Commissioner of Taxation v Consolidated Media Holdings Ltd [2012] HCA 55 (5 December 2012)
Last Updated: 5 December 2012
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
FRENCH CJ,
HAYNE, CRENNAN, BELL AND GAGELER JJ
COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION APPELLANT
AND
CONSOLIDATED MEDIA HOLDINGS LTD RESPONDENT
Commissioner of Taxation v Consolidated Media Holdings
Ltd
[2012] HCA 55
5 December
2012
S228/2012
ORDER
- Appeal
allowed with costs.
- Set
aside the orders made by the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia on 20
March 2012 and in their place order that the appeal
from the orders made by
Emmett J on 14 April 2011 be dismissed with costs.
On appeal from the Federal Court of Australia
Representation
B J Sullivan SC with T M Thawley SC for the appellant (instructed by
Australian Government Solicitor)
D H Bloom QC with K J Deards and C A Burnett for the respondent (instructed
by King & Wood Mallesons)
Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal
revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law
Reports.
CATCHWORDS
Commissioner of Taxation v Consolidated Media Holdings Ltd
Taxation – Income tax – Share buy-back – Off-market
purchase – Company's financial record of transaction –
Whether
dividend or capital gain – Whether purchase price "debited against amounts
standing to the credit of ... the company's
share capital account" –
Meaning of "share capital account" – Relevance of legislative history.
Words and phrases – "account", "buy-back", "combined share capital
account", "debited against amounts standing to the credit
of", "financial
records", "financial statements", "purchase price", "share capital account".
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), Pt 2J.1 of Ch 2J, Pt 2M.2 of Ch
2M.
Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth), ss 6D, 159GZZZP.
- FRENCH CJ,
HAYNE, CRENNAN, BELL AND GAGELER JJ. This appeal concerns the
characterisation for income tax purposes of consideration
received by the
respondent, then Publishing and Broadcasting Ltd ("PBL"), for shares sold to
Crown Melbourne Ltd, then Crown Ltd
("Crown"), in an off-market buy-back in the
year of income ended 30 June 2002.
Legislative
setting
- The
legislative setting for the off-market buy-back comprised the Corporations
Act 2001 (Cth) ("the Corporations Act") as well as the Income Tax
Assessment Act 1936 (Cth) ("the ITAA 1936") and the Income Tax
Assessment Act 1997 (Cth) ("the ITAA 1997").
- The
Corporations Act allows a company to buy back its own shares if the buy-back
does not materially prejudice the company's ability to pay its creditors
and if
the company follows procedures laid down in Div 2 of Pt 2J.1 of
Ch 2J. The way a company accounts for a buy-back is governed by the
general obligations of the company under Pt 2M.2 of Ch 2M. Under Pt 2M.2 of Ch
2M, the company has an obligation to keep "written financial records" that
"correctly record and explain its transactions and
financial position and
performance" and that "would enable true and fair financial statements to be
prepared and
audited"[1]. The
company also usually has an obligation to prepare an annual financial report,
consisting of financial statements for a financial
year as well as notes to
those statements and a directors' declaration about those statements and
notes[2]. The
financial statements and notes for a financial year must comply with accounting
standards made for the purposes of the Corporations Act and any further
requirements in regulations made under that
Act[3] and must
give a true and fair view of the financial position and performance of the
company[4]. The
expression "financial records" includes "documents of prime entry" as well as
"other documents needed to explain ... the methods
by which financial statements
are made up ... and ... adjustments to be made in preparing financial
statements"[5].
- For
the purposes of the ITAA 1936 and the ITAA 1997, the effect of a
company buying a share in itself from a shareholder in the company
is addressed
in Div 16K of Pt III of the ITAA 1936. Within Div 16K: such a
"purchase" is a
"buy-back"[6];
the shareholder is the
"seller"[7]; the
amount or the sum of the amounts the seller is entitled to receive as a result
of or in respect of the buy-back is the "purchase
price"[8]; and,
except where the buy-back is an "on-market purchase" (made in the ordinary
course of trading on a stock exchange on which the
share is quoted in an
official list), the buy-back is an "off-market
purchase"[9].
The effect of an off-market purchase is addressed in Subdiv C.
- The
pivotal provision of Subdiv C of Div 16K of Pt III of the ITAA 1936 is
s 159GZZZP. Section 159GZZZP(1) provides that, for the purposes of the
ITAA 1936 and the
ITAA 1997[10],
where a buy-back of a share by a company is an off-market purchase, the
difference between the purchase price and "the part (if
any) of the purchase
price ... which is debited against amounts standing to the credit of ... the
company's share capital account"
is taken to be a dividend paid by the company
to the seller on the day the buy-back occurs out of profits derived by the
company.
Section 159GZZZP(2) provides that the remainder of the purchase
price is taken not to be a dividend.
- The
consequences of the classification of the purchase price by s 159GZZZP for
the operation of the ITAA 1936 and the ITAA 1997,
in respect of a
seller that is an Australian resident company, can be sufficiently summarised
for present purposes as follows. To
the extent that the purchase price is taken
by force of s 159GZZZP(1) to be a dividend, the amount of the purchase
price is ordinarily
included in the seller's assessable
income[11] and
the seller is ordinarily entitled to a corresponding rebate of income
tax[12]. To
the extent that the purchase price is taken by force of s 159GZZZP(2) not
to be a dividend, and subject to adjustments, an amount
equal to the purchase
price is ordinarily taken to be the amount the seller has received or is
entitled to receive as consideration
in respect of the sale of the shares in
determining whether the seller makes a capital gain or a capital loss in respect
of the buy-back
as worked out in accordance with Pts 3-1 and 3-3 of the
ITAA 1997[13].
- In
the year of income ended 30 June 2002, "share capital account" was defined
in s 6D of the ITAA 1936. Section 6D(1) provided:
"A
share capital account is:
(a) an account which the company keeps of its share capital; or
(b) any other account (whether or not called a share capital account),
created on or after 1 July 1998, where the first amount credited
to the
account was an amount of share capital."
- Section
6D(2) provided:
"If a company has more than one account covered by
subsection (1), the accounts are taken, for the purposes of this Act, to be a
single
account."
- Section
6D(3) qualified ss 6D(1) and 6D(2) by providing that an account that was
"tainted" for the purposes of Div 7B of Pt IIIAA of the ITAA 1936 was not a
share capital account other than for specified purposes. A company's share
capital account ordinarily
became tainted for the purposes of Div 7B of Pt IIIAA
if the company transferred "an amount to its share capital account from any of
its other
accounts"[14].
A note to s 6D(2), which formed part of the
ITAA 1936[15],
explained that "[b]ecause the accounts are taken to be a single account (the
combined share capital account) tainting any of the
accounts has the effect of tainting the combined share capital
account".
Buy-back
- For
the whole of the year ended 30 June 2002, PBL owned all of the nearly three
billion issued and paid-up ordinary shares in Crown.
On 28 June 2002, PBL
and Crown entered into a share buy-back agreement which provided for the sale by
PBL to Crown of just over
840 million of those shares for a purchase price of
$1 billion ("the share buy-back agreement"). The share buy-back agreement
provided
for completion on 1 August 2002 or such other date as might be
agreed between the parties.
- Before
28 June 2002, Crown had established accounts in its general ledger which
included those labelled a "Shareholders Equity Account"
and an "Inter-company
Loan (Payable) Account". On 28 June 2002, Crown established a new account
in its general ledger labelled a
"Share Buy-Back Reserve Account".
- On
28 June 2002, Crown debited $1 billion to the newly established Share
Buy-Back Reserve Account. On the same day, Crown made a
corresponding credit
entry in its ledger which, as subsequently corrected with effect from
30 June 2002, was shown as a $1 billion
credit to the Inter-company
Loan (Payable) Account. No entry was made in the Shareholders Equity Account,
which retained a constant
credit balance throughout the year ended 30 June
2002 in excess of $2.4 billion.
- The
share buy-back agreement was completed on 6 August 2002. On that date,
amongst other things, PBL transferred to Crown the shares
the subject of the
share buy-back agreement for a consideration of $1 billion and Crown
cancelled those shares.
- Crown's
audited financial statements for the financial year ended 30 June 2002
showed a reduction in "Contributed Equity" of $1 billion
from an opening
figure of just over $2.4 billion (corresponding with the balance shown in
the Shareholders Equity Account) to a closing
figure of just over
$1.4 billion. Notes against "Contributed Equity" explained it to refer to
issued and paid up capital comprising
ordinary shares fully paid, and recorded
that:
"On 28 June 2002, 840,336,000 ordinary shares (28.6% of
total shares on issue) were bought back by Crown ... The shares were
repurchased
from [PBL] for a total consideration of $1,000,000,000."
- There
is no dispute that Crown followed the procedures laid down in Div 2 of
Pt 2J.1 of Ch 2J of the Corporations Act in entering into and
giving effect to the share buy-back agreement. There was an unresolved dispute
on the evidence at first instance
as to whether the method of accounting for the
share buy-back adopted by Crown was appropriate as a matter of accounting
practice,
but it was common ground that the method was neither expressly
permitted nor expressly prohibited by the applicable accounting standards.
Assessment and appeal proceedings
- The
Commissioner of Taxation ("the Commissioner") took the view that
s 159GZZZP(2) of the ITAA 1936 applied to the $1 billion PBL
was
entitled to receive under the share buy-back agreement as at 30 June 2002
and went on to assess PBL to have made a capital gain
in respect of the
buy-back. PBL objected to the assessment on the ground that it was
s 159GZZZP(1) that applied, with the result
that the $1 billion was
taken to be a dividend to be included in its assessable income and entitling it
to a rebate of income tax.
- The
Commissioner disallowed the objection, following which PBL commenced a
proceeding in the Federal Court under Pt IVC of the Taxation
Administration Act 1953 (Cth) appealing against that disallowance. The
proceeding was dismissed at first instance by Emmett J. The Full Court
(Stone, Greenwood
and Logan JJ) allowed an appeal from that dismissal and
allowed the objection. The present appeal is brought from the orders of
the
Full Court.
Issue
- The
issue in the appeal is whether the $1 billion PBL was entitled to receive
under the share buy-back agreement was, as at 30 June
2002, "debited
against amounts standing to the credit of [Crown's] share capital account"
within the meaning of s 159GZZZP(1) of
the ITAA 1936.
- The
resolution of that issue by Emmett J at first instance proceeded on the basis
that, as at 30 June 2002, Crown's "share capital
account", as defined in
s 6D, comprised, for the purposes of s 159GZZZP(1) of the
ITAA 1936, its Shareholders Equity Account to which the amount in excess of
$2.4 billion stood credited together with its newly created Share Buy-Back
Reserve Account. That was because each was an "account"
kept by Crown "of its
share capital" within the meaning of s 6D(1)(a) and because the two accounts
were to be taken by s 6D(2) for the purposes of the ITAA 1936 to be a
single account. The $1 billion debited to the Share Buy-Back Reserve
Account was therefore
debited against the amount in excess of $2.4 billion
standing to the credit of what was, for the purposes of s 159GZZZP(1) of
the
ITAA 1936, taken to be that single share capital
account[16].
- The
resolution of the issue by the Full Court was different because the Full Court
took a narrower view of s 6D of the ITAA 1936. In the view of the Full
Court: s 6D(1)(a) referred to no more than "the company account, however
described, to which the paid up capital of the company was originally credited";
s 6D(1)(b) applied "to any other post 30 June 1998 account ...
to which the first amount credited was an amount of share capital"; and
s 6D(2) did no more than to treat "each of those accounts as a single
account thereby facilitating transfers between
them"[17].
Applying that view, the Full Court concluded that: the Shareholders Equity
Account was Crown's share capital account because it
was "in terms of
s 6D(1)(a) ... an account in which Crown kept its share capital"; the Share
Buy-Back Reserve Account was "neither such an account nor was it
an account to
which s 6D(1)(b) ... applied"; and s 6D(2) therefore had no
application[18].
The Full Court added that, even if the Share Buy-Back Reserve Account did fall
within s 6D(1)(b) so as to be required by s 6D(2) to be taken with the
Shareholders Equity Account to be a single account, the statutory fiction of a
single account created by s 6D(2) did not go so far as to "deem the act of
debiting against one account to have occurred against an amount standing to the
credit of
another
account"[19].
- The
Full Court was persuaded to that narrower view of s 6D of the
ITAA 1936 by arguments presented on behalf of PBL which relied on a
detailed analysis of the historical development of corporations
and taxation
legislation in their application to share buy-backs and other capital reductions
up to the year of income ended 30 June
2002. PBL and the Commissioner both
adopted a similar historical approach to the presentation of competing arguments
in the appeal.
- Although
addressed in these reasons, consideration of the historical development of
corporations and taxation legislation ultimately
contributes little to the
construction and application of either s 6D or s 159GZZZP(1) of the
ITAA 1936.
Legislative history
- In
the year of income ended 30 June 2002, the provisions of the Corporations
Act and the ITAA 1936 relating to share buy-backs were of relatively recent
origin. So were the provisions in Div 7B of Pt IIIAA of the ITAA 1936
and the definition of "share capital account" in s 6D of that Act.
- The
preceding two decades had seen developments in corporations law to which
sequential amendments to the ITAA 1936 were largely
responsive.
- The
Companies Code, in the form in which it commenced in
1981[20],
followed earlier companies legislation in: requiring the share capital of a
company to be divided into shares of a fixed
amount[21],
known as the "nominal value" or "par value" of the shares; requiring the
confirmation of a court for the company to reduce its share
capital including by
paying off any paid-up share capital in excess of the needs of the
company[22];
and prohibiting a company from acquiring its own shares or interests in its own
shares[23]. A
company (other than a no liability company) could issue shares at a "discount"
from their par value only if specified conditions
were
satisfied[24]
and a company that issued shares at a "premium" to their par value was required
to transfer the aggregate amount of that premium
to a "share premium account" to
which provisions relating to the reduction of capital applied as if the share
premium account were
paid-up share capital of the
company[25].
Save only that the share premium account could be applied in the payment of
dividends satisfied by the issue of shares, the company
was prohibited from
paying dividends to shareholders except out of
profits[26].
Another requirement of the Companies Code was that, where a company redeemed
preference shares otherwise than out of the proceeds
of a fresh issue of shares,
the nominal value of the shares redeemed was to be transferred out of profits
otherwise available for
dividends to a "capital redemption reserve", to which
the provisions relating to the reduction of capital applied as if the capital
redemption reserve were paid-up share capital of the
company[27].
- An
exception to the prohibition against a company acquiring its own shares or
interests in its own shares was created by an amendment
to the Companies Code in
1989[28]. The
Companies Code, as then amended, permitted a company to buy back its shares if
prescribed conditions were
satisfied[29]
with the consequence that, immediately after their transfer to the company, the
shares bought back were automatically cancelled and
the company's issued share
capital was reduced by their nominal
value[30]. The
exception created by that amendment was reflected in the Corporations Law, which
commenced in
1991[31].
Until 1995, any premium paid by the company over the nominal value of the shares
bought back had to be written-off by the company
first against any amount
standing to the credit of its share premium account and only after that against
its distributable
profits[32].
Under simplified provisions substituted in
1995[33]: that
latter requirement was omitted; providing for consideration payable by the
company on a buy-back of its shares became a permissible
but not mandatory
application of a share premium
account[34];
and, immediately after the registration of the transfer to the company of the
shares bought back, the shares were automatically
cancelled but without reducing
the company's nominal share
capital[35].
- The
concept of shares in a company having a par value was abolished as part of a
major revision of the Corporations Law effected
by amending legislation which
commenced on 1 July
1998[36]. On
and after that date: shares in a company no longer had a par
value[37]; a
company was no longer required to have a share premium account or a capital
redemption reserve; a company was able to capitalise
profits without issuing
shares[38]; and
the requirement that a dividend only be paid out of profits of the company
became
unqualified[39].
Section 1446 of the Corporations Law, a transitional provision, provided
that immediately after the commencement of the amending
legislation, "any amount
standing to the credit of the company's share premium account and capital
redemption reserve [became] part
of the company's share capital".
- The
same amending legislation repealed the simplified share buy-back provisions that
had been substituted in 1995 and re-enacted
those provisions, with some changes,
as Pt 2J.1 of Ch 2J of the Corporations Law. It remained the case
that, immediately after the
registration of the transfer to the company of the
shares bought back, the shares were automatically
cancelled[40]
but no reference was made to the effect on the company's nominal share capital,
which had ceased to be a relevant concept.
- The
same amending legislation also replaced, with Pt 2M.2 of Ch 2M of the
Corporations Law, various accounting and reporting obligations
which had largely
been carried over into the Corporations Law from the Companies Code. Those
earlier obligations had included an
obligation for a company to keep such
"accounting records" as correctly recorded and explained the transactions and
financial position
of the company and to do so in a manner as would enable the
preparation from time to time and auditing or review of "true and fair
accounts"
comprising "profit and loss accounts" and "balance sheets" together with
statements, reports and notes attached to or intended
to be read with
them[41].
Part 2M.2 of Ch 2M of the Corporations Law substituted the broader
concept of "financial records" for the earlier concept of "accounting
records"
and correspondingly substituted the concept of "true and fair financial
statements" for the earlier concept of "true and
fair accounts".
- The
form and structure of Pt 2J.1 of Ch 2J and Pt 2M.2 of Ch 2M
of the Corporations Law were replicated in the Corporations Act, which commenced
on 15 July 2001.
- Amendments
to the ITAA 1936 over the same period tracked the amendments to the
Companies Code and the Corporations Law.
- At
the commencement of the Companies Code, the ITAA 1936 ordinarily included
dividends paid by a company out of profits derived by
the company within the
assessable income of a
shareholder[42].
As defined since
1967[43],
"dividend" excluded (amongst other things and subject to exceptions)
distributions where the amount of the moneys paid was "debited
against an amount
standing to the credit of a share premium account of the company" and "moneys
paid ... by way of repayment ...
of moneys paid up on a share" but otherwise
included "any distribution made by a company to [a]
shareholder"[44].
A "share premium account" was defined to mean "an account ... to which the
company [had], in respect of premiums received by the
company on shares issued
by it, credited amounts, being amounts not exceeding the respective amounts of
the premiums" but not an
account "where any other amount is included in the
amount standing to the credit of such an account" or an account "where an amount
that has been credited to such an account in respect of a premium received by
the company on a share issued by it ... could not,
at any time before it was so
credited, be identified in the books of the company as such a
premium"[45].
The overall effect was that a distribution made by a company to a shareholder in
a reduction of capital was ordinarily a dividend
if and to the extent that the
distribution exceeded the sum of the amount paid up on cancelled shares and any
amount debited against
an amount standing to the credit of a dedicated share
premium account.
- Division
16K of Pt III was inserted into the ITAA 1936 in
1990[46] in
consequence of the amendment to the Companies Code for the first time permitting
a company to buy back its shares. Section 159GZZZP(1)
as enacted provided
that, for the purposes of the ITAA 1936, where a buy-back of a share by a
company was an off-market purchase,
the amount taken to be a dividend paid by
the company to the seller out of profits derived by the company was so much of
the purchase
price as exceeded the sum of the amount to which the share was paid
up immediately before the buy-back and the part (if any) of the
purchase
price which was debited against amounts standing to the credit of the company's
share premium account.
- Division
7B of Pt IIIAA was introduced into the ITAA 1936, and
s 159GZZZP(1) was amended to take the form in which it relevantly
remained,
by amending legislation enacted in consequence of, and which commenced with, the
amendment of the Corporations Law on 1
July
1998[47]. The
same amending Act inserted into the ITAA 1936 a definition of "share
capital account" which, so far as relevant, was to the
effect that "share
capital account ... [did] not include an account that [was] tainted for the
purposes of [Div 7B of
Pt IIIAA]"[48].
- The
Explanatory Memorandum for that amending legislation in 1998 described one of
its purposes as being to "ensure that existing
provisions within the tax laws
dependent on the concept of par value (and associated terms such as share
premiums, share premium
account and paid-up capital) continue to operate
appropriately"[49].
The Explanatory Memorandum went on to explain the purpose of Div 7B of
Pt IIIAA. It
stated[50]:
"The
current definition of 'share premium account' in the Act operates in such a way
that the tainting of the account by amounts other
than share premiums
(eg by crediting the account with profits) results in the account ceasing
to be a share premium account for tax
purposes.
Under the new Corporations Law, companies will be permitted ... to capitalise
profits by transferring an amount from their profit
account to their share
capital account. For the same reason that a share premium account is tainted by
the transfer of profits into
the account, a tainting rule will also apply in
respect of a company's share capital account."
- The
definition of "share capital account" as introduced from 1 July 1998 was
repealed, and s 6D was introduced into the ITAA 1936
in its place, by
further amending legislation in
1999[51], which
was given retrospective effect to 1 July
1998[52]. The
Explanatory Memorandum for that further amending legislation explained its
purpose as including to ensure
that[53]:
"a
share capital account does not become tainted by the merger of tainted share
premiums with share capital unless the share capital
account ceases to be more
than the total of the tainted share premium account immediately before the
merger".
It went on to
explain[54]:
"The tainting rule within [Div 7B of Pt IIIAA of the
ITAA 1936] prevents companies disguising a profit distribution as a
tax-preferred
capital distribution from the share capital account by first
transferring profits into that account and then distributing from it.
A similar
rule applied to share premium accounts before their abolition on 1 July
1998: in cases where the share premium account
contained amounts other than
share premiums ('tainted share premium accounts') the share premium account was
also treated as a profit
account.
Since the tainting rule's inception two unintended outcomes have emerged.
First, the merger of tainted share premiums with share
capital on 1 July
1998 has the effect of tainting the new share capital account for tax purposes,
thereby preventing the distribution
of profits in the guise of share capital.
This has the inappropriate flow-on effect of producing an automatic franking
debit upon
merger and it removes the ability of companies to defer distribution
of tainted amounts already transferred to share premium accounts.
Second, under the rules formerly applicable to share premium accounts before
1 July 1998, a share premium account did not become tainted
when share
premiums were credited to another account and then transferred to the share
premium account, provided they could be identified
in the books of the company
at all times as such a premium. The law in its present form does not expressly
provide for this exception."
- The
first of the two "unintended outcomes" identified in the Explanatory Memorandum
for the further amending legislation in 1999
was an outcome of the application
of Div 7B of Pt IIIAA in circumstances where the transitional
provision in s 1446 of the Corporations
Law caused an amount standing to
the credit of a company's share premium account or capital redemption reserve
automatically to become
part of the company's share capital on 1 July
1998[55]. It
was addressed by a transitional provision in the further amending
legislation[56].
- The
second of the two "unintended outcomes" identified in the Explanatory Memorandum
for the further amending legislation in 1999
– the tainting of a share
capital account occurring by reason of an amount of share capital first credited
to another account
being transferred to the share capital account in
circumstances where the amount could at all times be identified in the books of
the company as share capital – was addressed by a combination of the
insertion of the new definition in s 6D and the creation
of a new exception
to the rule in Div 7B of Pt IIIAA that a company's share capital
account would ordinarily become tainted if the
company transferred an amount to
it from another
account[57].
By virtue of the new definition in s 6D, notwithstanding the transfer to it
of an amount first credited to another account, an
account would be and remain a
share capital account (by operation of s 6D(1)(a)) if it was "an account
which the company [kept] of
its share capital" or (by operation of
s 6D(1)(b)) if it was created on or after 1 July 1998 and the first
amount credited to it
was share capital. Because two or more share capital
accounts were to be taken (by operation of s 6D(2)) to be a single account,
transfers between them would fall outside the scope of the ordinary rule that a
company's share capital account would become tainted
if the company transferred
an amount to that account from any of its other accounts. Even if an amount of
share capital were transferred
to a share capital account from another account
that fell outside the new definition in s 6D, by virtue of the new
exception the
rule would not apply if the amount "could be identified in the
books of the company as an amount of share capital at all times before
it was
credited to the share capital
account"[58].
Resolution
- "This
Court has stated on many occasions that the task of statutory construction must
begin with a consideration of the [statutory]
text"[59]. So
must the task of statutory construction end. The statutory text must be
considered in its context. That context includes legislative
history and
extrinsic materials. Understanding context has utility if, and in so far as, it
assists in fixing the meaning of the
statutory text. Legislative history and
extrinsic materials cannot displace the meaning of the statutory text. Nor is
their examination
an end in itself.
- The
Commissioner in the appeal emphasised that Div 7B of Pt IIIAA of the
ITAA 1936 as enacted treated a share buy-back in much the
same way as the
ITAA 1936 had since 1967 treated a distribution made in a reduction of
capital and that there was nothing in the
extrinsic material accompanying the
amendment of s 159GZZZP(1) in 1998 to indicate a legislative intention to
alter that similarity
of treatment. In a reprise of its argument to the Full
Court, PBL emphasised that the legislation amending the ITAA 1936 on
1 July
1998 in response to changes in the Corporations Law had the
immediate result, in the language of a contemporary discussion
paper[60], that
"the source of funds for distributions (profits or contributed capital) is a
matter of choice for companies, and operates by
reference to the company's
accounts" and that the legislative focus of the retrospective enactment of
s 6D in 1999 was on the interaction
of the new definition of "share capital
account" it introduced with Div 7B of Pt IIIAA, not with
s 159GZZZP(1).
- Each
of those aspects of legislative history may be acknowledged. The problem is
that none is of much assistance in fixing the meaning
of s 6D or in
applying s 159GZZZP(1) in the light of that meaning.
Section 159GZZZP(1) was to apply from 1 July 1998 in accordance
with
its amended terms. The definition of "share capital account" in s 6D,
introduced in 1999 retrospectively to 1 July 1998, applied
to that
expression in s 159GZZZP(1) as much as it applied to the use of that
expression elsewhere in the ITAA 1936.
- An
aspect of legislative history that is of greater utility in the construction and
application of ss 6D and 159GZZZP(1) of the ITAA
1936 is the
contemporaneous commencement on 1 July 1998 of Pt 2M.2 of Ch 2M
of the Corporations Law. Section 6D must be read in
light of that Part's
replacement of the previous notions of a company having "accounts" and
"accounting records" with the broader
and more functional notion of a company
having "financial statements" and "financial records". The reference in
s 6D(1)(a) to "an
account which the company keeps of its share
capital" (emphasis added) cannot in that light be confined, in the manner
suggested by the Full Court, to the account "to
which the paid up capital of the
company was originally
credited"[61]
or to "one in which a company ordinarily keeps its share capital on
contribution"[62]
(emphasis added). Much less can it be confined, as PBL argued in the appeal, to
an account which the company kept of its share capital
on 1 July 1998.
- The
word "account" in s 6D doubtless referred to a record of debits and credits
relating to a designated topic. Neither limb of
s 6D(1) turned on how the
topic of a particular record of debits or credits was designated. Section
6D(1)(b) applied only to an
account created after 1 July 1998, and turned
entirely on the nature of the amount first credited. Section 6D(1)(a)
applied irrespective
of when an account was created, and was not confined to
turn on any amount having been credited to the account, whether first or
at
all.
- In
a context in which the relevant record-keeping obligation of a company under
Pt 2M.2 of Ch 2M of the Corporations Law was to keep
written financial
records that correctly recorded and explained its transactions and financial
position and performance and that
would enable true and fair financial
statements to be prepared and audited, it was sufficient for an account to
answer the description
in s 6D(1)(a) of "an account which the company keeps
of its share capital" (emphasis added) that the account, whether debited
or credited with one or more amounts, be either a record of
a transaction into
which the company had entered in relation to its share capital, or a record of
the financial position of the company
in relation to its share capital.
- Section
6D(2) required that all share capital accounts that individually answered the
description in either s 6D(1)(a) or s 6D(1)(b)
be treated as a single
account for all purposes of the ITAA 1936. Section 6D(2) could not be
confined in a way that made it merely
facilitative of transfers between share
capital accounts. That the operation of s 6D(2) in combination with
Div 7B of Pt IIIAA might
result in a transfer from a profit account to
a reserve account tainting the whole company's combined share capital account
was not,
as PBL argued, "anomalous". It was the outcome specifically
foreshadowed in the note to s 6D(2) forming part of the statutory
text.
- Crown's
Share Buy-Back Reserve Account in which, as corrected, the only entry as at
30 June 2002 was a $1 billion debit was a record
of the transaction by
which Crown had on 28 June 2002 entered into an executory contract to
reduce its share capital by that amount.
As illustrated by the derivation of
the figure for "Contributed Equity" later shown in Crown's audited financial
statements, the
financial position of Crown in relation to its share capital as
at 30 June 2002 could only be understood by subtracting the $1 billion
debit balance in its Share Buy-Back Reserve Account from the credit balance of
just over $2.4 billion in its Shareholders Equity
Account. On either
basis, the Share Buy-Back Reserve Account answered the description of an account
which Crown kept of its share
capital within s 6D(1)(a). The Share
Buy-Back Reserve Account was therefore a share capital account.
- As
Crown's Share Buy-Back Reserve Account, along with its Shareholders Equity
Account, was, as at 30 June 2002, a share capital account,
the Share
Buy-Back Reserve Account and the Shareholders Equity Account were, by the
operation of s 6D(2), to be taken for the purposes
of s 159GZZZP(1) of
the ITAA 1936 to be Crown's single combined share capital account. Taken
as a single account, Crown's combined
share capital account had an amount of
just over $2.4 billion standing to its credit and a debit of
$1 billion to the same combined
share capital account. To characterise
that debit as a debit "against" the amount standing to the credit of the
combined share capital
account is not to extend the fiction created by
s 6D(2), but to apply it.
- In
addition to reiterating the construction of s 6D to which it had persuaded the
Full Court, PBL sought to raise a new argument
in the appeal to this Court to
the effect that s 159GZZZP(1) of the ITAA 1936 was not engaged as at
30 June 2002 given that the share
buy-back agreement was not completed and
the shares held by PBL were not cancelled until 6 August 2002. Assuming without
deciding
that it is open to PBL to raise the new argument, the new argument must
be rejected. PBL accepted that the share buy-back agreement
was a "buy-back"
within the meaning of Div 16K of Pt III of the ITAA 1936 that occurred when
the share buy-back agreement was entered
into on 28 June 2002. PBL also
accepted that the amount of $1 billion PBL was then entitled to receive
under the share buy-back
agreement on completion was a "purchase price" within
the meaning of Div 16K of Pt III of the ITAA 1936. Just how in those
circumstances
the executory nature of the share buy-back agreement resulted in
s 159GZZZP(1) not being engaged as at 30 June 2002 was not articulated
by PBL and is not apparent.
- The
$1 billion PBL was entitled to receive under the share buy-back agreement
was, as at 30 June 2002, therefore "the purchase price
in respect of the
buy-back of the share[s] ... which [was] debited against amounts standing to the
credit of ... [Crown's] share
capital account" within the meaning of
s 159GZZZP(1) of the ITAA 1936. It was not to the point that the
share buy-back agreement
remained to be completed and the shares had not been
cancelled.
Orders
- The
following orders should be made:
- Appeal
allowed with costs.
- Set
aside the orders made by the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia on
20 March 2012 and in their place order that the appeal
from the orders made
by Emmett J on 14 April 2011 be dismissed with
costs.
[1] Section 286(1) of the Corporations
Act.
[2] Sections 292 and 295 of the
Corporations Act.
[3] Sections 9, 296 and 334 of the
Corporations Act.
[4] Section 297 of the Corporations
Act.
[5] Section 9 of the Corporations
Act.
[6] Section 159GZZZK(a) of the ITAA
1936.
[7] Section 159GZZZK(b) of the ITAA
1936.
[8] Section 159GZZZM(a) of the ITAA
1936.
[9] Section 159GZZZK of the ITAA
1936.
[10] Section 6(1) of the ITAA 1936
("this Act").
[11] Section 44 of the ITAA
1936.
[12] Section 46 of the ITAA
1936.
[13] Section 159GZZZQ of the
ITAA 1936.
[14] Section 160ARDM of the ITAA
1936.
[15] Sections 2-35, 2-45 and 995-1
("this Act") of the ITAA 1997.
[16] Consolidated Media Holdings
Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation (2011) 82 ACSR 637 at 652-653 [70]-[73].
[17] Consolidated Media Holdings
Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (2012) 201 FCR 470 at 484 [40], 485
[43].
[18] (2012) 201 FCR 470 at 486
[45].
[19] (2012) 201 FCR 470 at 486
[46].
[20] Companies Act 1981
(Cth). See also Companies (Application of Laws) Act 1981 (NSW);
Companies (Application of Laws) Act 1981 (Vic); Companies (Application
of Laws) Act 1981 (Q); Companies (Application of Laws) Act 1981
(WA); Companies (Application of Laws) Act 1982 (SA); Companies
(Application of Laws) Act 1982 (Tas); Companies (Application of Laws)
Act (NT).
[21] Section 37(1)(c) of the
Companies Code.
[22] Section 123 of the Companies
Code.
[23] Section 129 of the Companies
Code.
[24] Section 118 of the Companies
Code.
[25] Section 119 of the Companies
Code.
[26] Sections 119 and 565 of the
Companies Code.
[27] Section 120 of the Companies
Code.
[28] Section 16 of the
Co-operative Scheme Legislation Amendment Act 1989 (Cth).
[29] Division 3A of Pt IV of
the Companies Code.
[30] Section 133PC of the Companies
Code.
[31] Division 4B of Pt 2.4
of the Corporations Law, inserted into the Corporations Act 1989 (Cth)
from 1 January 1991 by Sched 5 to the Corporations Legislation Amendment Act
1990 (Cth), and applied by the Corporations (New South Wales) Act
1990 (NSW), Corporations (Victoria) Act 1990 (Vic), Corporations
(South Australia) Act 1990 (SA), Corporations (Queensland) Act
1990 (Q), Corporations (Western Australia) Act 1990 (WA),
Corporations (Tasmania) Act 1990 (Tas), and Corporations (Northern
Territory) Act 1990 (NT).
[32] Section 133PD of the Companies
Code (inserted by s 16 of the Co-operative Scheme Legislation Amendment
Act 1989 (Cth)) and s 206PD of the Corporations Law.
[33] First Corporate Law
Simplification Act 1995 (Cth).
[34] Section 191(2)(ea) of the
Corporations Law.
[35] Section 206I of the
Corporations Law.
[36] Company Law Review Act
1998 (Cth).
[37] Section 254C of the
Corporations Law as amended by Sched 5 to the Company Law Review Act 1998
(Cth).
[38] Section 254S of the
Corporations Law.
[39] Section 254T of the
Corporations Law.
[40] Section 257H of the
Corporations Law.
[41] Sections 9 ("accounts" and
"accounting records") and 289(1) of the Corporations Law. See also ss 266 and
267(1) of the Companies
Code.
[42] Section 44(1) of the ITAA
1936.
[43] Income Tax Assessment Act
(No 4) 1967 (Cth).
[44] Section 4(2)(a) of the
Income Tax Assessment Act (No 4) 1967 (Cth), amending s 6(1) of the
ITAA 1936.
[45] Section 4(2)(b) of the
Income Tax Assessment Act (No 4) 1967 (Cth), amending s 6(1) of the
ITAA 1936.
[46] Taxation Laws Amendment Act
(No 3) 1990 (Cth).
[47] Taxation Laws Amendment
(Company Law Review) Act 1998 (Cth).
[48] Section 6(1) of the ITAA
1936.
[49] Australia, House of
Representatives, Taxation Laws Amendment (Company Law Review) Bill 1998 (Cth),
Explanatory Memorandum at [1.5].
[50] Australia, House of
Representatives, Taxation Laws Amendment (Company Law Review) Bill 1998 (Cth),
Explanatory Memorandum at [1.59]-[1.60].
[51] Taxation Laws Amendment Act
(No 7) 1999 (Cth).
[52] Section 2(2) of, and items 1
and 2 of Sched 1 to, the Taxation Laws Amendment Act (No 7) 1999
(Cth).
[53] Australia, House of
Representatives, Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No 7) 1999 (Cth),
Explanatory Memorandum at [1.1].
[54] Australia, House of
Representatives, Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No 7) 1999 (Cth),
Explanatory Memorandum at [1.6]-[1.8].
[55] Australia, House of
Representatives, Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No 7) 1999 (Cth), Explanatory
Memorandum at [1.34]-[1.35].
[56] Item 7 of Sched 1 to the
Taxation Laws Amendment Act (No 7) 1999 (Cth), amending item 9 of
Sched 2 to the Taxation Laws Amendment (Company Law Review) Act 1998
(Cth).
[57] Australia, House of
Representatives, Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No 7) 1999 (Cth), Explanatory
Memorandum at [1.23]-[1.28].
[58] Section 160ARDM(2)(a) of the
ITAA 1936, inserted by item 3 of Sched 1 to the Taxation Laws
Amendment Act (No 7) 1999 (Cth).
[59] Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v
Commissioner of Territory Revenue [2009] HCA 41; (2009) 239 CLR 27 at 46 [47]; [2009] HCA
41.
[60] See Australia, Review of
Business Taxation, A Platform for Consultation, Discussion Paper 2
(1999), vol 2 at [19.2].
[61] (2012) 201 FCR 470 at 484
[40].
[62] (2012) 201 FCR 470 at 485
[43].