ATO Interpretative Decision

ATO ID 2004/929

Income Tax

Portfolio transfer of general insurance liabilities: deduction for refund of reinsurance premiums under cancelled reinsurance contract
FOI status: may be released

CAUTION: This is an edited and summarised record of a Tax Office decision. This record is not published as a form of advice. It is being made available for your inspection to meet FOI requirements, because it may be used by an officer in making another decision.

This ATOID provides you with the following level of protection:

If you reasonably apply this decision in good faith to your own circumstances (which are not materially different from those described in the decision), and the decision is later found to be incorrect you will not be liable to pay any penalty or interest. However, you will be required to pay any underpaid tax (or repay any over-claimed credit, grant or benefit), provided the time limits under the law allow it. If you do intend to apply this decision to your own circumstances, you will need to ensure that the relevant provisions referred to in the decision have not been amended or repealed. You may wish to obtain further advice from the Tax Office or from a professional adviser.

Issue

Can a general insurance company claim a deduction under section 8-1 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) for a refund of reinsurance premiums to another general insurance company under a reinsurance contract that is cancelled because of a portfolio transfer?

Decision

Yes. A general insurance company can claim a deduction under section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997 for a refund of reinsurance premiums to another general insurance company under a reinsurance contract that is cancelled because of a portfolio transfer.

Facts

The taxpayer is a general insurance company for the purposes of section 995-1 of the ITAA 1997 and the Insurance Act 1973.

The taxpayer has a reinsurance contract with another general insurance company (the reinsured). The purpose of the reinsurance contract is to reduce the reinsured's exposure to claims and to be indemnified against some part of the claims.

The taxpayer entered into a portfolio transfer arrangement whereby it assumed the insurance liabilities of the reinsured. As a result, the reinsurance contract between the taxpayer and the reinsured was cancelled.

The taxpayer, on cancellation of the reinsurance contract, is required to refund that part of the reinsurance premium that it previously received from the reinsured that relates to the unexpired period of the reinsurance contract.

Reasons for Decision

Section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997 states that a loss or outgoing is deductible provided that 'it is necessarily incurred in carrying on a business for the purpose of gaining or producing your assessable income.' A loss or outgoing is not deductible under section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997 if it is denied under paragraph 8-1(2)(a) of the ITAA 1997 because it is a loss or outgoing of a capital nature.

The deductibility of the refund of part of the reinsurance premium can be determined in light of the High Court's decision in G.P. International Pipecoaters Pty Ltd v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1990) 170 CLR 124; 90 ATC 4413; (1990) 21 ATR 1. It was held in that case that:

The character of expenditure is ordinarily determined by reference to the nature of the asset acquired or the liability discharged by the making of the expenditure, for the character of the advantage sought by the making of the expenditure is the chief, if not the critical, factor in determining the character of what is paid.

In the context of subsection 51(1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936, the predecessor of section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997, Hill J said in FC of T v. Broken Hill Pty Ltd Company Ltd 2000 ATC 4659; (2000) 45 ATR 507, [2000] FCA 1431 that:

In determining whether an outgoing falls for deductibility under s51(1), it will be critical to determine what the outgoing is paid for. The significance of that question, which is directed to ascertaining the advantage sought to be obtained, is essential to the determination of true characterisation of an outgoing.

As the reinsurance contract is not going to run its full term, the taxpayer will refund part of the reinsurance premium that it received from the reinsured. The refund recognises the fact the taxpayer will not be providing reinsurance cover for the period that was originally intended.

The provision of a service such as reinsurance cover is of a normal incident of the business of a reinsurer. Therefore, where the service will not be provided for the period that was originally intended, a refund of part of the premium in respect of that service is considered to have a revenue character and will be deductible.

Accordingly, the taxpayer can claim a deduction under section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997 for the refund of the reinsurance premium under a reinsurance contract that is cancelled.

Date of decision:  1 November 2004

Year of income:  Year ended 30 June 2004

Legislative References:
Income Tax Assessment Act 1997
   section 8-1
   paragraph 8-1(2)(a)
   section 995-1

Income Tax Assessment Act 1936
   subsection 51(1)

Insurance Act 1973
   the Act

Case References:
G P International Pipecoaters Pty Ltd v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation
   (1990) 170 CLR 124
   90 ATC 4413
   21 ATR 1

FC of T v. Broken Hill Pty Co Ltd
   2000 ATC 4659
   45 ATR 507

Related ATO Interpretative Decisions
ATO ID 2004/910
ATO ID 2004/911
ATO ID 2004/912
ATO ID 2004/913
ATO ID 2004/914
ATO ID 2004/915
ATO ID 2004/916
ATO ID 2004/917
ATO ID 2004/918
ATO ID 2004/919
ATO ID 2004/920
ATO ID 2004/921
ATO ID 2004/922
ATO ID 2004/923
ATO ID 2004/924
ATO ID 2004/925
ATO ID 2004/926
ATO ID 2004/927
ATO ID 2004/928
ATO ID 2004/930

Keywords
General insurance
General insurance industry
Reinsurance & reinsurers

Siebel/TDMS Reference Number:  4078120

Business Line:  Public Groups and International

Date of publication:  19 November 2004

ISSN: 1445-2782