Regulation Impact Statement
Small incorporated business tax cut
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Background ...................................................................................................................... 1
1. The problem............................................................................................................... 1
2. Case for government action / Objective of reform ...................................................... 2
3. Policy options............................................................................................................. 3
Option 1: No policy change.............................................................................................................. 3
Option 2: Company tax cut for incorporated small businesses ...................................................... 3
4. Cost benefit analysis of each option / Impact analysis ................................................. 3
Option 1: No policy change.............................................................................................................. 3
Option 2: Company tax cut for incorporated small businesses ...................................................... 3
Company tax rate reduction for small business .............................................................................. 3
5. Consultation............................................................................................................... 6
6. Option selection / Conclusion ..................................................................................... 8
7. Implementation and evaluation / review .................................................................... 8
BACKGROUND
The Australian economy is in transition and faces significant structural challenges due to both
domestic and international factors. Mining investment is now detracting from GDP growth. The
switch to broader-based growth driven by activity in non-resource sectors is occurring, but perhaps
more slowly than is desirable.
Below trend economic growth is leading to spare capacity in the labour market and increasing
unemployment, particularly youth unemployment. Economic growth has been below its long run
average in 5 of the past 6 financial years, weighing on job creation and contributing to a gradual
upward drift in unemployment.
Low interest rates, a falling Australian dollar and real wage adjustment over time are expected to
support employment and encourage business growth over the longer term.
There have been some positive signs the required adjustment is underway, including job
advertisements showing a slight upward trend in recent months.1
However there is a risk of the adjustment being a protracted one, particularly given businesses
remain reluctant to invest and take on new workers absent stronger sustainable demand.2
Investment in the non-mining sectors continues to be subdued,3 and small businesses have
responded by scaling back the level of their capital spending.4 Longer-term capital expenditure plans
have also been revised down significantly in the non-mining sector, notwithstanding solid growth
this year.
The Government committed to introducing a 1.5 per cent small business tax cut from 1 July 2015 in
the Coalition’s Policy for Small Business.5 On 2 February the Prime Minister announced a small
business and jobs package would be announced in the 2015-16 Budget.
1. THE PROBLEM
Incorporated small businesses make an important contribution to the Australian economy. They,
along with unincorporated small businesses, account for the vast majority of the active private
businesses in the country and represent large shares of its employment and value added.
There are currently around 780,000 incorporated small business or over 30 per cent of the
2.3 million small businesses in Australia (defined as having less than $2 million turnover). According
to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, small businesses provide around 43 per cent of non-financial
private sector jobs in Australia and around one third of non-financial output in 2012-13.6 The small
business sector has the potential to contribute strongly to national growth and competitiveness,
including providing greater employment opportunities. Small businesses have the advantage of
being adaptable and flexible, able to respond profitably to changing circumstances. Studies indicate
1
2
3
4
5
6
ANZ job advertisement series, http://www.media.anz.com /phoenix.zhtml?c=248677&p=iroljobad&nyo=0.
2014-15 Budget Paper 1, pp 2-11.
ABS, 5625.0, December Quarter 2014.
The Economic Trends, Challenges and Behaviour of Small Businesses in Australia, Reserve Bank of
Australia, 2014.
http://www.liberal.org.au/.
ABS, Cat 8155.0, Australian Industry.
1
Regulation Impact Statement
that it is small businesses that are often the entities that test and pioneer innovative ideas and
business practices which are critical to future economic growth, job prospects and improved living
standards.
However, while small companies play a significant role in the Australian economy, they also face a
unique set of operational challenges, and as a consequence typically have higher failure rates than
those for larger companies. A comparison of the outcomes of the NAB survey of large companies,
with the Sensis survey of small businesses undertaken by the Reserve Bank suggests that conditions
for small business have been weaker than for larger businesses since the global financial crisis in
2008-09.7
One issue is regulatory costs; incorporated small businesses face higher proportional regulatory
costs than larger companies due to their inability to take advantage of economies of scale in
understanding and complying with regulation.
The other main issue for small companies is access to finance. Funding for small businesses is
essential to facilitate productivity growth and job creation. Improving small business’s access to
finance was a Government election commitment.8
The tax rates which apply to Australian companies are above the OECD average9 and may be
discouraging investment. The higher a company’s tax rate, the less retained earnings the company
will have for reinvestment. Reducing tax rates would allow incorporated small businesses to retain
more of their earnings, allowing them to invest more and expand their business activity. Modifying
the tax system to better encourage new small business investment could enhance productivity over
time through capital deepening.
2. CASE FOR GOVERNMENT ACTION / OBJECTIVE OF REFORM
While it is businesses which create jobs, there is a clear role for Government to address
impediments and create the right conditions for Australian small businesses to grow and become
more productive, creating more jobs. With the economy facing below-trend growth, the
Government’s objective is to stimulate small business growth and employment, through reduced tax
and regulatory barriers.
The Australian economy is in transition. The declining terms of trade and the ageing of the
population are placing downward pressure on income growth. Small businesses are a key driver of
Australia’s economy, underpinning growth and innovation and providing jobs for millions of
Australians.
Small businesses are typically more vulnerable to shocks and changes in economic conditions than
larger businesses. This makes it particularly important that, during this period of economic
transition, the policy settings support small business growth and innovation. This proposal will
deliver lower taxes to incorporated small businesses to help them grow.
Providing incorporated small businesses with a reduced rate of company tax will permit them to
retain more earnings for investment. Investment is important as it leads to existing output being
7
8
9
2
Ibid 4.
http://www.liberal.org.au/latest-news/2013/08/19/tony-abbott-coalitions-policy-jobs-and-growth-smallbusiness.
Re:think Tax discussion paper March 2015, page 74, www.bettertax.gov.au.
produced at a lower cost (capital deepening) and new and improved ways of doing business
(innovation), which improves the amount of output produced for each unit of input, including labour
(productivity). As a result, higher investment can lead to higher employment and wages over time.
However, given the small size of these companies, the overall macroeconomic impact is unlikely to
be as significant compared to a broader tax cut to all companies.
3. POLICY OPTIONS
Option 1: No policy change
Under this option, no new actions would be taken by the Government and existing policy settings
would be relied upon.
Option 2: Company tax cut for incorporated small businesses
The Prime Minister announced at the National Press Club, that ‘at the heart of our small business
jobs package will be a small business company tax cut on July 1 — at least as big as the 1.5 per cent
already flagged’ to apply from the start of the 2015-16 financial year.
Under this option, a company tax cut of 1.5 per cent would be provided to incorporated small
businesses (defined as those companies with turnover of less than $2 million) for income years
beginning on or after 1 July 2015. This is consistent with the Government’s election commitment to
provide small business with a 1.5 per cent tax cut, as outlined in the policy document, Coalition’s
Policy for Small Business.10
4. COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF EACH OPTION / IMPACT ANALYSIS
Option 1: No policy change
This option involves no new actions by the Government and relies on existing policy settings.
Consequently, it would introduce no new impacts on businesses, community organisations or
individuals. At the same time, it would not address the issues identified in the problem section.
As noted in the background, low interest rates, a falling Australian dollar and real wage adjustment
over time can be expected to support employment and encourage business growth over the longer
term, along with increasing infrastructure investment and already announced measures to reduce
regulation and red tape burden which will make it easier to do business. However, a long, drawn out
adjustment process would have substantial social costs, as identified in the Problem section.
Option 2: Company tax cut for incorporated small businesses
Company tax rate reduction for small business
A corporate tax cut targeted to small businesses (defined as incorporated businesses with
aggregated turnover less than $2million) beginning on or after 1 July 2015.
10 Ibid 5.
3
Regulation Impact Statement
This proposal would create a two-tier company tax system whereby:
•
the whole of a company’s taxable income would be subject to a tax rate of 28.5 per cent if its
aggregated turnover is below a $2 million threshold; or
•
the whole of a company’s taxable income would be subject to a 30 per cent rate if its
aggregated turnover is equal to or above a $2 million threshold.
The maximum amount of franking credits a small incorporated business can attach to its dividends in
a year – its franking cap -will not be reduced along with the tax rate. The franking cap for small
businesses will stay the same as for large businesses.
Benefits
Providing incorporated small businesses with a reduced rate of company tax would improve small
business cash flow and assist them to grow and to compete more effectively with larger businesses.
It is estimated that over 780,000 companies could potentially benefit from this proposal.
Being a tax-based assistance measure, the financial benefit for individual companies will be
proportional to the amount of tax they pay. The benefit will be more significant for eligible
companies with higher taxable profits.
Reduced tax payable by small businesses will allow them to retain more earnings for reinvestment.
Investment is important as it leads to existing output being produced at a lower cost (capital
deepening) and new and improved ways of doing business (innovation), which improves the amount
of output produced for each unit of input, including labour (productivity). As a result, higher
investment can lead to higher employment and wages over time. While a cut in the company tax
rate will not immediately benefit the majority of small to medium enterprises that are not operating
in a company structure, they are likely to benefit, to some extent, from the economy-wide benefits
that flow from the cut. However, given the small size of these companies and average reduction in
tax paid, the overall macroeconomic impact is unlikely to be large.
The benefit of this measure should not be assessed in isolation but considered as part of the small
business package. Small businesses may be eligible for more than one of the different proposals,
dependent on their level of taxable income or whether they are incorporated or unincorporated.
Keeping the maximum amount of franking credits a small incorporated business can attach to its
dividends in a year the same as large companies while the tax rate decreases means shareholders in
dividend paying incorporated small businesses would be better off. Shareholders could receive
franking credits in excess of the tax rate applicable to these companies, providing there are enough
franking credits in these companies’ accounts, (recognising that companies may not fully distribute
their taxable income in any year). This would effectively reduce the shareholders’ overall tax paid
regardless of their marginal tax rate.
Costs
Revenue loss for government in the short term is estimated to be in the order of $1.45 billion over
the forward estimates (-$250 million in 2015-16 and -$400 million per annum from 2016-17 to
2018-19). However, the ongoing loss may be reduced in the long term to the extent that higher
business earnings and employment as a result of the tax cut increases government revenue.
Keeping the maximum amount of franking credits a small incorporated business can attach to its
dividends in a year the same as large companies comes at a cost to revenue as the Government is
4
providing franking credits in excess of the tax rate applicable to incorporated small businesses. As a
result, some shareholders will pay tax at less than their marginal tax rate on dividends.
It is expected there will be an initial compliance cost for businesses and their accountants/tax
advisors/tax agents in learning about and understanding the change, and implementing it into their
accounting systems. However, the model is largely based upon the existing company tax system.
This one-off adjustment cost is estimated at $35 per company, or $30 million in total.
A widening of the differential between company and personal tax rates might provide an additional
incentive for high income individuals to structure their services through incorporation to get the tax
benefit, therefore incur additional compliance costs in doing so. Aggressive tax planning might also
lead to subsequent revenue losses. If unincorporated businesses restructured to take advantage of
the lower tax rate, they would incur initial costs of incorporation and ongoing costs to satisfy
corporations act requirements. This risk may be lowered if a separate proposal to provide assistance
to unincorporated businesses is also adopted.
A company crossing the threshold between the lower and higher tax rates will be subject to an
additional tax liability on the taxable income under the threshold that was previously assessed at the
lower small company tax rate. This tax ‘cliff’ could be a disincentive to growth and, while it would
not be very large in most circumstances, it adds to the existing disincentives within the system to
grow above the small business turnover threshold.
In addition, businesses that are close to the threshold could attempt to actively delay recognition of
income and/or bring forward deductions in order to fall under the small business threshold and be
eligible for the lower tax rate. However, such behavioural responses are likely to be uncommon as
only a small number of companies would be close to the threshold in a given year. Those companies
close to the threshold, estimated at around 5,500 companies, will have some compliance costs
associated with determining their tax position which is estimated at $35 per company or $200,000 in
total.
It is expected that the taxpayers and their tax agents will have very minimal ongoing compliance cost
because system changes required are expected to be a one-off change.
Medium and large companies will not incur any costs from the change as their tax outcomes are
unchanged.
The ATO will initially have significant administrative costs in applying the two-tier company tax
system, which should decrease over time as issues are settled and system changes are put in place.
•
Adjustments to ATO systems may be required.
•
The ATO might devote greater efforts to police the boundary (threshold) and relevant integrity
rules, but this is limited to a small proportion of taxpayers in the population
The assessment is that the potential compliance cost impact to be medium overall comprising a
medium implementation impact and a low ongoing compliance cost relative to the affected group.
The table below gives the dollar costing of these estimates.
5
Regulation Impact Statement
Potential compliance cost impact
Implementation costs
On-going
costs/(savings)
$35
$35
$30,000,000
$200,000
Cost per taxpayer/client direct
compliance costs
Total potential direct
compliance costs
The measure is subject to the normal compliance cost offset requirements, which require that any
additional compliance costs be fully offset by compliance cost reductions elsewhere. The increased
regulatory costs are offset by the regulatory cost reductions associated with a proposal to align the
legal frameworks for personal and corporate insolvency practitioners.
Average annual regulatory costs (from business as usual)
Change in costs
($ million)
Business
Community
organisations
Individuals
Total change in
cost
$3.2
$
$
$3.2
Business
Community
organisations
Individuals
Total, by source
-$3.2
$
$
-$3.2
Total, by sector
Cost offset
($ million)
Agency
Are all new costs offset?
 Yes, costs are offset
Total (Change in costs – Cost offset) ($ million) = $0.0
Net Benefit
This proposal would potentially benefit over 780,000 small incorporated businesses. However, being
a tax-based assistance measure, the benefit will be proportional to the amount of tax a company
pays. This measure will benefit tax paying incorporated small businesses by improving their
profitability and competitiveness, which ultimately can lead to higher employment and wages over
time.
5. CONSULTATION
The tax proposals have been informed by targeted consultation with tax specialists outside
government, including the Board of Taxation (the Board), on an in-confidence basis. Descriptions of
the tax measures being considered were provided to Board members out-of-session for discussion at
the Board’s March 2015 meeting. A follow-up teleconference was also held with the small business
tax experts of the Board. The purpose of the teleconference was to provide Board members with the
6
opportunity to provide more detailed feedback on the options identified for improving the way that
small businesses and their owners are taxed.
The feedback from the Board was that a tax cut would be warmly received, and would send a
positive message that the Government is doing something for small business. The Board questioned
whether the suggested amount would make a significant difference to eligible companies as it would
have a minimal impact on cash flow. Other issues raised by the Board mostly were around the
complexities of applying a small business threshold. The Board recommended a turnover rather than
an income test which was adopted.
The scale and turnover issues were considered in the policy development process. While larger tax
cuts would be favoured by industry in isolation, larger tax cuts would have come at the expense of
the other small business assistance measures such as accelerated depreciation. High turnover, low
margin businesses may criticise a turnover test as it does not take account of profit margin
variations, but such a test is robust because it is less exposed to manipulation than an income test.
The Treasury also consulted with the Australian Tax Office in order to identify any implementation
issues, integrity concerns with the proposals, or any potential flow-on impacts they might have
within the broader tax framework.
The limited consultation on the proposals reflects the cabinet-in-confidence nature of the decision
making process. However, it should be noted that the proposed tax options have already been the
subject of, and informed by, extensive consultations undertaken as part of previous policy processes.
To inform the 2014 Board of Taxation Review into Tax Impediments Facing Small Business, the Board
encouraged broad participation by writing directly to stakeholder groups and holding consultations
with 48 stakeholder groups as well as further targeted consultations with experts on specific issues.
The review recommendations were also informed by the 43 written submissions received. As this
was a fast-track review the Board did not issue a discussion paper. The review recommended
increasing the small entity tax threshold, increasing the Fringe Benefits Tax minor and infrequent
threshold and extending CGT roll-over relief for small business, noting that these issues were
commonly raised in the submissions received.
The Business Tax Working Group (Working Group) was established by the former Government
following the Tax Forum held in October 2011. The Working Group released a Discussion Paper that
sought views from stakeholders and received more than 80 submissions. The Working Group
concluded that there would be benefits from a lower company tax rate and that Government should
continue to reduce the tax rate as fiscal circumstances permit. This is also consistent with the
findings of the Australia’s Future Tax System11 review.
Since the Budget announcement of the Government’s small business package, the Council of Small
Business Australia (COSBOA) the peak industry body, expressed its support for the package noting
the ‘budget inclusions for small business have been designed to boost confidence, boost cash flow
and boost the economy’; and that the package ‘provides the lowest tax rate for small business since
1967’.
As the implementing legislation is to be introduced as a 2015 Winter T Bill, there will not be time for
the release of exposure draft legislation. This is not considered an issue as the legislation is expected
to be relatively straightforward as it is essentially a rate change.
11 http://taxreview.treasury.gov.au/Content/Content.aspx?doc=html/home.htm.
7
Regulation Impact Statement
6. OPTION SELECTION / CONCLUSION
The preferred option is to provide a company tax cut of 1.5 per cent to incorporated small
businesses (defined as those companies with turnover of less than $2 million) for income years
beginning on or after 1 July 2015.
While larger tax cuts would be favoured by industry, larger tax cuts at the expense of the other small
business assistance measures is not considered the optimal policy mix.
The Government must balance the benefits of a tax rate cut against the other forms of industry
assistance such as accelerated depreciation. If this measure was introduced in isolation rather than
as part of the proposed small business package, the net benefit would be less due to it exacerbating
potential distortions to taxpayer behaviour near the turnover threshold. The reduction in net benefit
would result from the additional compliance and administrative costs associated with restructuring
and aggressive tax planning that some businesses may choose to incur in response to the proposal.
7. IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION / REVIEW
Legislation is required to implement the proposed two-tier company tax system. As the Government
has set the start date as 1 July 2015, the small business company tax cut needs to be a Winter T Bill
and enacted by 30 June 2015.
The design of the legislation is expected to be relatively straightforward largely relying on current
models in the tax system.
The ATO would be responsible for administering the tax rules applying to incorporated small
businesses. The ATO and Treasury are experienced in implementing this type of reform.
The benefit of this measure should not be assessed in isolation but considered as part of the small
business package. Similarly, the design issues that have the potential to cause difficulty, such as the
use of a turnover rather than an income threshold and the tax cliff threshold, need to be monitored
as part of the total small business regime as these conditions already apply to other benefits
received by small businesses. The ATO will monitor compliance of small businesses and unintended
behavioural changes resulting from the small business test. It will advise Treasury if any problems
are identified so remedial action can be considered, if appropriate.
8