TR 2006/1: Income tax: the
scope of and nature of payments falling within section 129 of
the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936
|
BINDING SECTION: |
|
|
What this Ruling is about |
1 |
|
Ruling |
36 |
|
Examples |
46 |
|
Date of effect |
56 |
|
NON BINDING SECTION: |
|
|
Appendix 1: |
|
|
Explanation |
57 |
|
Appendix 2: |
|
|
Alternative views |
125 |
|
Appendix 3: |
|
|
Detailed contents list |
129 |
Protection Label
|
This
Ruling provides you with the following level of
protection:
This publication (excluding appendices) is a public
ruling for the purposes of the Taxation
Administration Act 1953 .
A public ruling is an expression of the Commissioner's
opinion about the way in which a relevant provision
applies, or would apply, to entities generally or to a
class of entities in relation to a particular scheme or
a class of schemes.
If you rely on this ruling, we must apply the law to you
in the way set out in the ruling (or in a way that is
more favourable for you if we are satisfied that the
ruling is incorrect and disadvantages you, and we are
not prevented from doing so by a time limit imposed by
the law). You will be protected from having to pay any
under-paid tax, penalty or interest in respect of the
matters covered by this ruling if it turns out that it
does not correctly state how the relevant provision
applies to you. |
What this Ruling is about
Class of person/arrangement
1. This Ruling applies to persons whose principal place of
business is out of Australia and who:
-
(a)
-
carry passengers, livestock, mails or
goods shipped in Australia on ships belonging to them
(this would include ships owned or hired under a
hire-purchase agreement by such persons); or
-
(b)
-
carry passengers, livestock, mails or
goods shipped in Australia on ships chartered by them.
(See paragraphs 63 to 67.)
2. This Ruling applies to payments made under arrangements
relating to the carriage of passengers, livestock, mails or
goods by sea internationally as well as for 'coasting trade'.
The arrangements normally involve the carriage of goods etc. by
chartered and unchartered ships under contractual arrangements
known in the industry as 'bills of lading', 'voyage
charterparties' and 'time charterparties'.
Issues discussed in the Ruling
3. This Ruling considers the liability to income tax, of the
class of persons to whom this Ruling applies, arising in
relation to amounts paid or payable in respect of the carriage
of passengers, livestock, mails or goods shipped in Australia
under section 129 of the Income
Tax Assessment Act 1936 (ITAA
1936).
4. This Ruling considers the nature of payments that form the
basis for calculating the deemed taxable income under section
129 of the ITAA 1936. As contractual arrangements in the
shipping industry can be rather complex and varied, this Ruling
will make particular reference to payments made under 'bills of
lading', 'voyage charterparties' and 'time charterparties'. To
facilitate the discussion and analysis of section 129, this
Ruling will, in the main, address the issues in the context of
the carriage of goods by sea.
5. The principal issue raised by the shipping industry is
whether 'hire' paid under a 'time charterparty' is an amount
paid ' in respect
of' the carriage
of goods. However, issues have also arisen with regard to other
payments. This Ruling considers the tax treatment under section
129 of various specific payments that in the main are made under
the contractual arrangements discussed in this Ruling. The
payments in question are 'freight', 'demurrage', 'deadfreight',
'dispatch money', and cleaning charges payable under a 'bill of
lading' or 'voyage charterparty' and 'hire' payable under a
'time charterparty'. However, there may be other payments that
may or may not fall within the section and which are not
addressed in this Ruling.
6. This Ruling is not concerned with the effect of the Ships and
Aircraft Article in Australia's Double Tax Agreements. This
Ruling is also not concerned with payments made to the shipowner
by a charterer of a ship under a 'demise charterparty' of which
the 'bareboat charterparty' is an example. The nature of a
'demise charterparty' is discussed in detail in Taxation Ruling
TR 2003/2. Suffice to say that for the purposes of the present
Ruling a 'demise charterparty' is tantamount to the lease of a
ship. Unlike a 'voyage charterparty' and a 'time charterparty',
a 'demise charterparty' does not constitute a contract of
carriage or a contract for transportation services for goods
carried by sea. Section 129 does not contemplate payments made
for the lease of a ship.
Glossary of terms used in this Ruling
7. This Ruling uses terms that are commonplace in the shipping
trade. Although some of the terms are also used in other
contexts, for example, air transport, the definitions are
limited to shipping. The meaning given to the following terms
for the purposes of this Ruling has been obtained from various
shipping dictionaries,1textbooks and maritime case
law.
8. ' Bill of
lading' - is a
document issued by a carrier by sea to a shipper of goods
acknowledging the receipt by the carrier on board a named vessel
(or for subsequent shipment on board) of the goods described
therein, and containing an undertaking to deliver the goods at
the place of delivery to the shipper or named consignee, or to
his order or assigns, subject to the terms and conditions set
out in or incorporated into the document. It represents the
right to possession of the goods and, therefore, if an 'order'
bill, allows traders to deal with the goods while they are at
sea, the carrier automatically attorning to the holder on the
terms of the bill. 2 A
bill of lading is also:
-
(a)
-
ordinarily prepared by the 'shipper' of
goods or its agent and presented to the carrier or its
agent for signing;
-
(b)
-
signed by the master of the ship, but is
frequently signed by other persons to whom authority has
been granted to sign on behalf of the master or the
contracting carrier (including a charterer or its
agent);
-
(c)
-
evidence of, or constitutes, a contract
of carriage between the contracting carrier and
'shipper' or holder;
-
(d)
-
usually an acknowledgment of the shipment
of specified goods and describes the apparent order and
condition of the goods and the date of shipment; and
-
(e)
-
capable of being a document of title with
endorsement or delivery operating to effect a transfer
of the title of the goods described therein.
9. ' Charterer '
- is the party who hires a ship from a shipowner or another
charterer for a period of time (see 'Time charterparty' and
'Demise charterparty') or who reserves a ship's cargo space for
the carriage of goods (see 'Voyage charterparty').
10. ' Charterparty '
- is a generic term for the description of 'time charterparty',
'voyage charterparty' and 'demise (or bareboat) charterparty'
contracts.
11. ' C.I.F. '
- means 'cost, insurance and freight'. It is a term relating to
the sale of goods for carriage by sea. The seller pays for all
costs of transit to the port of destination and arranges the
transportation of the goods. The insurance and shipping charges
are included in the price paid for the goods by the buyer. The
goods are placed at the buyer's risk upon delivery of the
shipping documents.
12. ' Coasting
trade ' - also
referred to as ' coastal
trade ', is the
carriage of goods by a ship which are shipped and discharged at
a port in Australia. This will include both inter-State and
intra-State voyages irrespective of whether such voyages are
undertaken by licensed ships or under various permits or
registration requirements provided under relevant State or
Commonwealth legislation.
13. ' Deadfreight '
- is ordinarily a liquidated amount of damages payable under a
'bill of lading' or 'voyage charterparty' by the 'shipper' to
the shipowner for providing less than the quantity of cargo
agreed to be carried under the contract of carriage.
14. ' Demise (or
bareboat) charterparty '
- under a 'charterparty' by demise the ship is hired to the
'charterer' for a period of time with or without a master or
crew. A charter without master and crew (where the bare ship is
transferred) is known as a 'bareboat charter'. Under a demise
charter with master and crew the possession of the ship and
control of the master and crew are completely transferred to the
'charterer'.
15. ' Demurrage '
- is ordinarily an amount of money paid as liquidated damages to
the shipowner by the 'charterer' or 'shipper' for failing to
complete loading and discharging within the time allowed under a
'voyage charterparty' or 'bill of lading'.
16. ' Dispatch (or
despatch) money '
- is an amount paid by the shipowner or 'charterer' to the
'shipper' or voyage 'charterer' for completing the loading and
discharging before the time allowed under the 'bill of lading'
or 'voyage charterparty'.
17. ' F.O.B. '
- means 'free on board'. It is a term relating to the sale of
goods for carriage by sea. The buyer arranges the ship on which
the goods are to be carried. The seller puts the goods 'on
board' the ship (that is, over the ship's rail) at his expense
on account of the buyer and procures a 'bill of lading' in the
name of the buyer. The seller is discharged from his obligation
to deliver when the goods pass over the ship's rail at loading.
18. ' Freight '
- is the fee payable to the carrier for the carriage of goods
under a 'voyage charterparty' or 'bill of lading'.
19. ' Hire '
- is a sum of money paid to the shipowner by a 'charterer' under
a 'time or demise charterparty' for the use of the vessel.
20. ' Laytime '
- refers to the time granted free of charge to the 'charterer'
or 'shipper' under a 'voyage charterparty' or 'bill of lading'
for the loading and unloading of the cargo.
21. ' Linertrade '
or ' LinerService '
- Is the service provided by a shipping company whereby
cargo-carrying ships are operated between scheduled, advertised
ports of loading and discharging on a regular basis. The freight
rates which are charged are based on the shipping company's
tariff or, if the company is a member of a liner conference, the
tariff of that conference.
22. ' Shipper '
- is the person who has entered into a contract of carriage with
the carrier or in whose name the goods are actually delivered to
the carrier. This is normally the exporter (seller) of goods
sold although under 'F.O.B.' contracts the buyer may assume the
role of shipper. 3
23. ' Ship (to) or
Shipped ' - means
to put (goods) on board a ship. 4
24. ' Time
charterparty ' -
is the hiring of a ship from a shipowner for a period of time.
Here, the shipowner places his ship, with crew and equipment, at
the disposal of the 'charterer', for which the 'charterer' pays
'hire' money. The technical operation and navigation of the ship
remain the responsibility of the shipowner. For other
descriptions given to a time charterparty see paragraph 94.
25. ' Voyage
charterparty ' -
is a contract of carriage in which the 'charterer' pays
'freight' for the use of a ship's cargo space for one or more
voyages.
Background
Liability under section 129 of
the ITAA 1936
26. The taxable income determined under section 129 of the ITAA
1936, on which a liability to pay income tax arises, is 5% of
the amount paid or payable in respect of the carriage of the
items listed in the section. Specifically, section 129 provides
as follows:
Where a ship belonging to or chartered by a person whose
principal place of business is out of Australia carries
passengers, livestock, mails or goods shipped in Australia,
5% of the amount
paid or payable to
him in respect
of such carriage ,
whether that amount is payable in or out of Australia, shall
be deemed to be taxable income derived by him in Australia.
(Emphasis added).
27. It is to be noted from the outset that the tax raised under
Division 12 of Part III, of which section 129 is part, is meant
to be a simple tax. It is based on an arbitrary amount of profit
made in respect of the carriage of passengers, livestock, mails
or goods shipped in Australia by a shipowner or 'charterer'. The
arbitrary profit is 5% of the gross amounts paid or payable in
respect of such carriage. The section is not concerned with the
actual profit made on such carriage or how that profit may be
divided up among the various parties involved with the carriage.
In the generality of cases, the section is not concerned with
matters such as the form of the carriage arrangement, the nature
of the rights and obligations arising thereunder or whether the
payment for the carriage is due under the 'bill of lading' to
the shipowner or to the 'charterer'.
Shipping trade law & practice
28. Although section 129 is concerned with the consideration
paid or payable by passengers and shippers of livestock, mails
or goods embarking in Australia and not with the intricacies of
the relationship between shipowner, 'charterer' and 'shipper',
an understanding of the framework involved in the carriage of
goods by sea will assist in determining the scope of the
section. The provisions have their origins in the 19th Century
legislation of Australian and New Zealand colonies and it would
be reasonable to assume that the legislature in framing the
predecessors to section 129 had in mind ordinary maritime law
and practice at the time.
29. The transportation of goods by sea is usually arranged by
the vendor or purchaser of goods depending on whether the sale
is made 'F.O.B.', 'C.I.F.' or other bases. The nature and size
of the cargo to be carried also influence the contractual
arrangements that the parties choose to make. A 'shipper' of a
small quantity of goods is likely to reserve space on a ship
that is in the 'liner trade' of carrying goods for several
'shippers' between advertised routes around the world. This
normally occurs in the container trades where it is common
practice for liner shipping companies to operate in conferences.
Here, in most instances, the industry practice is for the
individual conference members to contract as carriers under
'bills of lading' issued by them for goods shipped on the
service.
30. By contrast, a 'shipper' of a large quantity of goods may
require the entire carrying capacity of a ship to carry goods to
a particular destination. In this case, the shipowner may
charter the ship to the 'shipper' for either a particular voyage
or a specified period of time. Here, the contractual arrangement
normally takes the form of a 'voyage charterparty' or 'time
charterparty' respectively.
31. The characterisation given to the amount payable under each
of the contractual arrangements referred to above in relation to
the carriage of goods also differs. Under a 'time charterparty'
'hire' is payable according to the amount of time the vessel is
placed at the disposal of the charterer. With 'liner services'
and 'voyage charterparty' 'freight' is payable for the carriage
of the cargo.
32. The difference between 'hire' and 'freight' is also
reflected in the computation of the two. 'Hire' is computed by
reference to the carrying capacity of the ship. It is calculated
on the basis of a fixed sum per ton of the vessel deadweight for
a specific period of time or an amount per day. It is normally
payable in advance at monthly or semi-monthly intervals.
Generally speaking, 'freight' is computed by reference to the
quantity of cargo carried. 'Freight' is normally payable on
delivery of the goods at the point of discharge unless the
agreement expressly provides otherwise.
33. The commercial arrangements in the shipping trade are varied
and a ship, more often than not, is made the subject matter of
several 'charterparties' in a chain. This often makes it
difficult to identify the nature and purpose of the arrangement
and the relationship that exists between the shipowner,
'charterer', sub-charterer and 'shipper'. It also raises the
question as to which party, if any, in the chain is liable under
section 129.
34. When a ship is chartered the contractual relationship
between the shipowner, 'charterer' and 'shipper' is more
complicated. In this case, too, a 'bill of lading' is usually
issued by or on behalf of the shipowner as carrier. However, it
may also be issued on behalf of the 'charterer' (as happens in
the container trades) so as to constitute a contract of carriage
between the 'charterer' and the 'shipper'. In the circumstances
there are two documents that appear to regulate the relationship
of the parties and the carriage - the charterparty and the 'bill
of lading'.
35. Special Rules have developed under both common law and under
international conventions5 governing
the rights and obligations of the carrier and the 'shipper'.
Some of these Rules have been adopted by Australia and are
contained in the Carriage
of Goods by Sea Act 1991 .
These Rules generally apply to the carriage of goods by sea
under a 'bill of lading' and are not applicable to 'charterparties'.
In other words, the relationship that exists between shipowner
and 'charterer' under a 'charterparty' is not affected. However,
the Hamburg Rules apply where a 'bill of lading' is issued
pursuant to a 'charterparty' and the holder of the bill is not
the 'charterer'. As standard 'voyage charterparties' and 'time
charterparties' normally contain a clause empowering the master
of the ship or his agent to issue 'bills of lading' on behalf of
the shipowner, it is often found that the shipowner is one of
the carriers at common law and for the purposes of these Rules.
Ruling
36. The provisions of section 129 are set out in full in
paragraph 26. In general terms, the section deems 5% of all
amounts paid or payable in respect of the carriage of
passengers, livestock, mails or goods 'shipped' in Australia to
be the taxable income derived by a shipowner or 'charterer'
whose principal place of business is out of Australia. The
section has the effect of calculating a deemed taxable income
and giving that taxable income a source in Australia.
37. The amounts paid or payable referred to in the section are
amounts paid or payable under the particular contractual
arrangement used to carry passengers, livestock, mails or goods
'shipped' in Australia. The carriage of goods by sea, for
example, normally entails carriage arrangements commonly known
in the shipping industry as 'bill of lading', 'voyage
charterparty' and 'time charterparty'. In this context, the
section brings to account amounts payable by the 'shipper', to
the class of persons mentioned in paragraph 1, in respect of the
shipment of its goods, livestock or mail from Australia and
fares payable by passengers embarking in Australia.
38. The amount paid or payable by way of 'freight' under a 'bill
of lading' and 'voyage charterparty' to the class of persons
mentioned in paragraph 1 by the 'shipper' under a 'bill of
lading' or by the 'charterer' under a 'voyage charterparty' who
is also the 'shipper' is to be included in determining the
taxable income under section 129 of the ITAA 1936. 'Freight'
payable in these circumstances under such contracts of carriage
is an amount paid or payable for the carriage of goods. Amounts
paid or payable for the carriage of the items listed in section
129 clearly fall within the expression ' amount
paid or payable ... in
respect of such carriage'appearing in the section (see
paragraphs 75 to 93 and Examples 1 & 2).
39. The carriage of goods by sea can also be undertaken under a
'time charterparty'. This will normally occur where the
'charterer' under a 'time charterparty' is also the 'shipper'
('shipper charterer') of the goods shipped in Australia. In this
context, the ship under a 'time charterparty' serves the purpose
of carrying the goods of the 'shipper charterer'. Thus 'hire'
paid or payable under a 'time charterparty' in these
circumstances to the class of persons mentioned in paragraph 1
is also to be included in determining the taxable income under
section 129 of the ITAA 1936 (see paragraphs 75 to 82 & 94 to
104). The amount of 'hire' to be brought to account under
section 129 is the amount that is attributable to the carriage
of goods shipped in Australia. From a practical point of view
there may be several instances where a time-chartered ship is
not utilised to carry goods 'shipped' in Australia. For example,
in any income year, the ship may also carry goods 'shipped' in
other countries. In the circumstances, the 'hire' paid in that
income year by the 'shipper charterer' will need to be
apportioned (see paragraphs 105 & 106 and Example 4).
40. Where a ship is the subject matter of a chain of
charterparties, the amounts brought to account under section 129
are the amounts paid or payable by the 'shipper' or 'shipper
charterer', as the case may be, of the goods 'shipped' in
Australia to the immediate 'charterer' up the chain so long as
that person's principal place of business is out of Australia.
This person may be a 'voyage charterer' or a 'time charterer'
(see paragraphs 68 to 71 and Example 3).
41. Where:
-
(a)
-
a 'shipper' or 'shipper charterer' makes
a payment of 'freight' or 'hire' for the carriage of its
goods to a person whose principal place of business is
in Australia (Australian operator);
-
(b)
-
the ship is obtained by the Australian
operator under a charterparty from a shipowner or
charterer whose principal place of business is out of
Australia for an amount of 'freight' or 'hire'; and
-
(c)
-
the Australian operator is not itself a
'shipper' or 'shipper charterer',
then:
-
(1)
-
the amount paid by way of 'freight' or
'hire' to the Australian operator falls outside the
scope of section 129 because it is not a payment made to
a person whose principal place of business is out of
Australia. However, the liability to income tax of the
Australian operator on the amount in question will be
determined under the general assessment provisions of
the Income
Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA
1997); and
-
(2)
-
the amount paid by way of 'freight' or
'hire' by the Australian operator to the shipowner or
'charterer' also falls outside the scope of section 129
because it is not considered to be an amount paid or
payable in respect of the carriage of the goods.
(See Example 5.)
42. Fares (also called passage money) paid or payable, to the
class of persons to whom this Ruling applies, for the carriage
of passengers embarking in Australia are to be included in
determining the taxable income under section 129.
43. The words 'in respect of such carriage' appearing in section
129 embrace any activity relating to carriage by sea of the
items listed in the section. In relation to the carriage of
goods, for example, the activities would include the loading of
the goods at the port of shipment and unloading at the port of
discharge. In the light of the context in which carriage by sea
is undertaken, as explained in paragraph 62, the following
payments made by a 'shipper' or 'shipper charterer' in respect
of the carriage of its goods embarked in Australia are for the
purposes of section 129 to be treated as follows:
-
(a)
-
Amounts paid or payable by way of
'demurrage' on the loading and unloading of the goods
are to be included in determining the taxable income
under the section (see paragraphs 107 to 111).
-
(b)
-
Amounts paid or payable by way of 'deadfreight'
to the extent that such payments constitute payments for
not providing a full cargo as required under a bill of
lading or voyage charterparty fall outside the scope of
the section (see paragraphs 112 to 115).
-
(c)
-
Payments for cleaning charges by a
'shipper' to a shipowner by way of contribution or to
reimburse the shipowner for such expenditure are to be
excluded in determining the taxable income under the
section (see paragraphs 120 to 124).
44. The carriage of goods by sea also involves payments in the
nature of 'dispatch moneys' made by a shipowner or 'charterer'
to a 'shipper' or 'shipper charterer'. Such payments are to be
deducted from the amount that would otherwise be treated as the
amount paid or payable for the carriage of goods (see paragraphs
116 to 119).
45. Section 129 applies to amounts paid or payable in respect of
the carriage of goods etc. 'shipped' in Australia and discharged
overseas as well as ' coasting
trade ' where the
ship is operated by a person whose principal place of business
is outside Australia. Coasting trade includes sight seeing tours
where the carriage of passengers 'shipped' in Australia
disembark at a port in Australia (see paragraph 73). However
where, for example, goods 'shipped' in Australia are transhipped
to another ship outside Australia, only the 'freight' applicable
for shipping goods in Australia to the point of transhipment overseas
falls within the provisions of section 129. Also where, under a
contract, goods shipped from overseas are to be transhipped to
another ship in Australia, the freight applicable to the goods
shipped in Australia only, would fall within the provisions (see
paragraphs 72 to 74).
Examples
Example 1 (carriage under bill of lading)
46. A shipowner whose principal place of business is in Bermuda
owns the ship ' The
Fishpen' and
trades in carrying refrigerated fish between Australia and
Singapore. It contracts with an Australian exporter of fish to
carry a quantity of fish to Singapore. The 'bill of lading'
provides, amongst other things, that the goods are to be loaded
at a nominated port in Melbourne and discharged at a nominated
port in Singapore. The agreed 'freight' is $12,000 payable as to
80% on completion of the loading and the balance in Singapore on
completion of the discharge of the goods.
47. In this case the deemed taxable income of the owner under
section 129 is 5% of the whole amount of $12,000, namely, $600.
It is irrelevant that part of the 'freight' is payable overseas.
Example 2 (carriage by shipowner under voyage charterparty)
48. The shipowner in Example
1 owns another
ship ' The
Energy' which it
charters under a 'voyage charterparty' to a Japanese buyer of
coal sold by an Australian exporter 'F.O.B.'. A 'bill of lading'
is issued by the master of the ship in the name of the buyer as
'shipper'. The contract of carriage in this case is the 'voyage
charterparty' since the 'shipper' is also the 'charterer'. The
amount of 'freight' payable by the 'shipper' under the 'charterparty'
is $200,000.
49. In this case, the deemed taxable income of the shipowner is
5% of $200,000, namely $10,000. It should be noted that if the
coal was carried from Australia to Japan under a 'time
charterparty', the contract of carriage would be the 'time
charterparty' and any 'hire' payable in respect of goods
'shipped' in Australia would come under section 129.

Example 3 (carriage under voyage charterparty by a time
charterer)
50. A Greek shipowner charters one of its ships to a Bermuda
time charterer under a 'time charterparty' for a period of two
years. The 'hire' payable under the 'time charterparty' is
$10,000 a day. The Bermuda time charterer in turn sub-charters
the ship under a 'voyage charterparty' to a Japanese buyer of
coal sold 'F.O.B.' by an Australian exporter. The 'freight'
payable under the 'voyage charterparty' for the particular
voyage is $700,000. The Bermuda time charterer hopes to make a
profit on this ship by undertaking several voyages during an
income year. A 'bill of lading' is issued by the shipowner
naming the Australian Exporter the 'shipper'. The bill is
endorsed to the Japanese buyer.
51. In this case only the 'freight' of $700,000 paid by the
Japanese buyer to the Bermuda time charterer falls under section
129. The only payment for the carriage of coal directly linked
to carriage by a ship under a 'charterparty' is the payment made
under the 'voyage charterparty'. In the circumstances, 5% of the
amount of $700,000 will be deemed to be the taxable income of
the Bermuda time charterer.

Example 4 (apportionment of time charter 'hire')
52. The Bermuda shipowner charters the ship ' The
Energy' under a
'time charterparty' to a Japanese buyer of coal for an amount of
'hire' of $10,000 a day. The Japanese buyer uses the ship to
ship coal from Australia for nine months of an income year
making a total of 3 voyages. It also ships coal from another
country for the remaining 3 months of the year.
53. In this case, only the amount attributable to the carriage
of coal from Australia is brought to account under section 129.
The time spent on return trips to Australia are excluded from
the calculation. Using the time basis of apportionment and the
information on the ship's Statement of Facts (see paragraph 106)
the ship took a total of 120 days in respect of the 3 voyages
covering the period the ship arrived at the Australian port for
loading to the time it arrived and unloaded at the discharge
port in Japan for each trip. On this basis, the amount paid to
the Bermuda shipowner for the carriage of goods shipped in
Australia is $1,200,000 (namely $10,000 ? 120 days). The deemed
taxable income under section 129 would be $60,000 (namely 5% of
$1,200,000).

Example 5 (carriage by an Australian charterer)
54. The Bermuda shipowner time charters the ship ' The
Energy' to a
Greek time charterer who in turn sub-time charters the ship to
an Australian sub-time charterer whose principal place of
business is in Australia. The Australian sub-time charterer then
voyage charters the ship to an Australian 'shipper' who has sold
coal on a 'C.I.F.' basis to a Japanese buyer. The 'freight'
payable under the 'voyage charterparty' is $30 a tonne. The
amount of sub-hire payable under the sub-time charterparty is
$9,900 a day and the amount payable under the 'time charterparty'
is $9,800 a day.
55. In this case none of the amounts referred to above come
within section 129. This is because the carriage leg under which
an amount is paid or payable for the carriage of goods 'shipped'
in Australia is the 'voyage charterparty'. As the 'freight'
payable under the 'voyage charterparty' is not a payment to a
person whose principal place of business is out of Australia
section 129 has no application. However, the 'freight' of $30 a
tonne falls to be assessed under the general assessment
provisions of the ITAA 1997.
Date of effect
56. This Ruling applies to years of income commencing both
before and after its date of issue. However, the Ruling does not
apply to taxpayers to the extent that it conflicts with the
terms of settlement of a dispute agreed to before the date of
issue of the Ruling (see paragraphs 21 and 22 of Taxation Ruling
TR 92/20).
Commissioner of Taxation
8 March 2006
Appendix 1 - Explanation
|
This
Appendix is provided as information to help you
understand how the Commissioner's view has been reached.
It does not form part of the binding public ruling. |
The scope of and calculation of the deemed taxable income
under section 129 of the ITAA 1936
57. Unlike the ordinary assessment provisions of the ITAA 1997
which ascertain taxable income on an actual net income basis,
section 129 deems an arbitrary amount of profit to be the
taxable income of the shipowner or 'charterer' derived in
Australia. That arbitrary amount of profit is 5% of the gross
amount paid or payable in respect of the carriage of goods etc.
'shipped' in Australia. No deductions are allowed under any
provisions of the ITAA 1936 or the ITAA 1997. In adopting this
methodology, the section resolves the practical problem of
ascertaining the actual profit made on, and the allocation of
overheads attributable to, a particular shipment of goods from
Australia.
58. The nature and object of a predecessor to section 129 was
explained by the High Court in Union
Steamship Co. of New Zealand v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation where
Knox CJ, Isaacs and Starke JJ held that there was to be no
deduction from the amount liable to tax under the section for
the dividends in question. 6
59. At p. 215, Knox CJ said:
It is clear that the proportion of the gross receipts of the
taxpayer on which tax is made payable by this section is an
arbitrary amount which bears no necessary relation to the
profits made by the taxpayer on the transactions from which
the gross receipts are derived, and may be either greater or
less than the amount of such profits. The amount is the same
whether such transactions result in profits available for
distribution to shareholders or in a loss.
60. At p. 219, Isaacs J said of the then 10%: 'In the first
place, the sum in question is not a specific identifiable
portion of the receipts. It is merely a conceptual sum arrived
at by an arbitrary arithmetical process adopted for the very
purpose of avoiding actual operations'. And, at p. 220 Starke J
said: 'It is an arbitrary method of determining taxable income
in certain cases, and renders inapplicable the provisions of
secs.14, 16 and 18 of the Act'.
61. The application of the section is predicated on the
existence of several factors. In the first place, the section
applies only to carriage by sea. Section 129 does not deal with
carriage by air. Nor is it concerned with inland carriage. Thus,
where goods are received at an inland point and carried by road
or rail to an Australian seaport, the land part of the carriage
is not governed by the section. In situations where the contract
covers inland carriage and carriage by sea an apportionment will
be required on a reasonable basis to exclude inland carriage
amounts. Secondly, the section applies to a particular class of
persons (namely shipowners and 'charterers') whose principal
place of business is out of Australia. Thirdly, the particular
ship mentioned in the section (that is, the ship leaving
Australia) must be carrying the items listed in the section that
are 'shipped' in Australia. Fourthly, the section applies to an
amount paid or payable in respect of the carriage of the items
in question on the particular ship. The third and fourth factors
suggest that the section is concerned with the particular
carriage of goods etc. by a particular ship and does not extend
to transactions or events before or after that carriage (see
paragraphs 69 to 70 and 74). Finally, it matters not whether the
amount is payable in or out of Australia. Some of these factors
are discussed in more detail below.
Carriage of goods by sea
62. The complexity and intricacies of the carriage of goods by
sea have already been alluded to under the heading ' Shipping
trade law & practice' (paragraphs
28 to 35). It is governed by trade customs and also various
national and international legislation and conventions. The
contractual arrangements are complex and for financing, risk
sharing and other reasons there has been a proliferation of the
use of multiple charterparties. The performance of the carriage
arrangement itself also involves several stages and operations.
The ship has to arrive at the place specified as the loading
point. The shipowner has to provide a seaworthy ship fit for
navigational purposes, properly manned and suitable to carry the
cargo put on board. The cargo needs to be loaded at the port of
shipment and unloaded at the port of discharge. The ship's holds
may need to be cleaned immediately before the loading or after
unloading the cargo. The cargo needs to be properly stowed on
the ship. Arrangements need to be made with port authorities and
port services procured. And, the navigation of the ship and the
voyage itself give rise to further obligations concerning safe
navigation and preserving the cargo in good condition during
transit. Thus any determination as to the nature of payments
made in respect of the carriage of goods etc. will need to be
made having regard to the above context.
Persons covered
63. The section applies to shipowners or 'charterers' whose
principal place of business is out of Australia. These, in the
main, would be non-resident shipping operators who 'ship' goods
in Australia. However, the section is equally applicable to a
resident of Australia that has its principal place of business
out of Australia. The words in the section ' ship
belonging to or chartered by '
clearly envisage the carriage of goods by chartered and
unchartered ships. A shipowner, a voyage 'charterer', a time
'charterer' and demise 'charterer' engaged in shipping goods in
Australia would thus fall within the scope of the section.
However, for the reasons explained in paragraph 6 and in TR
2003/2 payments for the lease of a ship under a 'demise
charterparty' fall outside the scope of section 129.
64. The words ' belonging
to ' would also
encompass the hirer of a ship under a hire-purchase agreement
engaged in shipping goods in Australia. It is trite law that the
meaning given to words depends on the context in which they are
used. Some case authorities7 have
considered that the words 'belonging to' should be given their
natural meaning of 'beneficial ownership' and 'absolute
ownership'. However, these cases can be distinguished on the
basis that the context was different, one involving the illegal
seizure of chattels punishable by penalty and imprisonment and
the other the application of the law of fixtures.
65. The context of section 129 suggests that a more liberal
meaning should be given to the words so as to encompass ships
under a hire-purchase agreement operated by a non-resident 'to
ship' goods in Australia. In extending the application of the
section to 'charterers' the policy of the text suggests that
persons who operate ships which are not owned by them fall
within its provisions. The provisions of section 129 would have
an anomalous operation if ships hired by means of a 'charterparty'
fall within its provisions while ships hired under a
hire-purchase agreement are excluded.
66. It is of some significance that the predecessors to section
129 in the Income
Tax Assessment Act 1915 and 1922 the
word 'owner' was used and that this was changed to the current
words of 'belonging to' in the ITAA 1936 by the Income Tax
Assessment Bill 1935. This change in language suggests that the
words 'belonging to' should be given an extended meaning to
include ships hired under a hire-purchase agreement rather than
a restrictive one. For ease of reference, the use of the words
'owner' or 'shipowner' in this Ruling are to be read as
encompassing the words 'belonging to'.
67. A further indicator, for giving the words an extended
meaning, is the custom in the shipping trade to refer to the
person who has hired a ship from the owner as the 'disponent
owner'8 in
those cases where that person in turn charters or hires the ship
to another person.
Multiple charterparties
68. In the simple case of carriage of goods under a single
carriage arrangement involving a 'voyage charterparty' or a
'time charterparty' there is a direct link between the payments
of 'freight' and 'hire' and the carriage of goods under each
arrangement. In both cases the shipowner is the carrier and the
'shipper' is the 'charterer'. However, where there is a chain of
charterparties interposed between the shipowner and the
'shipper', all of whom have their principal place of business
out of Australia, a question arises as to which party in the
chain is liable and what amounts should be assessed under
section 129.
69. The practical outcome of having multiple charterparties is
that the profit made from the carriage of a particular shipment
of goods is shared, in varying degrees, by all the parties in
the chain. However, the object of the section in assessing an
arbitrary amount of profit, on a particular shipment of goods
from Australia, is achieved if the last 'charterer' in the chain
is assessed on the amount of 'freight' or 'hire' paid to him.
From a commercial perspective, all the profits made in respect
of the carriage of a particular shipment of goods by the parties
up the chain (assuming they are all dealing at arm's length and
there are no abnormal market conditions prevailing) would be
reflected in the amount that the last 'charterer' in the chain
charges the 'shipper'.
70. The above approach is supported by the use of the word ' or '
in the phrase 'ship belonging to or chartered
by' and the words ' to
him ' appearing
in the section. They identify a singular payment to one of those
persons in respect of the carriage of goods etc. on a ship which
is operated by them either as owner or 'charterer' for their own
commercial benefit. It is customary in the industry to refer to
the person who benefits from such a carriage as the 'freight
beneficiary'. Therefore, where a ship is the subject matter of a
chain of 'charterparties' the section will apply to the last
'charterer' in the chain whose principal place of business is
out of Australia and who is paid by the 'shipper' an amount of
'freight' or 'hire' in respect of the carriage of goods
'shipped' in Australia. Adopting this approach achieves tax
symmetry with cases where goods are carried under a single
'voyage charterparty' or 'time charterparty' arrangement.
71. It is also understood from the industry that ships involved
in international trade are, in the main, not operated by their
owners. The operator is several times removed from the owner.
Ships used to carry goods 'shipped' in Australia are normally
the subject matter of a chain of 'charterparties' and the last
leg of that chain is commonly a 'voyage charterparty' between
the 'shipper' and a 'charterer' as operator whose principal
place of business is out of Australia. In these cases section
129 will apply to the 'freight' (and other amounts discussed in
this Ruling such as 'demurrage') earned by the 'charterer' and
not to any other amounts earned by way of 'freight', 'hire' or
other amounts up the chain. However, variations from this
carriage arrangement do occur and the identity of the person
liable and hence the amount to be assessed under the section
will need to be determined from the circumstances of each case.
Meaning of 'shipped in
Australia'
72. The section only applies to the carriage of goods that are
'shipped' in Australia. The expression 'shipped in Australia'
means that the goods are put on board a ship in Australia. 9 This
forms the factual basis upon which the deemed taxable income is
given an Australian source.
73. There is no provision made in section 129 as to where the
goods are to be discharged. This means that amounts paid to a
shipowner or 'charterer' whose principal place of business is
outside of Australia who is engaged in 'coasting trade' or the
carriage of goods internationally fall within its provisions.
The section will also apply to those situations where, for
example, a cruise ship undertakes sightseeing voyages to observe
whales in the Southern Ocean and passengers board the ship in
Hobart, and disembark at the same port. Fares paid in respect of
such sightseeing tours also come within the provisions of
section 129. The income from 'coasting trade' would normally
have an Australian source and be assessable in full under the
general assessment provisions contained in the ITAA 1997. As
section 129 of the ITAA 1936 is the more specific provision it
prevails over the general provisions of the ITAA 1997. However,
income from 'coasting trade' (or the carriage of goods
internationally) derived by a shipowner or charterer whose
principal place of business is in Australia is still assessable
under the general assessment provisions of the ITAA 1997.
74. The combined effect of the references to 'a ship', 'the
ship' and 'shipped in Australia' in section 129 or its
accompanying provisions in sections 130 and 135 of the ITAA 1936
is to restrict the section to amounts paid in respect of the
carriage of goods by the particular ship (that is, the ship
leaving Australia) that 'shipped' goods in Australia. In cases
of transhipment ,
for example where ship A under a contract loaded goods in
Australia for delivery to London, transhipped the goods to ship
B in Hong Kong for on-carriage to London, only the 'freight'
charged on the Australia-Hong Kong leg would be included under
section 129. This issue was decided by the High Court in Ocean
Steamship Company Limited v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation .10 Furthermore,
where under a contract, goods are shipped in an overseas country
and then transhipped to another ship in Australia, only the
'freight' charged in respect of the goods shipped in Australia
would be included under section 129.
The nature of payments falling within section 129
The meaning of the expression
'amount paid or payable ... in respect of such carriage'
75. Section 129 provides guidance concerning the scope of
payments falling within it. In the first place, the section uses
the general word 'amount' instead of the more restrictive words
'freight' for the carriage of goods, livestock or mail and
'fares' for the carriage of passengers. If the section was to be
restricted to 'freight' and fares one would have expected words
like 'freight' and 'fares' or 'amount paid for the
carriage of goods etc.' to have been used.
76. Secondly, an extended application of the section to other
payments is also evident from the use of the words 'in respect
of' contained in the expression. The words 'in respect of' have
been judicially considered in several contexts and in the main
have been recognised as having a wide meaning. 11
77. However, courts have also consistently maintained that the
words 'in respect of' gather meaning from the context in which
they appear. The context therefore may restrict the broad width
to which the words generally apply. 12 In
determining the width of the words courts have also applied a
number of tests as guidelines. For instance, the High Court in Technical
Products Pty Ltd v. State Government Insurance Office (Qld )13 said:
The words 'in respect of' have a very wide meaning. Indeed,
they have a chameleon-like quality in that they commonly
reflect the context in which they appear. The nexus between
legal liability and motor vehicle which their use introduces
in s 3(1) is a broad one which is not susceptible of precise
definition.That nexus will not, however, exist unless
there is some discernible and rational link between
the basis of legal liability and the particular motor
vehicle. (Emphasis added)
78. Dawson J in Technical
Products Pty Ltd (above)
added that the connection must be 'material'. Courts have also
held that a nexus which is 'discernible and rational' may be
indirect. 14 Still
in other cases a causal relationship which is sufficient or
material may provide the necessary link and so too where one of
the matters is a product or incident of the other. 15
79. Context is used in a broad sense and may be ascertained from
the purpose and object of the legislature, its language aided by
extrinsic materials and the mischief, if any, which the
legislature sought to remedy. A brief discussion of the object
of section 129 and the context in which the carriage of goods by
sea is undertaken are contained in paragraphs 27 to 35, 57 to
62, and 68 to 71.
80. The subject matter of section 129 is the carriage of goods
'shipped' in Australia by overseas shipping operators. As was
said by Barton J at 414 in Ocean
Steamship Company Ltd 16 when
considering the section: 'It must be assumed that the
Legislature in framing this section........had in mind the
ordinary maritime law'. In framing the section the Legislature
would be cognisant of the shipping practices and the various
transportation arrangements entered into by shipping operators
for the carriage of goods by sea at the time. The very fact that
the section brings 'charterers' within its scope and uses words
of wide ambit rather than the restrictive word 'for' in relation
to payments suggests that the section is to apply to various
payments made under 'charterparties' and 'bills of lading'.
81. The meaning of the similar phrase 'in relation to' was
considered by the House of Lords in Gatoil
International Inc. v. Arkwright-Boston Manufacturers Mutual
Insurance Co . in
the context of a provision which referred to 'any agreement
relating to the carriage of goods in any ship whether by
charterparty or otherwise'. 17Lord
Keith of Kinkel made specific reference to the fact that the
provision spoke of an agreement 'in relation to' and not 'for'
the carriage of goods in a ship. His Lordship concluded that the
meaning must be wider than would be conveyed by the preposition
'for'. As regards the connection required, His Lordship
indicated that there must be some reasonably direct connection.
82. It is considered that there is a
material discernible and rational link between
the payments made under each of the arrangements covered in this
Ruling and the carriage of goods 'shipped' in Australia in those
cases where the payment is made by a 'shipper' under a 'bill of
lading' and by a 'shipper charterer' in those cases where the
goods are carried by a ship which is under a 'charterparty', be
it a 'time charterparty' or 'voyage charterparty'. This is
reinforced when considering the special characteristics
(discussed below) of 'charterparties', which under maritime law
are regarded as or assimilated to contracts of carriage. For
example, 'bills of lading', 'voyage charterparties' and 'time
charterparties' are often referred to in shipping parlance as
contracts of affreightment thus reflecting the business and
practical nature of each arrangement as contracts of carriage.
Carriage under a 'bill of
lading' contract
83. A 'bill of lading' is one of the main documents evidencing
the contract of carriage of goods by sea between 'shipper' and
carrier. The 'bill of lading' also serves two other purposes -
it is a receipt and a negotiable document of title to the goods
'shipped'.
84. A 'bill of lading' is issued by the carrier to the 'shipper'
at the time the goods are put on board the ship. However, it
often happens that a contract of carriage has already been made
between the 'shipper' and the carrier before loading commences.
It follows from this that the 'bill of lading', which is issued
after receipt of the goods by the carrier, is not itself a
contract of carriage since that has, in the usual case, already
been made. 18
85. However, the booking note may expressly incorporate the
terms of the carrier's usual 'bill of lading', and even without
express incorporation the 'bill of lading' is very cogent
evidence of the terms of the contract. There are several reasons
for this. A term is implied into the original contract between
'shipper' and carrier that the goods will be carried upon the
terms of the 'bill of lading' customary in the trade. 'Shippers'
or their agents are usually well aware of the terms of the 'bill
of lading' used in any regular trade, and usually have supplies
of blank 'bill of lading' forms which they fill in and present
to the carrier for signature. The 'bill of lading' is usually
filled in by the 'shipper' or his agent and presented to the
master or some other agent of the carrier who signs it. When
this occurs, each party's conduct indicates that he assents to
the terms of the 'bill of lading'. And, a 'shipper' who receives
a 'bill of lading' and raises no objection to its terms will be
bound by them except those which are onerous and unusual.
86. A contract of carriage may thus be contained in or evidenced
by other documents such as a sea
waybill or mate's
receipt which are
also receipts for the goods 'shipped' and a document of title
(but not negotiable) (see Article 1(b) Carriage
of Goods by Sea Act 1991 ).
87. The payment of 'freight' by the 'shipper' to the carrier
under a 'bill of lading', seaway bill, mates receipt or similar
instruments that constitute or evidence a contract for the
carriage of goods is clearly a payment for the carriage of goods
and thus come within the section.
Carriage under charterparties
In general
88. The shipping of goods in a chartered ship also involves the
issue of a 'bill of lading'. The 'bill of lading' may be issued
to a person who is also the 'charterer' of the carrying ship or
to a person other than the 'charterer'. This gives rise to a
number of special issues such as: the status of the 'bill of
lading' in the hands of the 'shipper', the 'charterer' or a
third party; whether the goods are carried on the terms of the
'bill of lading' or the 'charterparty'; the identity of the
carrier and which document constitutes the contract of carriage.
A shipowner may also carry the goods of several 'shippers' and
the contract of carriage is the 'bill of lading' for one
'shipper' and the 'charterparty' for the other. It is this
diversity of situations surrounding the carriage of goods by sea
that leads the Tax Office to adopt a practical and commonsense
approach to the interpretation of section 129.
89. As a general rule, where goods are 'shipped' in a ship
chartered by the 'shipper' directly from the shipowner, any
'bill of lading' issued to the 'charterer' by or on behalf of
the shipowner operates as between the shipowner and 'charterer',
as a mere receipt. It is evidence of the facts stated in it,
such as the receipt of the goods by the shipowner, the time of
shipment and the apparent order and condition of the goods. But
it is not evidence of the terms of a contract of carriage, for
that contract will normally be contained in the 'charterparty'. 19 This
rule also applies in those cases where a 'bill of lading' is
first issued to a 'shipper' who is not the 'charterer' and later
endorses it to the 'charterer'. This occurred in The
Dunelmia 20 where
a F.O.B. seller had 'shipped' goods on a ship chartered by the
buyer for the purposes of taking delivery of the goods and the
seller later endorsed the bill to the buyer.
90. On the other hand, where the 'bill of lading' has been
endorsed by the 'shipper charterer' to a third person, as a
general rule, the bill will operate between 'shipper' and
transferee as a document of title, and constitute the contract
of carriage between the carrier and transferee. A variant of
this is the case where there is a 'charterparty' to which no
transferee is a party. For example, a ship may be chartered by
her owner to a 'charterer' and then sub-chartered by the
'charterer' to a 'shipper', to whom a 'bill of lading' is later
issued by the shipowner. As there is no 'charterparty' between
shipowner and 'shipper', the 'bill of lading' is regarded as
evidencing a contract of carriage between the shipowner and
'shipper'. The position would change where the 'bill of lading'
is issued by or on behalf of the 'charterer'. In this case the
'bill of lading' would not be a contract of carriage between
'shipper' and shipowner. However, as between the 'charterer' and
'shipper' the contract of carriage would be contained in the
sub-charter, so that the 'bill of lading' would prima facie be a
mere receipt.
91. The identification of the carrier can be a matter of
difficulty. The carrier is rarely expressly identified in the
'bill of lading'. The fact that the 'bill of lading' may be
issued in the name of the shipowner, the 'charterer', a
sub-charterer or the agent of any of them raises the question of
'who is the carrier?' Standard 'charterparty' forms usually
contain a clause requiring the Master of the ship or its agent
to sign 'bills of lading' 'as presented' by the 'charterer' or
for the 'charterer' or its agent to sign the 'bill of lading'
itself on behalf of the Master. In both situations, the
shipowner is regarded as the contracting carrier with the
'shipper' both at law and under the special Rules referred to in
paragraph 35. A 'bill of lading' issued in these circumstances
is often referred to as an ' owner's
bill' . In the
less common case, the terms of a 'charterparty' may allow a
'bill of lading' to be signed in the charterer's own name or by
agents on its behalf. Such a bill is known as a ' charterer's
bill' and the shipper's contract of carriage is usually with
the 'charterer'.
92. When discussing this issue, Carver
On Bills of Lading 21 states
at paragraph 4-027:
The question is one of considerable difficulty because
underlying commercial considerations may well suggest
different answers to it. On the one hand, the negotiations
preceding the making of the contract of carriage are likely
to be conducted between shipper and charterer, and this fact
might point in the direction of the bill's being a
charterer's bill. But it will not invariably lead to this
conclusion, since regard must be had to the different
practical or commercial purposes which may be served by
various types of charterparties.
Again this conclusion will not invariably follow, but the
present point does provide a commercial context for the
strange conclusion that a relationship created by
negotiations between shipper and charterer may, and quite
commonly will, give rise to a bill of lading contract
between shipper (and hence between a transferee of the bill)
and shipowner. Moreover, the person who actually performs
the carriage operation will, in the cases with which we
shall be principally concerned, (i.e. with cases in which
the charterparty is not by way of demise) be the shipowner;
and this fact, to which the courts have tended to attach
considerable weight points, though not decisively, in the
direction of the bill's being an owner's bill.
93. It is clear that where there is a contract of carriage
between 'shipper' and shipowner or 'charterer', whether the
contract be the 'bill of lading' or 'charterparty', the amount
paid by way of 'freight' under a 'bill of lading' or 'voyage
charterparty' and the amount of 'hire' paid under a 'time
charterparty' is an amount paid in respect of the carriage of
goods.
'Hire' under a time charterparty
94. As can be seen from the discussion under the previous
sub-heading, the function and purposes of a 'time charterparty'
and 'voyage charterparty' can be very similar and they share
similar legal issues. Although a 'voyage charterparty' is often
described as a contract of carriage22 it
does not serve that purpose all of the time.
95. The fact that various descriptions are given to a 'time
charterparty' by case law and maritime writers suggests that a
'time charterparty', depending on the context, can serve various
purposes. For example, a 'time charterparty' has variously been
described as a contract of carriage, a contract for services, a
contract for the use of a ship, a contract for transportation
services, a contract of affreightment, a contract under which
the owner places a crewed ship at the disposal of the
'charterer' and a contract for the hiring of a ship. 23 Such
characterisations reflect, in part, the fact that a 'time
charterparty' is itself a particular kind of commercial bargain
between owner and 'charterer' and partly from the
characteristics and hazards of carriage by sea.
96. It is the function that a ship under a 'time charterparty'
performs that is important and not the description given to the
arrangement. Section 129 speaks in terms of carriage on a ship
shipping goods in Australia. In this regard it is clear both at
law and according to maritime practice that the ship performs
the function of carrying the goods that the 'charterer' puts on
board the ship. Where the 'charterer' is also the 'shipper', the
'time charterparty' is itself the contract of carriage, which by
its very nature is a contract for transportation services. This
in part explains why 'bills of lading', 'voyage charterparties'
and 'time charterparties' are grouped together and generally
classified as contracts of affreightment. For instance, Scrutton
on Charterparties and Bills of Lading ,
states that 'depending on the manner in which the ship is
employed, the contract of affreightment may be contained in a
charterparty or evidenced by a bill of lading'. 24
97. Where the 'time charterparty' is not itself the contract of
carriage between the shipowner and 'charterer', the purpose
served is generally acknowledged to be the provision of
transportation services by the owner to the hirer (see the
similar conclusion reached in TR 2003/2 at paragraph 60). In
that context section 129 has no role to play because no goods
have been 'shipped' pursuant to that contract. In such a case,
the person reaping the benefits of carrying the 'shipper's'
goods is likely to be the 'charterer' or a sub-charterer. The
arrangement that section 129 is concerned with is the
arrangement between the 'shipper' of the goods and the person
that he pays to carry his goods which in the industry is
referred to as the 'freight beneficiary'. Put differently,
section 129 is concerned with amounts paid by the 'shipper' to
the person who carries his goods in a ship which either belongs
to or is chartered by that person. Adopting this approach meets
the object of section 129 as a simple tax and also accords with
the nature of a 'time charterparty' and the various purposes it
serves. Indeed, section 129 would have an absurd operation if
'hire' paid under a 'time charterparty' in the circumstances
where the 'charterparty' is the contract of carriage is
included, while 'hire' paid in those cases where the 'charterparty'
is not a contract of carriage, in the strict sense, but the time
'charterer' as operator is still providing transportation
services to the 'shipper', is excluded.
98. As explained by the House of Lords in Whistler
International Limited v. Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Limited ,25 the
crucial element of a 'time charterparty' is that there is a
division in the ship's management between the owner and the
'charterer'. The ownership and possession of the vessel remain
in the owner who is responsible for the navigation of the
vessel. The owner has to bear the expense of maintaining the
ship and the crew who are the owner's employees; carries the
risk of marine accidents and has to insure the vessel in return
for the payment of 'hire'. On the other hand, the economic
exploitation of the ship rests with the 'charterer'. He bears
the full commercial risk and expense of finding and contracting
with customers and enjoys the full benefit of the earnings of
the vessel.
99. The fact that the 'charterer' finds the 'shippers' and
arranges a contract of carriage with them entitles him to the
'freight' or 'hire' payable by the 'shipper' unless the
arrangement entered into between the 'charterer' and the
'shipper' provides to the contrary. This division of management
of the ship and the consequential division of profits reflected
in the different payments made by the 'charterer' to shipowner
and 'shipper' to 'charterer' is an essential aspect of the
carriage of goods by sea where several 'charterparties' are
involved. It is well understood in the shipping industry and
often commented on by case law. Channell J in Wehner
v. Dene SS. Co.26 made
the following comment on the rights of the shipowner and the
'charterer' or sub-charterer to 'freight' under a 'bill of
lading' issued as an owner's bill:
Now, although the owner has the right to demand the bill of
lading freight from the holder of the bill of lading because
the contract is the owner's contract, yet the owner has
also, of course, contracted by the charterparty that for the
use of his ship he will be satisfied with a different sum,
which will also in the great majority of cases be less than
the total amount of the bills of lading freights; and,
therefore, if the owner were himself to demand and receive
the bills of lading freight, as he might do if he chose, he
would still have to account to the charterer or the
sub-charterer, as the case might be, for the surplus
remaining in his hands after deducting the amount due for
hire of the ship under the charterparty.
100. It is worth emphasising that section 129 is predicated on
the premise that the goods are carried on a ship which is either
operated by the owner himself or is under charter to another
person. It's not a requirement of the section that the owner or
'charterer' has a contract of carriage with the 'shipper'. The
section looks at the payments made by the 'shipper' for the
carriage of his goods in that context. Indeed, where the
shipowner or 'charterer' directly enters into a contract of
carriage with the 'shipper' in the form of a 'time charterparty',
the amount of 'hire' paid is clearly a payment in respect of the
carriage. Where the 'charterer' carries the goods of the
'shipper' in a ship it has chartered but the contract of
carriage is with the shipowner, only the amounts payable by the
'shipper' to the 'charterer' for such carriage are to be brought
to account under section 129. It is the ATO view that in both of
the situations discussed above the 'hire' paid to the shipowner
or the 'charterer' by a 'shipper' is an amount paid or payable
in respect of the carriage of the 'shipper's' goods. In both
cases there is a material
discernible and rational link between the payment of the 'hire'
and the carriage of the shipper's goods .
101. The circumstances discussed above as to when a 'time
charterparty' itself constitutes a contract of carriage and the
commercial considerations involved in the division of the ship's
management under a 'time charterparty' tend to explain why
historically 'freight' paid under a 'voyage charterparty' and
'hire' paid under a 'time charterparty' were considered to be
similar. That history was considered in The
'Nanfri' 27 and
in The
'Cebu' No. 2 .28 The
cases show that despite modern technical differences for certain
purposes of the law between the two it was at one time common to
describe the sums payable under a 'time charterparty' as
'freight'.
102. In The
'Nanfri' Lord
Denning MR said at page 139:
At one time it was common to describe the sums payable under
a time charter-party as 'freight'. Such description is to be
found used by judges and text book writers of great
distinction. But in modern times a change has come about.
The payments due under a time charter are usually now
described as 'hire' and those under a voyage charter as
'freight'.
103. The court in The
'Cebu' No. 2 traced
the history of the use of the word 'freight' and concluded that
a change in the use of the term in the shipping trade came about
in modern times. That is, sometime before 1946 when the widely
used standard NYPE time charter amended form was published which
consistently uses the word 'hire'. By 1950, at least, the
popular Baltime form also consistently called the periodic
payments under a time charter 'hire'. The change was also
reflected over time in specialist dictionaries and by legal
textbooks.
104. As mentioned in paragraphs 28 and 80 in interpreting the
scope of section 129 it is appropriate to have regard to
maritime law and practice. The history of the description given
to 'freight' and 'hire' suggests that the two may be similar
depending on the purpose they serve. Section 129, in its current
form, was introduced into the ITAA 1936 in 1935 by the Income
Tax Assessment Bill 1935 but its federal income tax predecessor
dates back to the Income
Tax Assessment Act 1915-1916 (ITAA
1915-1916). In the circumstances, it could reasonably be assumed
that the Legislature at the time intended that time charter
freight would come under the section. While a change has
occurred in modern times, so that 'freight' is now regarded as a
payment for the
carriage of goods, the payment of 'hire' in the context of the
situations discussed above is so closely associated with the
carriage of goods that it would clearly be regarded as an amount
paid 'in respect of' the carriage of goods.
Apportionment of 'hire' where ship
is used to ship goods in Australia and in other countries
105. The circumstances under which a time-chartered ship is used
for the carriage of goods can vary greatly. A ship under a 'time
charterparty' may be used by the 'charterer' to ship goods
partly from Australia and partly from other countries. For
example, a time chartered ship may be used to ship goods in
Australia exclusively for nine months of an income year and the
other three months to ship goods exclusively from, say, New
Zealand. The ship could also be, in the main, devoted to
shipping goods in Australia but on occasions go to New Zealand
for a top-up cargo for discharge overseas. The ship may be on a
ballast voyage or laid-off for a period of time due to the lack
of cargo. Where this occurs, only that part of the 'hire' paid
under a 'time charterparty' that relates to the shipment of
goods in Australia will fall within section 129. This requires
the adoption of a reasonable basis of apportionment.
106. One basis of apportionment that can be used, in the context
of the above circumstances, is the time basis. Some members of
the shipping industry have suggested that apportionment should
be based on the time that a ship comes on hire to the time it
ceases to be on hire in respect of each voyage for goods shipped
in Australia. The daily rate of 'hire' is then applied to this
time to give the total amount of 'hire' referable to the
shipment of goods in Australia. The information required to
adopt this basis of apportionment is readily available from the
ship's Statement of Facts. Apportionment would thus be based on
the following period:
-
(a)
-
For voyages outside Australia - From the
time a ship arrives at the pilot station at its first
port in Australia to the time of completion of discharge
at its final port outside of Australia.
-
(b)
-
For Australian coastal voyages - From the
time the ship arrives at the pilot station at its first
port in Australia to the time of completion of discharge
at the last Australian port.
The above time basis of apportionment is acceptable to the Tax
Office. It is up to taxpayers to demonstrate that other
circumstances may require the adoption of some other reasonable
basis of apportionment so that only the amount of 'hire'
referable to the carriage of goods etc 'shipped' in Australia is
brought to account under section 129.
'Demurrage'
107. An important clause in a 'voyage charterparty' and in some
liner 'bills of lading' is that which specifies the amount of
time allowed for loading and unloading the cargo. The time
allowed is referred to as 'laytime' which is free of charge to
the charterer. If the 'laytime' is exceeded, the 'charterer' has
to pay compensation to the shipowner in the form of 'demurrage'.
108. The nature of 'demurrage' has been variously described and
the term is also used in other detention cases outside the field
of loading and unloading a ship. 29 This
Ruling applies to 'demurrage' payable in the field of carriage
by ship. The two main theories of 'demurrage' are, first, that
it is additional 'freight' and, secondly, that it is damages for
breach of contract. The preference for any one view differs in
various jurisdictions. However, it should be noted that the
contract of carriage may be, and is usually, governed by foreign
law. Under English law there are arguments either way, but the
prevailing view is that 'demurrage' is regarded as agreed
damages for breach of contract and is recoverable without proof
of loss by the shipowner30 (see
contra view in Burmah
Steam Ship Co. Ltd v. Commissioners of Inland Revenue 31 where
Lord Sands considered 'demurrage' to be additional 'freight').
109. The 'demurrage' rate is usually a daily rate fixed by
reference to the 'freight' rates payable under the 'voyage
charterparty'. The time of payment varies and depends on express
provisions in the 'charterparty'. 'Demurrage' incurred upon
loading may be payable on completion of loading or on completion
of discharge. 'Demurrage' incurred on the unloading of cargo is
normally payable at that point.
110. Irrespective of whether 'demurrage' is considered to be
additional 'freight' or damages for breach of contract there is
a sufficient and direct connection between the 'demurrage'
payment and the carriage of the goods to bring 'demurrage'
within the provisions of section 129. The loading and unloading
of goods are, like the transportation of the goods, an integral
part of the business of carriage by sea. In fact, the loading
and unloading operations are seen as identifying the first and
last operations in a series of operations that constitute the
carriage of goods by sea. For instance, for the purposes of the
Hague Rules (see paragraph 35) loading and discharge form part
of the carriage operations.
111. To reiterate, the object of section 129 (see paragraphs 57
to 60) is to assess the profits of a shipowner or 'charterer'
albeit as an arbitrary amount of taxable income. The 'demurrage'
rate fixed by the parties is intended to cover the ship's daily
running costs plus the profit the ship operator would have been
able to earn had the ship not been delayed. 'Demurrage' payments
clearly contain a profit element materially linked with the
carriage of goods by sea. In the circumstances, it is the ATO
view that the words 'in respect of' are broad enough to cover
'demurrage' even if it is a payment for damages for breach of
contract. This view accords with the Tax Office's long standing
view contained in various Canberra Income Tax Circular Memoranda
(CITCMs) that 'demurrage' payments fall within section 129 (see
CITCM 580 as amended by CITCM 756).
'Deadfreight'
112. Standard forms 'voyage charterparties' normally contain a
clause for the 'charterer' to provide a 'full and complete'
cargo. If the 'charterer' fails in his obligation the shipowner
is entitled to damages for breach of contract - otherwise known
as 'deadfreight'. The amount due to the shipowner is generally
calculated on the basis of the 'freight' appropriate to the
amount of unutilised cargo space. The time of payment varies
according to express terms in the 'charterparty'. 'Deadfreight'
clauses also appear in some liner 'bills of lading'.
113. The payment of 'deadfreight' does not occur regularly in
the industry. One reason for this is that a replacement cargo is
often found to fill the ship's holds that the original 'shipper'
could not fill. Here, 'deadfreight' does not arise since the
contract between the shipowner and 'shipper' is fulfilled by
providing a complete cargo. However, the finding of a
replacement cargo may entail a separate payment of 'freight'
(sub-freight) by the second 'shipper' of goods to the original
'shipper' as a sub-charterer. The sub-freight would also fall
within section 129 and assessable in the hands of the original
'shipper' since it is a payment made in respect of the carriage
of a separate shipment of goods belonging to the second
'shipper'. In the circumstances, this may entail an adjustment
to be made to the amount of freight paid by the original shipper
to the shipowner so that only the amount paid in respect of the
carriage of the goods of the original shipper is assessed in the
hands of the shipowner.
114. Payments for 'deadfreight' occur because a quantity of
goods has not been 'shipped'. It is a penalty or compensation
not in respect of the carriage of goods but rather one for
non-carriage of a particular quantity of goods. Therefore, such
payments are outside the scope of section 129 and are not to be
taken into account in determining the deemed taxable income
under the section.
115. However, as the terms and context of 'deadfreight' clauses
may differ under a 'voyage charterparty' there may be
circumstances where that item can be taken into account - for
example, where the clause establishes a minimum charge for the
specified voyage.
'Dispatch (or despatch) money'
116. These payments also occur under a 'voyage charterparty' and
'bill of lading'. They are normally dealt with in the same
clause as the Demurrage Clause. The payment is made by the
shipowner to the 'charterer' or 'shipper' as an inducement to
complete the loading and unloading operations as quickly as
possible. The 'dispatch money' is a payment for any 'laytime'
saved. Normally the rate for 'dispatch money' is fixed at 50 per
cent of the agreed 'demurrage' rate. Settlement time is similar
to the payment for 'demurrage'.
117. The payment of 'dispatch money' by the shipowner to a
'charterer' or 'shipper' relating to time saved in Australia for
the loading of goods and the time saved for the discharge of the
goods should be deducted from the amount which would otherwise
be treated as the amount paid or payable for the carriage of
goods under section 129.
118. At common law 'freight' is payable only on delivery of the
goods at the port of discharge. The agreed 'freight' is also
payable in full with no deduction allowed, for example, by way
of set-off. However, stipulations as to the payment of 'freight'
vary greatly between contracts. In practice, 'bills of lading'
and 'voyage charterparties' expressly provide for the whole or
part of the 'freight' to be paid in advance and in some cases
permit some deductions. A usual clause in a 'bill of lading' and
'voyage charterparty' is 'The freight shall be deemed earned as
the cargo is loaded on board and shall be discountless and
non-refundable, vessel and/or cargo lost or not lost'. It would
appear, however, that it is customary for 'dispatch money' to be
deducted from 'freight'.
119. The payment of 'freight' under maritime law and practice
may raise some issues about the time of derivation of 'freight'
and when the adjustment for 'dispatch money' can be made.
Irrespective of whether 'dispatch money' represents an amount of
'freight' unearned or not, the amount that would otherwise be
treated as derived under section 129 should be reduced by any
'dispatch money' paid.
Cleaning charges
120. The condition of a ship is the responsibility of the
shipowner. The shipowner has to provide a ship that is seaworthy
and fit for the voyage and to carry the particular cargo. For
example, a ship that previously carried coal may need to be
cleaned in order to make it fit to carry some other cargo.
121. Some 'voyage charterparties' expressly provide that the
cleaning of the ship's tanks etc. is the responsibility of the
owner and the expense incurred on its account. Generally
speaking, the practice in the industry is that the shipowner is
responsible for cleaning the ship both before and after a voyage
for goods carried under a 'voyage charterparty' or 'bill of
lading'. Where a 'time charterparty' is involved the shipowner
is obliged to deliver a clean ship to the 'charterer' but the
'charterer' is responsible for cleaning the ship during its use
and on re-delivery to the shipowner. Cleaning costs are also
normally factored in the 'freight' charged to the 'shipper'
rather than carved out as a separate payment.
122. It would appear that the circumstances in which a 'shipper'
of goods is required to indemnify a carrier against the costs of
cleaning and testing to make a vessel cargo-worthy for
particular goods arise where the goods concerned have an unusual
quality or character that requires a higher degree of cleaning
prior to shipment (being a requirement of the 'shipper') or
following discharge (for the cargo holds to be left in an
acceptable condition for subsequent goods).
123. In Case
No. K 12 ,32 the
carrier was responsible for cleaning the ship and making it fit
to carry a cargo of oil. However, a clause in the 'bill of
lading' provided that the 'shippers' undertake to reimburse the
carriers for any expense actually incurred in preparing and
testing the tanks. The 'bill of lading' was endorsed with the
amount payable for 'Freight' as well as 'Cleaning charges'. The
Taxation Board of Review held that the cleaning charges fell
outside the provisions of section 129. The reasoning for this
was that only 'freight' is caught under the section.
124. It is understood from the industry that the cleaning of a
ship is rarely done by the 'shipper'. The circumstances, as
discussed in paragraph 122, where the shipowner (who normally
has the responsibility for cleaning the ship) separately charges
the shipper for cleaning the ship is also rare. In the
circumstances, the Tax Office accepts that cleaning charges fall
outside section 129. However, it does not accept the Board's
reasoning that only 'freight' falls within the section. Where
cleaning charges are separately charged to the 'shipper' and the
charges are excessive, consideration will be given to other
provisions of the ITAA 1936 or the ITAA 1997 to ensure that the
correct amounts paid or payable in respect of the carriage of
goods etc. are brought to account under section 129.
Appendix 2 - Alternative views
|
This
Appendix sets out alternative views and explains why
they are not supported by the Commissioner. It does not
form part of the binding public ruling. |
Alternative view
125. The alternative view is that 'hire' paid under a 'time
charterparty' would be excluded from section 129, in those cases
where the 'time charterparty' is not itself the contract of
carriage, on the basis that the 'time charterparty' is only a
contract for the provision of transportation services. This view
stems from the decision of the Taxation Board of Review in Case
No. K 12 in that
section 129 only captures amounts paid by way of 'freight'. That
is, section 129 only envisages payments made ' for '
the carriage of goods.
126. For the reasons advanced in this Ruling, this view is not
accepted. The Taxation Board of Review in Case
No. K 12 referred
to the High Court decision in Ocean
Steamship Co. Ltd 33 in
support of its reasoning. That case was concerned with 'freight'
(not 'hire') payable to a shipowner in respect of the
transhipment of the goods by a ship overseas other than the ship
that originally shipped the goods in Australia. The question as
to the scope of the operation of the words 'in respect of' and
its application to 'hire' did not arise. The issue was simply
whether the section only caught 'freight' earned by the ship
leaving Australia.
127. Indeed, Barton J when quoting a passage in the section as
appeared in the ITAA 1915-1916, namely, 'goods shipped in
Australia' and 'full amount payable to him ... in respect of the
carriage' made the comment at 414 of the CLR:
The passage just quoted follows the ordinary definition of
freight, and means the freight payable to the shipowner in
or out of Australia on the goods.
His Honour's comment was made in the context of the discussion
on whether the section referred to a particular ship (that is,
the ship leaving Australia) or more than one ship that was
involved with the carriage. It was not an observation as to the
scope and meaning of the words 'in respect of'. On the same
page, His Honour also commented that: 'It must be assumed that
the legislature in framing this section...... had in mind the
ordinary maritime law'. As explained above, at that time
maritime law treated the remuneration paid under a 'time
charterparty' as 'freight'. His Honour's comments may well have
been made in the light of this knowledge.
128. While carriage arrangements existing at the time may not
have involved a proliferation of charterparties, time
charterparties would have been in use as is evident from early
decisions of the courts. These early court decisions recognised
that in some context 'time charterparties' serve as contracts of
carriage and in others that the profits made in respect of the
carriage of goods is shared because of the dual management of
the ship by the owner and charterer - one receiving the
'freight' under the 'bill of lading' or 'voyage charterparty',
the other the 'hire' under the time charterparty.
Appendix 3 - Detailed contents list
129. The following is a detailed contents list for this Ruling:
|
|
Paragraph |
|
What this Ruling is about |
1 |
|
Class of person/arrangement |
1 |
|
Issues discussed in the Ruling |
3 |
|
Glossary of terms used in this Ruling |
7 |
|
Background |
26 |
|
Liability
under section 129 of the ITAA 1936 |
26 |
|
Shipping
trade law & practice |
28 |
|
Ruling |
36 |
|
Examples |
46 |
|
Example 1 (carriage under bill of lading) |
46 |
|
Example 2 (carriage by shipowner under
voyage charterparty) |
48 |
|
Example 3 (carriage under voyage
charterparty by a time charterer) |
50 |
|
Example 4 (apportionment of time charter
'hire') |
52 |
|
Example 5 (carriage by an Australian
charterer) |
54 |
|
Date of effect |
56 |
|
Appendix 1 - Explanation |
57 |
|
The scope of and calculation of the deemed
taxable income under section 129 of the ITAA 1936 |
57 |
|
|
|
Carriage of
goods by sea |
62 |
|
Persons
covered |
63 |
|
Multiple
charterparties |
68 |
|
Meaning of ' shipped
in Australia' |
72 |
|
The nature of payments falling within
section 129 |
75 |
|
The meaning
of the expression 'amount paid or payable ...in respect
of such carriage' |
75 |
|
Carriage
under a ' bill
of lading' contract |
83 |
|
Carriage
under charterparties |
88 |
|
In general |
88 |
|
' Hire'
under a time charterparty |
94 |
|
Apportionment
of 'hire' where ship is used to ship goods in Australia
and in other countries |
105 |
|
' Demurrage' |
107 |
|
' Deadfreight' |
112 |
|
' Dispatch
(or despatch) money' |
116 |
|
Cleaning
charges |
120 |
|
Appendix 2 - Alternative views |
125 |
|
Alternative view |
125 |
|
Appendix 3 - Detailed contents list |
129 |
Footnotes
[1]
Brodie, PR 1997, Dictionary of Shipping Terms, 3rd edn, LLP;
Ivamy, ERH 1988, Law Dictionary, Butterworths; Sullivan, E 1996,
The Marine Encyclopaedic Dictionary, 5th edn, LLP; Brown, RH
1989, Dictionary of Marine Insurance Terms and Clauses, 5th edn,
Witherby & Co Ltd; Nygh, P & Butt, P 1997, Australian Legal
Dictionary, Butterworths.
[2]
Cooke, J, Young, T, Taylor, A, Kimball, JD, Martowski, D &
Lambert, L 2001, Voyage Charters, 2nd edn, LLP, paragraph 18.1
et seq.
[3]
Ribble Navigation Company v. Hargreaves 17 CB 385.
[4]
Bowes v. Shand 2 App. Ca. 455.
[5]
Known as the Hague Rules 1924, the Hague/Visby Rules 1968 and
the Hamburg Rules 1978. Australia has adopted an amended version
of the Hague Rules but at the time of the issue of this Ruling
had not adopted the Hamburg Rules.
[6]
The predecessor to section 129 considered by the High Court in
Union Steamship Co. of New Zealand v. Federal Commissioner of
Taxation (1924) 35 CLR 209, was section 22 of the Income Tax
Assessment Act 1915-1918 under which 10% of the gross receipts
of the owner or charterer were subjected to tax. Under section
16 of that Act, dividends paid by a company were an allowable
deduction for the purposes of ascertaining the taxable income of
the company. The issue in the case was whether such deductions
were also allowable in determining the taxable income under
section 22.
[7]
Myerson v. Collard (1918) 25 CLR 154; Melluish v. BMI (No. 3)
Ltd [1995] 4 All ER 453.
[8]
Defined in Dictionary of Shipping Terms by PR Brodie, see
footnote 1, as a 'Person or company who controls the commercial
operation of a ship, responsible for deciding the ports of call
and the cargoes to be carried. Very often, the disponent owner
is a shipping line which time charters a ship and issues its own
liner bills of lading'.
[9]
Bowes v. Shand 2 App. Ca. 455.
[10]
Ocean Steamship Company Limited v. Federal Commissioner of
Taxation (1918) 25 CLR 412.
[11]
See cases referred to in footnotes 12 to 15.
[12]
FC of T v. Scully (1999-2000) 201 CLR 148; by Deane, Dawson and
Toohey JJ in Workers' Compensation Board (Q) v. Technical
Products Pty Ltd (1988) 165 CLR 642 at 653-654.
[13]
By Brennan, Deane and Gaudron JJ in Technical Products Pty Ltd
v. State Government Insurance Office (Qld) (1989) 167 CLR 45 at
47.
[14]
By Gibbs CJ in Storey v. Lane (1981) 147 CLR 549 at 557; Fraser
v. Commissioner of Taxation (1996) 69 FCR 99 at 113.
[15]
See J & G Knowles v. Commissioner of Taxation (2000) 96 FCR 402
and cases cited therein; FC of T v. Scully (1999-2000) 201 CLR
148.
[16]
Ocean Steamship Company Limited v. Federal Commissioner of
Taxation (1918) 25 CLR 412.
[17]
Gatoil International Inc. v. Arkwright-Boston Manufacturers
Mutual Insurance Co. [1985] 1 AC 255 at 270 & 271.
[18]
The 'Ardennes' [1950] 84 LI L Rep 340; [1951] 1 KB 55 (CA);
Pyrene v. Scindia Navigation [1954] 2 QB 402.
[19]
Rodoconachi Sons & Co v. Milburn Brothers [1886] 18 QBD 67 and
The Ship 'Socofl Stream' v. CMC (Australia) Pty Ltd (2001) FCA
961.
[20]
The President of India v. Metcalfe Shipping Co. Ltd (The
Dunelmia) [1970] 1 QB 289.
[21]
Sir Treitel, G & Reynolds, FMB 2001, Carver On Bills Of Lading,
Sweet & Maxwell.
[22]
Wilson, JF Carriage Of Goods By Sea, 3rd edn, Pitman Publishing,
Chapters 1 & 3; Davies, M & Dickey, A 2004, Shipping Law, 3rd
edn, Lawbook Co, Chapters 10 & 13.
[23]
For various descriptions given to time charterparties see:
Carriage of Goods by Sea, (footnote 22) at 4, 5, 86 & 92;
Shipping Law, (footnote 22) at 161; Wilford, M, Coghlin, T &
Kimball, JD 1995, Time Charters, 4th edn, Lloyd's of London
Press Ltd at 530 & 536; White, MWD 2000, Australian Maritime
Law, 2nd edn, The Federation Press, at 122 & 137; Colinvaux, R
1982, Carver's Carriage by Sea, 13th edn, Stevens & Sons,
London, at 413, 416-418, 460, 473, 482 & 1234; Boyd, SC,
Burrows, AS & Foxton D 1996, Scrutton on Charterparties and
Bills of Lading, 20th edn, Sweet & Maxwell, London, at 59;
Australasian United Steam Navigation Co. Ltd v. The Shipping
Control Board (1945) 71 CLR 508; Sea and Land Securities Ltd v.
Dickenson [1942] 2 KB 65; Federal Commerce and Navigation Ltd v.
Molena Alpha Inc. (The 'Nanfri') [1979] 1 Lloyd's Rep 201 (HL)
and Whistler International Limited v. Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha
Limited [2001] 1 AC 638.
[24]
Scrutton on Charterparties and Bills of Lading (footnote 23)
Art. 1 p. 1 and Australasian United Steam Navigation Co Ltd
(footnote 23) where Rich J at 525 stated that a time
charterparty was a charter in respect of the use or services of
ship and performed the ordinary function of a charter of
affreightment.
[25]
Whistler International Limited v. Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Limited
[2001] 1 AC 638.
[26]
Wehner v. Dene SS. Co. [1905] 2 KB 92 and also in Tradigrain v.
King Diamond Marine Limited [2000] 2 Lloyd's Rep 319.
[27]
Federal Commerce and Navigation Ltd v. Molena Alpha Inc. (The
'Nanfri') [1978] 2 Lloyd's Rep 132 (CA) per Lord Denning.
[28]
Care Shipping Corporation and Others v. Itex Itagrani Export S.A
(The 'Cebu' No. 2) [1992] 1 All ER 91; [1990] 2 Lloyd's Rep 316.
[29]
Tiberg, H 1995, The Law of Demurrage, 4th edn, Sweet & Maxwell,
Chapter 12; Schofield, J 2000, Laytime and Demurrage, 4th edn,
LLP Chapter 6.
[30]
See: Carriage of Goods by Sea (footnote 22) at 51 & 52;
Australian Maritime Law (footnote 23) at paragraph 6.3.8.
[31]
16 TC 67 at 73.
[32]
[1959] 10 TBRD 74.
[33]
Ocean Steamship Company Limited v. Federal Commissioner of
Taxation (1918) 25 CLR 412.
Previously released in draft form as TR 2005/D16
References
ATO references:
NO 2004/16063
ISSN: 1039-0731
Related Rulings/Determinations:
TR 2003/2
TR 92/20
Subject References:
belonging to
bill of lading
carriage of goods
coasting trade
cleaning expenses
deadfreight
demurrage
dispatch money
freight
hire
time charterparty
voyage charterparty
Legislative References:
ITAA 1915
ITAA 1915-1916
ITAA 1915-1918
ITAA 1915-1918 16
ITAA 1915-1918 22
ITAA 1922
ITAA 1936 14
ITAA 1936 16
ITAA 1936 18
ITAA 1936 Pt III Div 12
ITAA 1936 129
ITAA 1936 130
ITAA 1936 135
ITAA 1997
TAA 1953 Pt IVAAA
Carriage of Goods by Sea Act
Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1991 Sch 1 Art 1(b)
Motor Vehicles Insurance Act 1936 3(1)
Hague Rules 1924
Hague/Visby Rules 1968
Hamburg Rules 1978
Case References:
Australasian United Steam
Navigation Co. Ltd v. The Shipping Control Board
(1945) 71 CLR 508
Bowes v. Shand
2 (1877) App. Ca. 455
Burmah Steam Ship Co. Ltd v.
Commissioners of Inland Revenue
16 TC 67
Care Shipping Corporation and
Others v. Itex Itagrani Export S.A
[1992] 1 All ER 91
[1990] 2 Lloyd's Rep 316
Case No. K 12
[1959] 10 TBRD 74
Federal Commerce and Navigation
Ltd v. Molena Alpha Inc.
[1978] 3 WLR 309
[1978] 3 All ER 1066
[1978] 2 Lloyd's Rep 132 (CA)
Federal Commerce and Navigation
Ltd v. Molena Alpha Inc
[1979] 1 Lloyd's Rep 201 (HL)
[1979] AC 757
[1979] 1 All ER 307
[1978] 3 WLR 991
FC of T v. Scully
(1999-2000) 201 CLR 148
(1999-2000) 2000 ATC 4111
(1999-2000) 43 ATR 718
Fraser v. Commissioner of Taxation
1996) 69 FCR 99
(1996) 138 ALR 689
(1996) 33 ATR 370
Gatoil International Inc. v.
Arkwright-Boston Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Co.
[1985] 1 AC 255
[1985] 1 All ER 129
J & G Knowles v. Commissioner of
Taxation
(2000) 96 FCR 402
2000 ATC 4151
44 ATR 22
Melluish v. BMI (No. 3) Ltd
[1995] 4 All ER 453
[1996] AC 454
[1995] 3 WLR 630
Myerson v. Collard
(1918) 25 CLR 154
Ocean Steamship Company Limited v.
Federal Commissioner of Taxation
(1918) 25 CLR 412
Pyrene v. Scindia Navigation
[1954] 2 QB 402
[1954] 2 All ER 158
[1954] 1 Lloyd's Rep 321
Ribble Navigation Company v.
Hargreaves
17 CB 385
Rodoconachi Sons & Co. v. Milburn
Brothers
[1886] 18 QBD 67
Sea and Land Securities Ltd v.
Dickenson
[1942] 2 KB 65
Storey v. Lane
(1981) 147 CLR 549
Technical Products Pty Ltd v.
State Government Insurance Office (Qld)
(1989) 167 CLR 45
The 'Ardennes'
[1950] 84 LI L Rep 340
[1951] 1 KB 55 (CA)
[1950] 2 All ER 517
The President of India v. Metcalfe
Shipping Co. Ltd
[1970] 1 QB 289
[1969] 3 All ER 1549
[1969] 3 WLR 1120
[1969] 2 Lloyd's Rep 476
The Ship 'Socofl Stream' v. CMC
(Australia) Pty Ltd
(2001) FCA 961
Tradigrain v. King Diamond Marine
Limited
[2000] 2 Lloyd's Rep 319
[2000] 2 All ER (Comm) 542
Union Steamship Co. of New Zealand
v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation
(1924) 35 CLR 209
Wehner v. Dene SS. Co.
[1905] 2 KB 92
Whistler International Limited v.
Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Limited
[2001] 1 AC 638
[2001] 1 All ER 403
[2000] 3 WLR 1954
Workers' Compensation Board (Q) v.
Technical Products Pty Ltd
(1988) 165 CLR 642
Other References
Boyd, SC, Burrows, AS & Foxton D 1996, Scrutton on
Charterparties and Bills of Lading, 20th edn, Sweet & Maxwell,
London
Brodie, PR 1997, Dictionary of Shipping Terms, 3rd edn, LLP
Brown, RH 1989, Dictionary of Marine Insurance Terms and
Clauses, 5th edn, Witherby & Co Ltd
Canberra Income Tax Circular Memoranda CITCM 580
Canberra Income Tax Circular Memoranda CITCM 756
Colinvaux, R 1982, Carver's Carriage by Sea, 13th edn, Stevens &
Sons, London
Cooke, J, Young, T, Taylor, A, Kimball, JD, Martowski, D &
Lambert, L 2001, Voyage Charters, 2nd edn, LLP
Davies, M & Dickey, A 2004, Shipping Law, 3rd edn, Lawbook Co
Income Tax Assessment Bill 1935
Ivamy, ERH 1988, Law Dictionary, Butterworths
Nygh, P & Butt, P 1997, Australian Legal Dictionary,
Butterworths
Schofield, J 2000, Laytime and Demurrage, 4th edn, LLP
Sullivan, E 1996, The Marine Encyclopaedic Dictionary, 5th edn,
LLP
Tiberg, H 1995, The Law of Demurrage, 4th edn, Sweet & Maxwell
Treitel, Sir G & Reynolds, FMB 2001, Carver On Bills Of Lading,
Sweet & Maxwell
White, MWD 2000, Australian Maritime Law, 2nd edn, The
Federation Press
Wilford, M, Coghlin, T & Kimball, JD 1995, Time Charters, 4th
edn, Lloyd's of London Press Ltd
Wilson, JF Carriage Of Goods By Sea, 3rd edn, Pitman Publishing
|