Analysis
34 The starting point for undertaking a search for the proper construction of the term 'present legal obligations' in the definition of the term 'net assets' in s 109Y(2), in particular, whether it includes income tax imposed on a company's taxable income for a year of income, as at the end of that year of income, but which has not been assessed at that date, is the legislative context in which these terms are to be found, namely, Div 7A of Pt III of the ITAA 36, informed by the legislative policy or purpose underlying that context. The explanatory memorandum, circulated by the Treasurer of the day, accompanying the Bill which introduced Div 7A into Pt III of the ITAA 36, provides some guidance as to the policy or purpose in this regard.
'Overview
9.1 Part 1 of Schedule 9 of the Bill will insert new Division 7A, of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (the Act) to ensure that all advances, loans, and other credits (unless they come within specified exclusions) by private companies to shareholders (and their associates), are treated as assessable dividends to the extent that there are realised or unrealised profits in the company. In addition, debts owned by shareholders (or associates) which are forgiven by private companies are treated as dividends.
Summary of the amendments
Purpose of the amendments
9.2 The purpose of the amendments is to ensure that private companies will no longer be able to make tax-free distributions of profits to shareholders (and their associates) in the form of payments or loans.'
35 This extract from the explanatory memorandum manifests both the legislative policy of Div 7A as a whole, and s 109Y in particular. Section 109Y is to provide a 'cap' or limit on such loans, advances or other credits being treated as assessable dividends, namely, up to but not exceeding the realised and unrealised profits in the company.
36 The term 'distributable surplus' is to be understood in that context, namely, the realised and unrealised profits in the company available for distribution. The profits of a company available for distribution are its 'after-tax' profits. As Fullagar J observed in Commonwealth v O'Reilly (1984) VR 931 at 938:
'In my opinion the profits out of which dividends may be paid are the profits remaining after deduction from gross profits of, inter alia, federal income tax, or at least a bona fide estimate thereof. A bona fide assessment of profits involves a bona fide estimate of income tax.'
37 It is within this legislative context, informed by the legislative policy and purpose referred to in the explanatory memorandum, that the ingredients of what goes to make up 'distributable surplus', including the term 'present legal obligations', fall to be considered. A construction of those ingredients which gives the term 'distributable surplus' a measure which approximates the profits (realised and unrealised) available for distribution is to be preferred to a construction which results in a divergence between the measure of the distributable surplus so construed and the measure of the profits (realised and unrealised) available for distribution.
38 The requirement that there be an 'obligation' does not require the existence of a debt due, in the sense of owing, any more than it requires the existence of a debt due, in the sense of being payable. The term 'obligation' embraces situations outside the confines of a creditor/debtor relationship. On the other hand, in O'Reilly, Fullagar J, after referring to what was said by Gibbs J in Re Mendonca at 259, expressed the view that the Commissioner was a creditor of each company (in that case) even prior to assessment. His Honour said at 940:
'In my opinion the Tax Commissioner was, in respect of the financial year, a creditor of each company from the expiry of 30 June at the end of the relevant financial year, even though the amount of the company's liability to him had not been assessed and the amount was not immediately payable.'
39 It is common ground in this proceeding that unless and until an assessment is made and notice is served of that assessment, income tax is not due, and nor is it payable before the date fixed by s 204 of the ITAA 36: Clyne, per Mason J at 16 (with whom Aickin and Wilson JJ agreed), Brennan J also agreeing on this issue at 24. Nor does it appear to be in dispute that unless and until an assessment is made and notice is served of that assessment, the Commissioner has no legal right to recover an amount of income tax. On the other hand, the correctness of these statements is no impediment to a conclusion that prior to the making of the assessment and service of notice of that assessment, the taxpayer had an obligation to pay income tax in the future, and that obligation came into existence on 30 June of the year of income in respect of which the income was derived.
40 The obligation is no less an obligation because the Commissioner cannot, until he makes an assessment and serves notice of that assessment, enforce it as a debt due and payable. So understood, the obligation to pay income tax 'matures as a debt due and payable after assessment', to use the words of the Full Court in Jones at 290, but that maturation does not deny the existence of the obligation prior to the making of the assessment and service of notice of that assessment: see Kavich at 527 per Lockhart J.
41 The Commissioner's submission that the obligation is not a present obligation but a future one misconceives the true position. The obligation is a present one in the sense that it exists; the fact that the obligation is to do something at a future date does not deny its standing as an existing obligation. At worst it may be a contingent obligation, contingent on an assessment being made and notice of that assessment served, but that does not disqualify it as a present legal obligation.
42 The Commissioner's suggestion that this construction leads to the strange situation of the company having parallel present legal obligations; an obligation to pay the amount specified in the assessment plus an obligation to pay the 'true amount' of tax for that year of income, again misconceives the position. The present legal obligation arising under the Income Tax Act matures into a debt due and payable after assessment so that at no relevant time is there more than one present legal obligation.
43 As the Tribunal observed at [42] of its reasons, income tax is imposed by the Income Tax Act 1986 (Cth) (s 5(1)) at the rates declared by the Income Tax Rates Act 1986 (Cth). The income tax so imposed is levied by s 7 of the Income Tax Act, which also requires it to be paid for the relevant financial year. The obligation to pay income tax so imposed arises by operation of the Income Tax Act itself and not by the issue of a notice of assessment.
44 In our view, the Tribunal did not err in concluding that the obligation to pay tax at the amount subsequently properly ascertained, assessed and determined, is a 'present legal obligation' as at the end of the financial year in respect of which the income is derived and within the meaning of s 109Y(2) of the ITAA 36.