012 (Issue 43)
Towards the end of 2011, the case of Harris v Harris [2011] FamCAFC 245 considered whether the assets of a family trust should be treated as assets of a marriage and so subject to division on a property settlement.
The case provides further context to the general attitude of the Family Court in relation to family trust structures, especially in relation to the concept of indirect control as outlined by the High Court in Kennon v Spry (2008) 238 CLR 366.
By Matthew Burgess and James Ford
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 14 September 2012 (Issue 39)
Trusts are structures regularly used for asset protection purposes or as vehicles to protect children from divorce when relationships break down. However, family trusts must be used carefully to avoid potential problems. The decision of the Family Court in Morton v Morton [2012] FamCA 30 is discussed as an illustrative case.
By Matthew Burgess and James Ford
Published by Weekly Tax Bulletin (Thomson Reuters), 10 August 2012
Succession planning expert Matthew Burgess, emotional resilience expert Dennis Hoiberg and Suncorp Bank head of agribusiness Greg Leahy took to the stage at Beef Week to discuss succession planning issues facing many families on the land.
Published By North Queensland Register, 17 May 2012
Succession planning expert Matthew Burgess, emotional resilience expert Dennis Hoiberg and Suncorp Bank head of agribusiness Greg Leahy took to the stage at Beef Week to discuss succession planning issues facing many families on the land.
Published by Countryman, 17 May 2012
Suncorp teamed up with Matthew Burgess to try to shed more light on the subject of succession planning during Beef Week.
Published by Queensland Country Life, May 2012
The use of lineal descendant trusts in estate planning allows for tax effective income distribution and a high level of asset protection.
By Matthew Burgess and Elissa Etheridge
Published by Australian Farm Journal, August 2009
Matthew is interviewed by The Courier Mail in relation to the tax outcomes for marriage splits and pre-nuptial agreements.
By Erica Thompson
Published by The Courier Mail, 28 April 2008
Matthew is interviewed by The Courier Mail in relation to the tax implications for MBF members if a proposed takeover of the health fund goes ahead.
By Erica Thompson
Published by The Courier Mail, 21 April 2008
Matthew is interviewed by Financial Standard in relation to integrating trauma cover into a business insurance portfolio.
By Sue Laing
Published by Financial Standard, 4 February 2008
Over the last six years, McCullough Robertson has had a dream ride on the back of Queensland’s economic boom. The firm specialises in three of the key areas in which the state has boomed: capital markets, resources and property. Matthew is mentioned as a member of the firm’s executive committee.
By Nicola Berkovic
Published by The Australian, 6 July 2007
In light of fundamental changes to the taxation regime and the expanding wealth of Australia’s aging population, there is a growing need for estate planning to utilise appropriate structuring. These articles (divded into Part 1 and Part 2) focus on the use of special purpose trusts in the estate planning process.
By Matthew Burgess
Published by Taxation in Australia, June 2007 (Volume 41 No. 11)
The ability of a discretionary trust to protect business assets is called into question by a recent federal court decision.
By Matthew Burgess and Suzanne Bagot
Published by National Accountant, April/May 2007
The testamentary trust structure provides significant levels of asset protection and offers flexibilities from a tax planning perspective.
Published by Queensland Country Life, September 2006
Navigating the tax system and using structures such as trusts are among the top tactics of some of Brisbane’s most successful investors, according to McCullough Robertson Lawyers business partner Matthew Burgess.
By Alex Tilbury
Published by The Courier Mail, 27 April 2005
Matthew is interviewed by The Courier Mail in relation to the fee disclosure in prospectuses and his recommendations to investors.
By Alex Tilbury
Published by The Courier Mail, 9 April 2005
Matthew is interviewed by The Courier Mail in relation to long term planning for tax minimisation.
By Alex Tilbury
Published by The Courier Mail