Survey indicates property market cooling due to confusion
News release: Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand and Tax Management New Zealand
26 November 2021
A survey of chartered accountants and tax agents has revealed that incoming legislation intended to help cool New Zealand’s over-heated housing market is already having a major effect on investors – but largely because of confusion and lack of detail rather than clear policy.
The annual survey, jointly run by Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand (CA ANZ) and TMNZ, sought the views of 361 accountants in public practice, on recent tax policy developments.
Among the findings, the survey revealed that 70% of respondents have already seen clients change or voice their intention to change their residential property investment behaviours due to ongoing changes to the extended bright-line test, and proposed changes to deny interest deductions.
CA ANZ NZ Tax Leader John Cuthbertson said that further results from the survey show to key factors in play; the complexity of the proposed rules, and uncertainty as the details could change before the legislation is enacted in March 2022, despite the bright-line and denial of interest deductions coming into play from earlier this year.
“The survey suggests that the housing market has been given a policy placebo, in the form of legislation that is influencing behaviour before it is fully developed and enacted.”
“Residential property purchasers and investors typically react to the specific detail of legislation. However, in this case the market appears to be reacting to the complexity of the proposed legislations carveouts and inconsistencies, and the fact that it won’t know exactly what is in place until March 2022, despite it being backdated to capture activity in 2021.”
“To be fair, the Government’s aim was to cool down the overheated housing market, which is causing a range of economic and social issues, but we’re not sure this is the best way to do it.”
The survey shows that over 21 per cent of the respondents, or 1 in 5, feel ‘not at all confident’ about advising clients on the proposed new build interest limitation rules, and over 65 per cent of participants felt the phase out and denial of interest deductions would be somewhat or extremely difficult to comply with.
Similarly, almost 50% of respondents said they were either somewhat confident, or not at all confident on advising on the new build bright-line test.
“Because this policy hasn’t been developed in line with the generic tax policy process (GTPP), there’s a much higher chance of unintended consequences and collateral damage. The survey shows a considerable lack of confidence in how the legislation will work, and that will likely result in non-compliance and issues around who is captured and who isn’t.”
“It’s important to note that the level of complexity encountered will depend on the number of properties owned, banking arrangements in place and the mix of interest limitation rules and concessions in play,” added Mr Cuthbertson.
TMNZ Chief Executive Chris Cunniffe said the survey provides a good indication of how the proposed rules would be rolled out.
“In their current complex form, there’s likely to be a lot of variability in compliance with these laws. Especially as not everyone has a tax agent or accountant helping them.”
“While the extension of the bright line test to 10 years might land well for most mum and dad property owners, the denial of interest deductions and how that relates to new builds is likely to be misunderstood.”
“There’s opportunity for Government to provide greater clarity on the law changes and simplify certain aspects to help owners and accountants alike.”
New Survey Shows Inland Revenue Helpful, But Hindered
Press Release: Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand and Tax Management New Zealand
24 November 2021
Helpful, but hindered is the overarching finding in a new survey digging into public practice accountants’ experiences with Inland Revenue (IR).
Conducted by Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand and TMNZ, the survey of 361 members in public practice asked a range of questions about the timeliness of IR’s service, the quality of interaction, and the business support on offer.
“Over 80 per cent of those surveyed rated their agent account manager interactions positively over the last 12 months, which Inland Revenue should be pleased with,” said CA ANZ NZ Tax Leader John Cuthbertson.
“The flipside is that it is taking much longer for Inland Revenue to resolve queries. The number of public practitioners who say it’s taking more than 6 days to resolve their queries has risen from 5 per cent of respondents, to 47 per cent.”
Despite this, accountants and tax agents are positive about not only their interactions with account managers, but also the support measures that Inland Revenue has administered.
“Accountants and agents across New Zealand are telling us that the tax support provided by Inland Revenue has been as effective this year, as it was last year,” said Tax Management New Zealand Chief Executive, Chris Cunniffe.
“It’s been another turbulent year for businesses, and the tax relief and support measures have made a positive difference. It’s just that our survey shows it can take a while to get through to Inland Revenue, and to have queries resolved and assistance locked in.”
The appreciation of Inland Revenue’s support was illustrated by 85 per cent of participants reporting that they had clients who utilised the remission of interest and penalties for late payment of provisional tax due to COVID.
Additionally, over 71 per cent of participants have found it easy or not difficult, to enter into or assist clients with an instalment arrangement in the past 12 months. This covers all types of tax, including GST, PAYE and FBT, not just provisional tax.
The increased level of scrutiny and information required to access COVID support was also felt by survey respondents.
“Approximately half the survey respondents said that accessing COVID support was harder than in 2020. That’s not surprising, given the public’s desire for more scrutiny about who received support, and the declarations becoming more stringent during this year’s lockdowns,” concluded Mr Cuthbertson.
Syncing provisional tax to cashflow
As a self-employed painter and decorator, Bart Taylor knows full well how business owners can get themselves into strife if they don’t plan for their tax obligations.
He speaks from his own personal experience.
That’s why Bart is happy to talk about how TMNZ enables him as a self-employed tradesperson to take the stress out of having to pay provisional tax on dates dictated by Inland Revenue (IR).
TMNZ offers Bart the flexibility to make the payments when it suits his cashflow.
As someone who doesn’t always get paid every week, that’s important because it offers his business some breathing space while he waits for the money he’s earned from completed jobs to land in his bank account and ensures that other important invoices can be paid in the meantime.
A bit about Bart
Bart owns and operates his own business in Christchurch.
He’s a one-man band and that’s the way he likes it. Plus, most of his work means he does not require a crew, although he will occasionally use contractors when required or on larger jobs.
Bart has been his own boss since 2013, when, at the age of 24, he decided to make a go of this painting lark on his own. The market in the Garden City was awash with painting gigs during the rebuild and becoming self-employed seemed like a low-risk move.
Fast-forward nearly eight years and his gamble has paid off. He is enjoying the benefits that come with self-employment and, as a husband and father in a young family, the better work-life balance he has achieved.
Tough tax lessons
Yet that’s not to say that everything has been a bed of roses during that time.
“Becoming self-employed has been a bit of a rollercoaster. Lots of learnings, lots of difficult times, hard times,” says Bart.
“First and foremost, I’m a tradesman, so I am a worker. The back office, the organisation, the financial side of things is not my strong point. With the tax side of self-employment, I managed it very poorly for years because I was so young.”
Like other business owners, Bart wasn’t as prepared as he should have been and was “stung” in his second year of trading. That was when two years’ worth of tax was due. Ouch.
He admits having to pay provisional tax was “rough for a little while”.
“In the trade industry, you don’t always get paid every week and you need cashflow to run your business,” explains Bart.
“My accountant saw there was a risk of if we paid that tax bill in full, that I might fall short in other areas and he wanted to make sure that my relationship with my trade suppliers stay good and that the invoices I need to pay get paid on time, not just the IR ones.
“He recommended Tax Management NZ and that freed up cashflow.”
Breathing space from IR to manage cashflow
That’s because TMNZ gives Bart the flexibility to pay his provisional tax when it suits his business, without the consequences of steep IR interest and late payment penalties.
It operates with the blessing of the taxman, too.
TMNZ makes a date-stamped payment to IR on Bart’s behalf on the date his provisional tax is due. Bart pays TMNZ at a time when it suits his cashflow.
TMNZ transfers the date-stamped payment to Bart’s IR account and IR treats it as if Bart himself has paid on time. This eliminates any IR interest and late payment penalties showing on his account.
“Sometimes the option of TMNZ, to be able to borrow some money for a short period of time, to make sure you hit that IR deadline, frees you up with your cashflow until that payment [you are waiting on] comes through,” says Bart.
“The fee of using Tax Management NZ is so low and affordable in comparison to the failings of if you ran out of money in that time, or the scramble and the stress, so it’s definitely worth it.
“It’s changed my perception around making these tax payments. It takes the stress off of it.”
And how does dealing with TMNZ compare to dealing with IR?
“You get a bit more of a personal touch with Tax Management NZ because you get a prompt response and it’s not a cookie-cutter [reply].”
Bart is one of many small business owners throughout New Zealand who benefits from the provisional tax flexibility TMNZ offers. Get in touch for more information about our service or if you have any questions. We're happy to help. Alternatively, register with TMNZ to explore tax pooling for yourself.
Cashflow relief for farmers impacted by flood or drought
Those impacted by flooding in Canterbury or drought elsewhere in New Zealand have another option to manage their cashflow.
It’s called tax pooling.
It lets taxpayers defer their upcoming provisional tax payments to a time that suits them, without incurring interest (currently seven percent) and late payment penalties from Inland Revenue (IRD).
The service – which has been operating with the blessing of the taxman since 2003 – is available through an approved commercial provider such as Tax Management NZ (TMNZ).
The impact of extreme weather
The Government has declared the recent flood in the Canterbury region as a medium-scale adverse weather event.
As those in this part of New Zealand assess the damage and begin the clean-up following the large deluge of rain, a big dry is beginning (or, in some cases, continuing) to bite other parts of New Zealand. The drought has been classified as a large-scale adverse weather event.
Farmers impacted by these contrasting weather events are being encouraged to act early and assess their options if they need assistance.
For those battling drought, some tough decisions around stock and feed will need to be made. In the Canterbury region, flooding only compounds the financial pressure as many were also dealing with drought beforehand.
Cashflow will be important during this difficult period.
Help is available
Managing tax payments will be a key consideration in managing cashflow too.
IRD, to its credit, is exercising some discretion.
It will allow farmers and growers affected by the Canterbury flood to make early withdrawals from the income equalisation scheme.
For those whose current or future income will be significantly affected by drought, IRD will allow late deposits for the 2019-20 income year up to 30 June 2021.
Early withdrawals are also available in the case of a medium-scale adverse event or if someone is suffering serious hardship.
Please note a taxpayer must satisfy certain criteria for IRD to exercise its discretion around the income equalisation scheme.
There's also the option of re-estimating provisional tax.
However, while that allows someone to get a refund of tax they have paid earlier in the year, it does come with some risk.
Free up cashflow by deferring payment of provisional tax
Farmers growers with a May balance date are due to pay their the final instalment of provisional tax for the 2020-21 income on 28 June.
For a small interest cost, someone can use TMNZ to defer this payment.
We make a date-stamped tax deposit to IRD on behalf of a taxpayer on 28 June and the taxpayer pays us when it suits their cashflow.
A taxpayer can either pay the full tax amount at a date of their choosing or enter an instalment arrangement.
When a taxpayer satisfies their arrangement with TMNZ, IRD will treat it as if the taxpayer had paid on time. Any interest and late payment penalties showing on their account will be remitted.
A taxpayer has up to 12 months to pay their 28 June provisional tax with TMNZ.
TMNZ’s interest cost is much cheaper than what IRD charges when someone pays their tax late.
Please click here to register with TMNZ. Alternatively, feel free to contact us if you have any questions.
Can AIM taxpayers use tax pooling?
A taxpayer cannot use tax pooling to defer payment of, or settle, provisional tax instalments calculated under the accounting income method (AIM).
However, TMNZ can help AIM taxpayers with terminal tax or when they receive a notice of reassessment.
What does tax pooling legislation say about AIM?
Legislation in the Income Tax Act 2007 clearly states that a taxpayer can use tax pooling funds to satisfy “a provisional tax liability other than under the AIM method”.
Please refer to sections RP17-RP21 of the Act for further information.
Why IR doesn’t allow tax pooling to assist with AIM payments?
Inland Revenue (IR) says tax pooling manages taxpayers’ uncertainty around provisional tax payments and their exposure to interest.
Consistent with this objective, tax pooling is not currently available for tax types where someone has certainty of their liability at the time of payment (for example, GST).
Given the payments made under AIM are calculated on actual accounting profit, taxpayers will have certainty about what's due.
As such, it's IR’s view that it's not appropriate to allow tax pooling for provisional tax payments calculated under AIM.
What does that mean for you?
IR will reject the use of any tax pooling funds to satisfy an underpaid AIM instalment. As a result, late payment penalties and interest will continue to show on a taxpayer account.
They will, however, accept the use of tax pooling funds to settle a terminal tax liability. The same applies if an AIM taxpayer has additional tax to pay after receiving a notice of reassessment.
Please be mindful of these facts when entering arrangements with TMNZ.
It’s also an important consideration before electing to use AIM to calculate provisional tax.
That's because paying tax when income is earned is not necessarily the same as when cash is received.
If someone is unable to pay an AIM instalment on time or in full due to cashflow constraints, the safety net of tax pooling will not be available to reduce their exposure to interest and eliminate late payment penalties.
Feel welcome to contact us if you have any questions.
Make IR interest, late payment penalties disappear
A missed or underpaid provisional tax payment often means a taxpayer is faced with a steep interest cost and potentially late payment penalties on top of what they owe.
However, tax pooling can make that go away.
A big frustration with Inland Revenue (IR) is that it expects taxpayers to pay the correct amount of tax on the dates it sets. No ifs, no buts.
Fail to adhere to this rigid timetable or underpay and you will face the consequences.
IR charges interest – 9.89% as at 8 May 2025 – from the date the payment was due until you pay the outstanding amount.
Late payment penalties may also apply as follows:
- One percent the day after payment was due.
- An additional four percent if the tax amount (including late payment penalties) remains unpaid after seven days.
A tax pooling provider such as TMNZ operates with the blessing of IR. It can be of assistance if taxpayers find themselves in this situation.
Where might this be useful?
In the event you missed your recent 7 May provisional tax payment – or any other instalment relating to the 2020-21 income year, for that matter – we can eliminate any late payment penalties for which you may be liable and significantly reduce the interest you pay.
You make your payment to TMNZ and we apply backdated tax that was paid to IR on the original date(s) it was due against your liability.
The taxman treats it as if you paid on time once it processes this transaction.
This wipes any IR interest and late payment penalties showing on your account.
You have the option of making to TMNZ a one-off payment at a date of your choosing or making regular instalment payments towards your liability over a longer period.
TMNZ gives you up to 13 months to pay your 7 May provisional tax for the 2020-21 income year.
Is your 2020 terminal tax overdue?
You still have time to use TMNZ to reduce the interest cost and eliminate late payment penalties if you have outstanding provisional or terminal tax liabilities for the 2019-20 income year.
However, you will have to act quickly.
Tax pooling legislation gives taxpayers an additional 75 days past their terminal tax date to pay their terminal tax.
If your terminal tax for the 2019-20 income year was due on 7 April 2021, you would have until 15 June to settle owe with TMNZ.
Reassessed by IR
TMNZ can also assist with historic income tax payments and other tax types such as GST and PAYE if you receive a notice of reassessment from IR.
You have 60 days from the date the IR issues this notice to use tax pooling.
Please contact us if you have any questions.
Commissioner’s discretion for tax pooling
A provision within legislation allows taxpayers to use tax pooling for certain income tax or RWT voluntary disclosures where no return has been previously filed.
This is known as Commissioner’s discretion.
And it’s worth seeking if a taxpayer satisfies all relevant criteria (see below), as settling these underpaid tax types through an approved tax pooling provider such as TMNZ can result in notable interest savings. The interest we charge can be significantly lower than Inland Revenue (IR).
To use tax pooling for historical income tax and other tax types, there generally needs to be a notice of reassessment issued by IR.
However, section RP17B (9) Income Tax Act 2007 stipulates that the Commissioner’s discretion found in RP17B (10) of the Act may be available in situations where a voluntary disclosure for income tax or RWT is made and a return for that tax type has not previously been filed.
The criteria for Commissioner’s discretion
That said, there are three conditions a taxpayer seeking Commissioner’s discretion to use tax pooling funds to settle income tax and RWT obligations must meet.
They are as follows:
- The increased amount arises as a result of an event or circumstance beyond the person’s control; and
- The person has a reasonable justification or excuse for not filing the return by the required date; and
- The person has an otherwise good compliance history for two income years before the income year in which the voluntary disclosure is made.
A taxpayer must satisfy all three requirements for the Commissioner to exercise their discretion.
This ensures that in exercising discretion she is satisfied that each occasion of non-compliance is not a deliberate act or a continuation of failures because of the taxpayer’s inadequate or poorly applied internal controls.
We recommend you refer to the examples 12 and 13 (pages 44 and 45) of the Tax Information Bulletin Vol 23, No 8, October 2011 to get a sense of the scenarios where IR will allow or decline a request for Commissioner’s discretion.
Applying for Commissioner’s discretion
The process is straightforward.
An application asking the Commissioner to exercise their discretion to use tax pooling funds can be made in writing.
Be sure to include the taxpayer’s name and IR number in this correspondence.
Outline the details of the case in a few paragraphs. We recommend splitting this information under the following headings:
- Background information. Include information about the taxpayer and nature of their business. It should also contain contextual information that you deem relevant, such as historical business relationships, personal circumstances, and relationships with other/historical accountants.
- The increased amount arises as a result of an event or circumstance beyond the person's control. Include detailed (and chronological) events or factors that have occurred throughout the period in question that provide further contextual explanation as to how the liability has arisen and not been declared until now, and how this was beyond the taxpayer’s control.
- The person has a reasonable justification or excuse for not filing the return by the required date. Include any details that show the client has not been purposefully negligent.
- The person has an otherwise good compliance history for two income years before the income year in which the voluntary disclosure is made. Include details that support a good prior history. It’s important to show this occurrence is out of the ordinary and therefore worthy of consideration.
TMNZ has an email template available should you require this.
Requests asking the Commissioner to exercise their discretion can be sent to taxpooling@ird.govt.nz
TMNZ is here to help
If you’d like further information on Commissioner’s discretion or wish to discuss a particular scenario, please get in touch.
IR payment allocation rules explained
Provisional tax payments made on or before the date of the final instalment for the year are applied to the oldest overdue tax amount first while payments made after the date of the final instalment are applied to the interest owing on any overdue tax first, then the overdue tax amount.
The Inland Revenue (IR) payment allocation rules – which are found in s120F and s120L Tax Administration Act 1994 – also apply to payments made via a tax pooling provider such as TMNZ.
It’s important to understand how they work and differ from one another.
Detailed explanation
Section 120L covers provisional tax payments made on or before the date of the final instalment for the year.
It requires IR to apply a payment to unpaid tax in order from oldest to newest. Please note the unpaid tax amount(s) include late payment penalties.
Section 120F deals with payments that are made after the date of the final provisional tax instalment for the year.
It requires IR to apply payments, in the following order, towards:
- The interest accrued on the oldest unpaid tax amount until that interest is paid.
- The oldest unpaid tax amount until that tax is paid.
- The interest accrued on the next oldest unpaid tax amount until that interest is paid.
- The next oldest unpaid tax amount until that tax is paid.
- To each subsequent arising interest and unpaid tax amount using the pattern above, in time order that relevant unpaid tax arises, until they are paid.
Again, the unpaid tax amount in s120F includes late payment penalties.
The ramifications
These allocation rules mean a taxpayer may well find a tax payment they intended to be destined for a particular instalment date is allocated by IR’s system to earlier unpaid amounts first.
For example, let's say they may make a $10,000 payment on time and in full on 15 January 2021. However, if they failed to pay their 28 August 2020 (P1) provisional tax, then their $10,000 payment will be applied as per s120L to the overdue tax amount (including late payment penalties) at P1 first.
As such, this leaves them exposed to additional (and unexpected) late payment penalties and interest.
It does not matter if the $10,000 payment they made on 15 January 2021 is a date-stamped transfer from the account of a tax pooling provider. Please see sRP19 (1B) Income Tax Act 2007.
In other words, you need to clear the tax liability at all earlier instalment dates first.
How TMNZ can assist with missed provisional tax payments
It's best to purchase from TMNZ the backdated tax to cover the shortfall at the earlier instalment date.
This achieves two things.
Firstly, it eliminates late payment penalties and significantly reduces the interest cost on the underpaid tax.
That’s because the tax you are purchasing from TMNZ was paid to IR on the date it was originally due. IR will treat it as if you have paid on time once it processes your transaction with TMNZ.
Secondly, it ensures that any other payment that was otherwise made on time and in full will be allocated to the particular provisional tax date for which it was intended.
A taxpayer has up to 75 days past their terminal tax date for that tax year to purchase the tax they require.
For example, if you have a terminal tax date of 7 February 2021, you will have until mid-April to settle your 2020 income tax with TMNZ. Those with a 7 April 2021 terminal tax date have until mid-June.
Please contact us if you have any questions. We're happy to help.
Anti-money laundering requirements and tax pooling
Tax Management NZ (TMNZ) must now conduct a limited form of customer due diligence on all clients as part of recent changes to anti-money laundering (AML) requirements.
As such, we will be collecting information about the taxpayers using our service and asking anyone acting on their behalf to supply some basic personal details.
We also need to see evidence that a taxpayer has an actual or expected liability at Inland Revenue (IR) before we transfer tax from our tax pool.
Transactions cannot be completed until we receive this information from you.
Information we require from a taxpayer
For a company, limited AML requires us to collect and hold information about them that is publicly available. We will obtain this information ourselves from the New Zealand Companies Office. You don’t have to do this.
For an individual or a trust, we only need information from a person acting on their behalf (see below).
What person acting on behalf means
As part of the limited AML requirement, TMNZ must collect the identity information from at least one individual who has the authority to act on behalf of a taxpayer using our service.
For tax agents, this can be either of the following:
- A partner, director or owner of your firm; or
- An agent at your firm who is linked to the taxpayer (e.g. the taxpayer’s accountant). It can also include the person who entered the transaction for the taxpayer or the person who receives email correspondence regarding the taxpayer’s transaction if this person is different from the accountant.
For a taxpayer, this can be ANY of the following:
- The taxpayer themselves, if they are an individual.
- An employee who has authority to act on behalf of the taxpayer (if they are a company).
- A trustee of the taxpayer (if they are a trust). We require a copy of the trust deed to ensure this person has authority to act.
The person above requires a TMNZ dashboard login and must either have visibility to view all taxpayers registered with your accounting firm or be linked to the specific taxpayer or transaction. This is not applicable if the taxpayer is an individual or the person acting on behalf is a trustee.
You have the option of supplying the tax agent or taxpayer identity information as part of limited AML.
Identity information we require from a person acting on behalf
TMNZ must collect the following identity information as part of the limited AML requirement if you are a person acting on behalf of the taxpayer:
- Your full legal name.
- Date of birth.
The above is required under section 15 Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act 2009.
Any personal information TMNZ holds about you or your clients is stored on a secure system that has been penetration tested to ensure this data will not be compromised.
Confirmation of tax liability
The limited AML requirement means TMNZ must also ascertain that a taxpayer using our service has a liability or expects to have a liability with IR before we can complete their transaction.
Proof of this can be in the form of:
- Written confirmation from a tax agent that the taxpayer is expecting to have a liability at IR. (This can be an approximation if the exact figure is not known at the time.)
- A copy of the taxpayer’s myIR transaction detail report for the relevant tax year.
- Standard uplift amounts determined from prior year RIT information. Prior year RIT information must be determined from copies of IR correspondence or written confirmation from a tax agent.
- A copy of any provisional tax estimate submitted to IR by the taxpayer.
- Any correspondence from IR showing a liability to pay in respect to the relevant tax year.
We only require confirmation of a taxpayer’s liability when we transfer funds from the tax pool to their IR account.
Does the information provided need to be verified?
A partial exemption granted to the tax pooling industry means there is no need for TMNZ to carry out the verification requirements that apply under full AML.
In other words, we do not need you to provide copies of documents to substantiate the information you provide.
Full AML, including verification, is still required for refunds or sales that meet our policy thresholds.
AML has been around for a long time – why are you asking for this information now?
Previously, TMNZ only carried out AML if a taxpayer was requesting a refund or sale over a certain amount from the tax pool.
However, our AML regulator – the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) – is making tax pooling providers hold more information about every taxpayer using our service and anyone with authority to act on their behalf.
This limited AML requirement from DIA is in response to the accounting profession being brought into the AML regime. It has been in effect since 1 July 2020.
As a reporting entity captured under the Act, TMNZ must comply with the AML regulations set out in the legislation and any other requirements issued by DIA.
Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions. We’re happy to help.
Updated 12 October 2020
Disclaimer: This article is correct as at 12 October 2020. It is subject to change.
How filing late and losing EOT impacts provisional tax payments
Losing extension of time (EOT) due to filing income tax returns late means someone can only use 105 percent of the previous year's residual income tax (RIT) when calculating their provisional tax payments.
That's because if a taxpayer fails to provide their returns(s) on time, Inland Revenue's (IR) system defaults to using the date by which they were legally due to file the return for that year – not the date on which they furnished the return.
Only if someone files their return(s) within the required timeframe will the actual date of filing be used.
This is important to remember, particularly when using TMNZ’s Tax Calculator.
An overview of IR's system and TMNZ's Tax Calculator
When a taxpayer files their return for the most recently completed year, IR’s system uses the lesser of standard uplift or a third of their RIT to determine the provisional tax instalment amounts due and payable for that year.
As per s120KBB (3B) Tax Administration Act 1994, the standard uplift instalment can either be the lesser of the 105 percent or 110 percent calculation. You can read more about that here.
TMNZ’s calculator follows the same logic as IR's system.
To determine the instalment amounts due and payable, it requires a taxpayer's RIT and filing date information for the past three years:
- The current tax year or most recently completed tax year (e.g. 2020).
- The tax year prior to that (e.g. 2019).
- The tax year two years prior to that (e.g. 2018).
Whereas IR has access to this information, we unfortunately don't. That's why we ask users to enter these details themselves.
If someone was late in providing a return and lost their EOT in any of the years before the current or recently completed tax year, then it’s crucial they know the correct filing date to use, otherwise the calculator will spit out incorrect instalment amounts.
After all, garbage in, garbage out.
Example
A taxpayer with a 31 March balance date decided to use TMNZ’s Tax Calculator to work out the provisional tax payable for the 2019 tax year. They did not pay any income tax for that year and wanted to purchase it from TMNZ to reduce their interest cost and eliminate late payment penalties.
RIT and filing date information for the past three years
| Tax Year | RIT | EOT | Legal date by which they must file their return | Date they file their return | Return status |
| 2017 | $6000 | Yes | 31 March 2018 | 1 May 2018 | Late |
| 2018 | $10,000 | No | 7 July 2018 | 16 January 2019 | Late |
| 2019 | $25,000 | No | 7 July 2019 | 30 June 2019 | On time |
As you can see, the taxpayer has lost their EOT for the 2018 tax year due to filing their 2017 return late. Their 2018 return was also late, so they don’t have EOT for their 2019 tax year either. However, the taxpayer did file the latter year’s return on time.
This means when using TMNZ’s Tax Calculator they must enter into the ‘date of filing’ field the respective legal dates by which they were required to furnish the returns for the 2017 and 2018 tax years.
For the 2017 tax year, this will be 31 March 2018 as their EOT was still applicable. For the 2018 tax year, this will be the non-EOT deadline of 7 July 2018.
Legislation states anyone who has an early balance date (i.e., the period between 1 October and 31 March) must file their return by 7 July if they do not have EOT. Those without EOT who have a late balance date (i.e., the period between 1 April and 30 September) must file their return on the seventh day of the fourth month after their year-end.
As the 2019 tax return was provided within the mandatory timeframe, the taxpayer can use the actual date on which they submitted that year’s return to IR.
Recap: How things should look in TMNZ’s Tax Calculator
| Tax year | RIT | Date of filing |
| 2017 | $6000 | 31 March 2018 |
| 2018 | $10,000 | 7 July 2018 |
| 2019 | $25,000 | 30 June 2019 |
How this impacts provisional tax instalments
In this situation, the 2019 provisional tax instalments will be based on the standard uplift amount as this is lower than a third of the RIT for that year.
However, ALL uplift payments will be based on 105 percent of the 2018 RIT.
That’s because the taxpayer lost EOT for the 2018 tax year and, therefore, was supposed to have filed their return for that year on 7 July 2018 – before the date of their first provisional tax instalment for the 2019 tax year (this being 28 August 2018).
As such, they cannot base any payments off 110 percent of their 2017 RIT.
Therefore, the 2019 instalment amounts due and payable as per IR's system – and what TMNZ's Tax Calculator will tell them to purchase – at each date are as follows:
- 28 August 2018: $3500
- 15 January 2019: $3500
- 7 May 2019: $3500
TMNZ's calculator will also show the taxpayer needs to purchase at their terminal tax date the final balance of $14,500 to settle the 2019 RIT, as their RIT is less than $60,000.
Please note the terminal tax date will have been 7 February 2020 due to them losing their EOT. They would have had 75 days from this date to purchase from TMNZ the 2019 income tax they require.
Don't forget the flow-on effect
It is also important to remember that because there was a requirement to file the 2019 return by 7 July 2019, the taxpayer can only use the 105 percent uplift calculation for their 2020 provisional tax payments.
Again, this is due to the filing date for the 2019 return being before the first instalment date for the 2020 year.
So, using the RIT information above, the standard uplift payments for the 2020 tax year will have been:
- 28 August 2019: $8750
- 15 January 2020: $8750
- 7 May 2020: $8750
For those using the standard uplift method, the 105 percent calculation will continue to be the only option for them to determine provisional tax payments until the taxpayer re-applies for their EOT.
Legislative references
You can find the legislation pertaining to filing dates of tax returns and EOT in s37 and s38 Tax Administration Act 1994.
Please feel welcome to contact us if you have any questions.