TR 2007/9: Income tax:
circumstances when an item used to create a particular
atmosphere or ambience for premises used in a cafe, restaurant,
licensed club, hotel, motel or retail shopping business
constitutes an item of plant
|
Contents |
Para |
|
LEGALLY BINDING SECTION: |
|
|
What this Ruling is about |
1 |
|
Background |
3 |
|
Ruling |
8 |
|
Date of effect |
28 |
|
NOT LEGALLY BINDING SECTION: |
|
|
Appendix 1: Explanation |
29 |
|
Appendix 2: Detailed contents list |
71 |
|
This
publication provides you with the following level of
protection:
This publication (excluding appendixes) 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 (unless we are
satisfied that the ruling is incorrect and disadvantages
you, in which case we may apply the law in a way that is
more favourable for you - provided we are not prevented
from doing so by a time limit imposed by the law). You
will be protected from having to pay any underpaid 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
1. This Ruling sets out the Commissioner's view on the
circumstances when an item used to create a particular
atmosphere or ambience for premises used in a cafe, restaurant,
licensed club, hotel, motel or retail shopping business
constitutes an item of plant. (Those types of business are
referred to in this Ruling as 'the types of business discussed
in this Ruling'.) Whether an item is an item of plant is
relevant in determining whether a deduction is available under
either Division 40 (for depreciating assets) or Division 43 (for
capital works) of the Income
Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA
1997).1 As
the Background section of this Ruling explains in more detail, a
deduction for expenditure on plant is not available under
Division 43 and therefore, because of the interaction between
Division 40 and Division 43, a deduction for the decline in
value of an item of plant in premises may be available under
Division 40.
2. This Ruling does not consider whether expenditure incurred in
relation to premises used in these businesses is deductible
under section 8-1. This Ruling also does not consider whether
such expenditure is for repairs to 'premises (or part of
premises) or a depreciating asset' under section 25-10. Taxation
Ruling TR 97/23 sets out the circumstances in which a deduction
for repairs is available under that section.
Background
3. Deductions for capital expenditure on assets associated with
premises used in the types of business discussed in this Ruling
will generally only be available under either:
-
(a)
-
Division 40 (for depreciating assets); or
-
(b)
-
Division 43 (for capital works).
Depreciating assets
4. Division 40 contains the rules for the uniform capital
allowance system which applies to most depreciating assets,
including plant. Broadly speaking, Division 40 provides a
deduction for the decline in value of depreciating assets.
Division 40 generally allows a deduction for the cost of a
depreciating asset based on its effective life.
5. However, Division 40 does not apply to capital works for
which a deduction is available under Division 43 or would be
available under Division 43 but for the capital works being
started before a particular day or used for a relevant purpose.2
Capital works
6. Broadly speaking, Division 43 provides a deduction for
construction expenditure on capital works (including buildings)
used for other than residential accommodation if the
construction of the capital works commenced after 19 July 19823 and
the capital works are used to produce assessable income. The
basic rate of deduction is 2.5% of the capital expenditure able
to be deducted.4 However,
construction expenditure excludes expenditure on plant.5 Therefore,
a deduction for expenditure on plant is not available under
Division 43.
7. Division 43 applies to capital works that are buildings or
structural improvements and to extensions, alterations or
improvements to those buildings or structural improvements. If
an item in premises used in the types of business discussed in
this Ruling is capital works then generally a deduction will not
be available under Division 40 unless the item is both plant and
a depreciating asset and the other conditions of Division 40 are
met. A deduction may be available under Division 40 in respect
of such an item even though it is not plant where the
expenditure incurred in respect of the construction of the
relevant capital works is excluded from being construction
expenditure other than by reason of paragraph 43-70(2)(e) (as
expenditure on plant).
Ruling
Ordinary meaning of plant
8. An item that forms part of the premises does not come within
the ordinary meaning of plant, except in the rare case where the
premises are themselves plant.
9. It is a question of fact and degree as to whether an item
forms part of the premises. The following are relevant matters
to consider when determining that question:
-
·
-
whether the item appears visually to
retain a separate identity;
-
·
-
the degree of permanence with which it
has been attached;
-
·
-
the incompleteness of the structure
without it; and
-
·
-
the extent to which it was intended to be
permanent or whether it was likely to be replaced within
a relatively short period.
10. Where an item on the premises does not form part of the
premises and also does not fall within the extended meaning of
plant (for example, as an article or machinery), it will come
within the ordinary meaning of plant where the function
performed by the item is so related to the particular taxpayer's
income earning activities or special that it warrants the item
being held to be plant.
11. An item used to create a particular atmosphere or ambience
for premises used in a cafe, restaurant, licensed club, hotel,
motel or retail shopping business performs a function that is so
related to that business to warrant the item being held to come
within the ordinary meaning of plant for that business where
that atmosphere or ambience is intended to attract customers and
is a definable element in the service which the business
provides and for which its customers are prepared to pay.
12. Describing an item as decor does not of itself mean that the
item comes within the ordinary meaning of plant for one of these
businesses. An item used to create a particular atmosphere or
ambience for premises used in one of these businesses must not
form part of those premises and must satisfy paragraph 11 of
this Ruling to come within the ordinary meaning of plant for
that business.
Extended meaning of plant - articles
13. If an item is an 'article' it will come within the extended
meaning of plant by that fact alone.
14. An item cannot be an article if it is a structure erected or
built on, or into, land.
15. An item may be an article even though it is attached to the
premises.
16. However, a finding that an item forms part of the premises
will preclude characterisation of the item as an article.
Extended meaning of plant - machinery
17. Machinery is plant whether or not it forms an integral part
of a building or is a part of the setting for the taxpayer's
income-earning activities.
18. The process of determining whether something is machinery in
the context of the definition of plant involves:
-
·
-
identifying the relevant thing (unit) or
things (units) based on a consideration of
functionality; and
-
·
-
then deciding whether that thing or each
of those things comes within the ordinary meaning of
machinery.
19. The ordinary meaning of machinery includes devices, such as
computers and microprocessors, which utilise in various
processes minute amounts of energy in the form of electrical
impulses.
20. The ordinary meaning of machinery also includes heating
appliances, such as stoves, cooktops, ovens and hot water
cisterns.
21. The ordinary meaning of machinery does not include anything
that is merely a reservoir or conduit, such as ducting, piping
or wiring, although connected with something that is machinery.
In other words, if the ducting, piping or wiring forms part of a
unit that is a machine then it is machinery but if it is merely
connected to, but not part of, a unit that is a machine then it
is not machinery.
Example 1
22. A restaurant has decorated its dining area as a medieval
banquet hall in order to attract customers. As part of the
medieval theme, replicas of stone walls are constructed out of
painted polystyrene and are fastened to the walls. Themed lights
shaped as flaming torches are also installed and wired into the
building. These lights are in addition to the down lights that
were already installed in the restaurant prior to the
installation of the replica walls. The polystyrene walls and the
themed lights do not form part of the premises. They retain a
separate visual identity and are not necessary to complete the
premises. The degree of attachment is slight but adequate. These
factors outweigh any intention that the items might remain in
place for an indefinite period of time. Their sole purpose is to
create an atmosphere or ambience which is a definable element of
the customers' dining experience. The function of these items is
so related to the restaurant's business to warrant being held to
come within the ordinary meaning of plant. The down lights
installed prior to the creation of this medieval theme merely
form part of the premises and are not plant.
Example 2
23. A hotel has decorated one of its bar areas with sporting
memorabilia from a particular sport to assist in creating the
atmosphere that is marketed to the public to encourage
patronage. Some items have been securely fastened to the walls
and floors to prevent theft while others are suspended from the
ceiling. In the circumstances the Commissioner considers that
these items do not form part of the premises and retain their
separate identity as articles. The items retain their separate
visual identity and do not add to the completeness of the
premises. These factors outweigh the differing degrees of
attachment of the memorabilia and any intention that they might
remain in place for an indefinite period of time. Since these
articles fall within the extended meaning of plant in subsection
45-40(1) it is not necessary to consider the relationship of the
items to the hotel business, although in this case the items are
likely to have a function that is so related to the hotel
business to warrant being held to come within the ordinary
meaning of plant.
Example 3
24. A replica of a historical building is built for use as a
hotel. The building contributes to the ambience and experience
provided to patrons of the hotel. This building is not plant. It
functions simply as premises within which the hotel operations
take place. It is no more than specialised premises used for
those operations.
Example 4
25. A retail clothing store has redecorated in order to stay
abreast of the current fashion. This included painting the walls
in a soft pastel colour and adding matching ceramic tiles. The
purpose of the restyling is to provide customers with an
impression of exclusiveness. While the paint and the ceramic
tiles attached to the walls do contribute to the atmosphere of
the store, they form part of the premises. The tiles and paint
lose their separate identity, are permanently attached and add
to the completeness of the building. These factors outweigh any
intention to replace the tiles and paint in response to changes
in fashion. They are therefore not plant.
Example 5
26. A retail camping equipment shop specialising in
speleological equipment (that is, equipment used in cave
exploration) has a fibreglass facade attached to its shopfront.
The facade was designed and constructed so that in colour,
texture and shape the doorway has the appearance of a cave
entrance that customers walk through to enter the shop. The
interior of the shop is decorated with various items to continue
the cave theme. The fibreglass facade does not form part of the
premises. The facade has a separate visual identity and is not
necessary to complete the premises. These factors outweigh
considerations of the degree of permanence with which the facade
is attached and any intention that it remain in place for a
considerable period of time.
27. The sole purpose of the facade is to create a cave-like
atmosphere or ambience that is intended to attract caving
equipment customers. Given the nature of the equipment in which
the business specialises, the presentation of the cave-like
atmosphere is a definable element in the service which the
business provides and for which its customers are prepared to
pay. The facade's function is not as part of the premises and is
so related to the business to warrant it being held to come
within the ordinary meaning of plant. The shopfront to which the
fibreglass facade is attached merely forms part of the premises
and is not plant.
Date of effect
28. 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 if conflicts with the
terms of settlement of a dispute agreed to before the date of
issue of the Ruling (see paragraphs 75 and 76 of Taxation Ruling
TR 2006/10).
Commissioner of Taxation
12 December 2007
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. |
29. As mentioned in paragraph 7 of this Ruling, the result of
the relationship between Division 40 and Division 43 is that a
deduction under Division 40 will not generally be available for
a capital works item in premises used in the types of business
discussed in this Ruling unless the item is both plant and a
depreciating asset and the other conditions of Division 40 are
met.
30. For the purposes of the ITAA 1997, 'plant' has the meaning
given by section 45-40.6 That
inclusive definition is identical in effect to the definition of
plant in former section 42-18 of the ITAA 1997 and expresses the
same ideas as the definition of plant contained in subsection
54(2) of the Income
Tax Assessment Act 1936(ITAA 1936) (except that 'articles'
were then separate from plant rather than included in the
definition of plant as they are now).
31. In the context of premises used in the types of business
discussed in this Ruling, the relevant aspects of the definition
of plant are:
-
·
-
the ordinary meaning of plant;
-
·
-
articles; and
-
·
-
machinery.
The ordinary meaning of plant
32. Since plant is defined in an inclusive manner, plant has its
ordinary meaning as well as including the items listed in the
definition. Over the years that 'ordinary meaning' has gradually
diverged from its natural or dictionary meaning.7
33. That which is 'mere setting'8 for
the particular taxpayer's income earning activities is not
within the ordinary meaning of plant.9 The
premises used in the types of business discussed in this Ruling
are almost always merely the setting for the income earning
activities and therefore not within the ordinary meaning of
plant.
34. Similarly, as Lord Lowry10 stated
in Scottish
& Newcastle Breweries:
something which becomes part of the premises, instead of
merely embellishing them, is not plant, except in the rare
case where the premises are themselves plant, like the dry
dock in IRC
v. Barclay Curle & Co Ltd or
the grain silo in Schofield
(Inspector of Taxes) v. R & H Hall Ltd. 11
35. Thus, an item that forms part of the premises does not come
within the ordinary meaning of plant, except in the rare case
where the premises are themselves plant.
36. In Wimpy
International Ltd & Anor v. Warland (Inspector of Taxes) 12 Hoffmann
J13 considered
that the question whether something had become part of the
premises was not 'the same as whether it has become part of the
realty for the purposes of the law of real property or a fixture
for the purposes of the law of landlord and tenant.'14 That
view accords with the Australian cases which clearly indicate
that fixtures may be plant.15 Further,
Hoffmann J16 usefully
provided guidance as to some relevant matters to be considered
to determine the question of fact and degree as to whether an
item forms part of the premises or retains a separate identity.
These are:
-
·
-
whether the item appears visually to
retain a separate identity;
-
·
-
the degree of permanence with which it
has been attached;
-
·
-
the incompleteness of the structure
without it; and
-
·
-
the extent to which it was intended to be
permanent or whether it was likely to be replaced within
a relatively short period.17
No one of those factors is necessarily conclusive and the
relative importance of each will vary depending on the nature of
the item.
37. However, if an item does not form part of the premises that
does not mean that the item is therefore plant.
38. Whether 'buildings, structures or the like, or parts of
them'18 that
are 'more than mere setting'19 come
within the ordinary meaning of plant depends upon 'whether the
function performed by the thing [the building, structure, or
part of it] is so related to the taxpayer's operations or
special that it warrants it being held to be plant.'20
39. Thus, where an item on the premises does not form part of
the premises, it will come within the ordinary meaning of plant
where the function performed by the item is so related to the
particular taxpayer's income-earning activities or special that
it warrants the item being held to be plant.
40. Passages from leading Australian cases such as Wangaratta
Woollen Mills and ICI demonstrate
the closeness of the relationship that must exist between the
function performed by an item and the particular taxpayer's
income-earning activities for the item to come within the
ordinary meaning of plant.
41. In Wangaratta
Woollen Mills McTiernan
J said:
The complex ventilation system including the cavity wall
does more than merely clear the atmosphere. Its structure is
an active tool in preventing spoiling of material, and in
enabling the operatives to carry out their tasks. It
would be completely unnecessary in almost every other
industry and quite useless to any buyer except a dyer. 21 [Emphasis
added]
42. In ICI Kitto
J said:
The truth is that the ceilings with which we are concerned
do nothing for the appellant's business that they would not
do for the business of any other occupier.22
43. The Commissioner considers that an item used to create a
particular atmosphere or ambience for premises used in a cafe,
restaurant, licensed club, hotel, motel or retail shopping
business will in certain circumstances have a function that is
so related to that business to warrant the item being held to
come within the ordinary meaning of plant for that business.
44. There have been a number of court decisions on the
circumstances when an item used to create a particular
atmosphere or ambience in a business constitutes an item of
plant.
45. Scottish
& Newcastle Breweries was
the first case to articulate that items used to create a
particular atmosphere or ambience for premises used in certain
businesses may come within the ordinary meaning of plant. In
that case Lord Lowry23 stated:
Now the creation of the right atmosphere is a means to an
end in the carrying on of such a trade [of hotelier]; it is
not a trade in itself or a separate part of the trade. This
objective can be achieved by a combination of things, a
beautiful or unusual or historic building, attractive views,
gardens, shrubberies and waterfalls, ornaments, the
equipment used by the staff and the glasses, china, cutlery,
table linen, and the tables and chairs used by the
customers. Everything in this list, from the ornaments
onwards, is apparatus used in the hotel business and the
ornaments are used purely to create atmosphere. The mere
fact that some of the ornaments are freestanding on the
floor or on shelves or tables and that others are suspended
from or affixed to walls or ceilings is quite beside the
point. They are all part of the hotelier's plant as defined
in Yarmouth
v. France. 24
Lord Lowry went on to emphasise that the fact that different
things may perform the same function of creating atmosphere
or ambience is not relevant; one thing may function as part
of the premises and the other as plant.25
46. The other important judgment in that case was that of Lord
Wilberforce. Lord Wilberforce26 emphasised
that each case must be resolved 'by considering carefully the
nature of the particular trade being carried on, and the
relation of the expenditure to the promotion of the trade'27 being
carried on. Based on findings that the various items were not
part of the premises and that:
the taxpayer company's trade includes, and is intended to be
furthered by, the provision of what may be called
'atmosphere' or 'ambience', which (rightly or wrongly) they
think may attract customers28
Lord Wilberforce concluded that the various decorative items
came within the ordinary meaning of plant.
47. In Cole
Bros Ltd v. Phillips (Inspector of Taxes) 29 delivered
seven days after the judgment in Scottish
& Newcastle Breweries, Lord
Wilberforce summarised the decision in Scottish
& Newcastle Breweries as
follows:
That recent appeal was ... decided in the taxpayer's favour
on the basis of clear and strong findings of fact by the
Special Commissioners that (I summarise) the items in
question were not merely the setting in which the trader
carried on his business but represented or created something
which he offered to his customers to resort to and enjoy.30
48. The requirement of an element of marketed ambience apparent
in Lord Wilberforce's statements is also evident in the
statement of Lord Hailsham LC in Cole
Bros that 'in
certain cases, notably that of a hotelier and restaurant
proprietor, the very thing the trader is selling includes an
'ambience' or 'setting'.'31
49. The only other case to date in which consideration was given
to the relevance of the creation of atmosphere or ambience in
deciding whether an item comes within the ordinary meaning of
plant is Wimpy which
involved various items in fast food restaurants. The Special
Commissioners' decision in that case contains the following
useful analysis for present purposes:
It is not 'decor' as such which, in the light of the Scottish
& Newcastle decision,
is to be regarded in suitable cases as part of the thing
sold by a restaurant owner, but 'ambience' or 'atmosphere'.32
and:
The circumstances in which items contributing only to
ambience or atmosphere will constitute plant must be
uncertain since it will depend on the evidence in each case.
But it seems that a finding of fact will be required that
atmosphere forms a definable element in the service which
the trader provides and for which his customers are prepared
to pay; ... Unless that element of marketed ambience is
found then in our opinion the case will not come within the
principle of the Scottish
& Newcastle decision.33
50. The Special Commissioners also considered that:
The creation of atmosphere must, in the nature of things, be
less important in Wimpy's trade than in a hotel or a
restaurant where customers will be expected to linger over
their meals, but we do not think that the concept is wholly
incompatible with the conduct of a fast food restaurant.34
51. That analysis was not challenged on appeal by Hoffmann J,
who affirmed the Special Commissioners' decision,35 or
by the Court of Appeal,36 who
affirmed Hoffmann J's judgment.
52. The Commissioner agrees with the Special Commissioners'
articulation of the relevant principle which is capable of
extension beyond the cases, which have involved hotel,
restaurant, and fast food restaurant businesses, to similar
contexts such as a cafe, licensed club, motel or retail shopping
business, where the creation of atmosphere or ambience is
intended to attract customers and forms a definable element in
the service which the business provides and for which its
customers are prepared to pay. However, that will not often be
the case for takeaway food shops that provide limited or no
dining facilities for their customers.
Extended meaning of plant - articles
53. It is considered that the AAT in Case
11/97 correctly
summarised the principles relating to the meaning of 'articles'
in the definition of 'plant' as follows:
-
(a)
-
An item may qualify for a depreciation
deduction, even if it is not [within the ordinary
meaning of] 'plant', if the item can be regarded as an
'article' for the purposes of section 54: Quarries
Ltd v. FCT (1961)
106 CLR 310. The word 'article' is also not defined in
the Income
Tax Assessment Act, but
it has been given a very wide meaning in the cases. Thus
Taylor J said in Quarries
Ltd v. FCT (1961)
106 CLR 310 at 316:
I see no reason for denying to the word 'article'
the comprehensive meaning which it normally bears or
for thinking that it was not used in the section by
way of extension [to the word 'plant'].
-
(b)
-
And Mason J (as he then was) said in FCT
v. Faichney (1972)
129 CLR 38 at 43; 3 ATR 435 at 440:
The word 'article' according to the Shorter Oxford
Dictionary bears the meaning 'a piece of goods or
property'. The word would, I think, according to its
normal and ordinary meaning include a carpet or
curtain, a desk and a bookshelf.
-
(c)
-
However, an item cannot be an 'article'
if it is a structure attached to land. Per Taylor J in Quarries
Ltd v. FCT (1961)
106 CLR 310 at 316:
Of course, 'article' cannot ordinarily be taken to
comprehend a structure erected or built in situ ...
-
(d)
-
The same would apply if the item were
regarded as an integral part or the 'fabric' of such a
structure. So much appears from Kitto J in Imperial
Chemicals Industries of Australia and New Zealand Ltd v.
Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1970)
120 CLR 396; 1 ATR 450, where his Honour said in
relation to false ceilings found to be part of the
structure of the building (at CLR 398; ATR 451):
In my opinion, while they are in position they are
plainly not 'articles'.
This is not to say, however, that an item simply
attached to a building will not qualify as
'articles': the carpet held to be an 'article' in FCT
v. Faichney (1972)
129 CLR 38; 3 ATR 435 was more than likely in some
way attached, though it was clearly not an integral
part of the home there under consideration.
Thus, as a finding that an item is part of the
'fabric' of a structure (where the structure is
itself the 'setting' of the taxpayer's operations),
will result in it being held to not be 'plant'; such
a finding will also preclude any characterisation of
the item as 'articles'.37
Extended meaning of plant - machinery
54. Machinery is plant whether or not it forms an integral part
of a building or is a part of the setting for the particular
taxpayer's income-earning activities.38
55. The process of determining whether something is 'machinery'
in the context of the definition of plant involves:
-
·
-
identifying the relevant thing (unit) or
things (units) based on a consideration of
functionality; and
-
·
-
then deciding whether that thing or each
of those things comes within the ordinary meaning of
'machinery'.
Identifying the relevant thing(s) or unit(s)
56. The requirement to identify a 'unit' of plant dates back to
the beginning of the ITAA 1936.39 A
similar requirement to identify the relevant depreciating asset
or assets continues today.40 Since
machinery is included in the definition of plant and references
to plant refer to units of plant,41 it
follows that the first step in determining whether something is
machinery is to identify the relevant thing (unit) that is, or
things (units) that are, the subject of that determination.
57. A similar process of reasoning seems to have been adopted in
another context in 1995 when it was said:
[A] length of hydraulic tubing in itself may not be a
machine but once it forms an integral part of a diesel
engine, it can properly be regarded as 'machinery'. I accept
Telecom's point that whether or not one might regard wire
cables and optic fibres as machines in themselves, they can
properly be regarded as 'machinery' if they are constituent
parts of some larger entity which is a machine.42
58. Similarly, the determination as to whether an item in
premises used in the types of business discussed in this Ruling
is machinery is likely to involve consideration of whether a
particular item is itself a unit, part of a larger unit or
whether its components are separate units. Taxation Ruling TR
94/11 and the cases referred to in that Ruling explain that a
determination of this nature is a question of fact and degree
which can only be determined in the light of all of the
circumstances of the particular case.43 TR
94/11 and those cases also provide guidelines (relating to
functionality) that are intended to assist in making that
factual determination.44
Determining whether the relevant thing(s) or unit(s) are
machinery
59. In 1919 it was said:
The word 'machinery' has no definite legal meaning and ...
the general rule is, in dealing with matters relating to the
general public, that statutes are presumed to use words in
their popular sense ... The Ratings Act is such a statute,
and, as there is no context to suggest any other meaning,
the term 'machinery' ought to be treated as having been used
therein in its popular sense.45
60. Similarly, there is nothing to indicate that machinery, in
the context of the definition of plant, was intended to have
other than its ordinary meaning.
61. It was also said in that 1919 case that machinery in its
popular sense:
means primarily a number of machines, taken collectively,
and a machine in its popular sense is a piece of mechanism
which, by means of its inter-related parts, serves to
utilise or apply power, but does not include anything that
is merely a reservoir or conduit, although connected with
something which is without doubt a machine.46
62. It was therefore concluded in that case that the mains laid
and used for supplying gas were not parts of a machine or
properly included under the term machinery.
63. Similarly, in 1949 it was said:
it would be using the word 'machinery' in a figurative or
metaphorical sense, and not in an ordinary or popular sense,
to describe as machinery the means by which [energy or
matter] is so made available or conveyed, where that means
itself contains no element of motion or action.47
64. Thus, the ordinary meaning of machinery does not include
anything that is merely a reservoir or conduit, such as ducting,
piping or wiring, although connected with something that is
machinery. In other words, if the ducting, piping or wiring
forms part of a unit that is a machine then it is machinery but
if it is merely connected to, but not part of, a unit that is a
machine then it is not machinery.
65. The Australian
Concise Oxford Dictionary, 4th
edn, 2004, relevantly defines machinery as:
-
1.
-
machines collectively.
-
2.
-
the components of a machine; a mechanism.
and machine as:
-
1.
-
an apparatus using or applying mechanical
power, having several parts each with a definite
function and together performing certain kinds of work.
-
2.
-
a particular kind of machine, esp. a
vehicle, a piece of electrical or electronic apparatus,
a computer, etc.
-
3.
-
an instrument that transmits a force or
directs its application.
66. Similarly, The
Macquarie Dictionary, 3rd
edn, 1999, relevantly defines machinery as:
-
1.
-
machines or mechanical apparatus.
-
2.
-
the parts of a machine, collectively: the
machinery of a watch.
and machine as:
-
1.
-
an apparatus consisting of interrelated
parts with separate functions, which is used in the
performance of some kind of work: a
sewing machine.
-
2.
-
a mechanical apparatus or contrivance; a
mechanism.
-
3.
-
something operated by a mechanical
apparatus, as a motor vehicle, a bicycle, or an
aeroplane.
-
4.
-
Mechanics
-
a. a device which transmits and modifies
force or motion.
-
b. simple machines, the six (sometimes
more) elementary mechanisms, that is, the lever, wheel
and axle, pulley, screw, wedge, and inclined plane.
67. In 1992 it was said that the modern ordinary meaning of
machinery and machine indicates that machines, and therefore
machinery, include devices that do not involve the application
of mechanical power but instead 'utilise in various processes
minute amounts of energy, in the form of electrical impulses'
(for example, computers and microprocessors).48
68. In that 1992 case it was also said:
It is even easier to characterise as machinery items such as
hot drink dispensers and appliances for heating food or
drinks or for cooking. In each case, energy in the form of
heat is transferred to some substance which, at the outset,
is of a lower temperature. The temperature of that substance
is thus raised. The heat source may be an electrical
element, or the combustion of some gas or solid fuel. It may
even be energy derived from solar light or heat.49
69. Thus, it was said in that case, a boiler ('in which hot
gases, heated by a furnace, are brought into close proximity to
water, and energy in the form of heat is passed through a
conductive material, to raise the temperature of the water and
vaporise it')50 is
machinery.
70. In the context of items in premises used in the types of
business discussed in this Ruling, these comments about heating
appliances indicate that items such as stoves, cooktops, ovens
and hot water cisterns are machinery.
Appendix 2 - Detailed contents list
71. The following is a detailed contents list for this Ruling:
|
|
Paragraph |
|
What this Ruling is about |
1 |
|
Background |
3 |
|
Depreciating assets |
4 |
|
Capital works |
6 |
|
Ruling |
8 |
|
Ordinary meaning of plant |
8 |
|
Extended meaning of plant - articles |
13 |
|
Extended meaning of plant - machinery |
17 |
|
Example 1 |
22 |
|
Example 2 |
23 |
|
Example 3 |
24 |
|
Example 4 |
25 |
|
Example 5 |
26 |
|
Date of effect |
28 |
|
Appendix 1 - Explanation |
29 |
|
The ordinary meaning of plant |
32 |
|
Extended meaning of plant - articles |
53 |
|
Extended meaning of plant - machinery |
54 |
|
Identifying the relevant thing(s) or unit(s) |
56 |
|
Determining whether the relevant thing(s)
or unit(s) are machinery |
59 |
|
Appendix 2 - Detailed contents list |
71 |
Footnotes
[1]
All legislative references are to the ITAA 1997 unless otherwise
stated.
[2]
Subsection 40-45(2).
[3]
Hotel buildings and apartment buildings (providing short-term
accommodation for travellers) commenced to be constructed in
Australia after 21 August 1979 are also covered: see paragraph
43-20(1)(a), section 43-90 and section 43-95.
[4]
A rate of 4% is available for capital works commenced to be
constructed between 22 August 1984 and 15 September 1987
(inclusive) and for parts of certain buildings (including hotel
buildings and apartment buildings) commenced to be constructed
after 26 February 1992: see section 43-25 and section 43-145.
[5]
Paragraph 43-70(2)(e).
[6]
Subsection 995-1(1).
[7]
IRC v. Scottish & Newcastle
Breweries Ltd [1982]
2 All ER 230 at 232 (Scottish
& Newcastle Breweries) ,
per Lord Wilberforce.
[8]
Macquarie Worsteds Pty Ltd v. FC
of T 74 ATC 4121
at 4125; (1974) 4 ATR 334 at 338.
[9]
Wangaratta Woollen Mills Ltd v.
Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1969)
119 CLR 1 at 10; 69 ATC 4095 at 4101; (1970) 1 ATR 329 at 335 (Wangaratta
Woollen Mills) , Imperial
Chemical Industries of Australia and New Zealand Ltd v. Federal
Commissioner of Taxation (1970)
120 CLR 396 at 398-399; 70 ATC 4024 at 4025-4026; (1970) 1 ATR
450 at 451-452 (ICI) and Macquarie
Worsteds Pty Ltd v. FC of T 74
ATC 4121 at 4125; (1974) 4 ATR 334 at 338.
[10]
With whom Lord Salmon, Lord Fraser and Lord Bridge agreed.
[11]
[1982] 2 All ER 230 at 238.
[12]
[1988] STC 149 (Wimpy) .
[13]
Now Lord Hoffmann of the House of Lords.
[14]
[1988] STC 149 at 173.
[15]
See Pearce
v. FC of T 89 ATC
4064; (1988) 20 ATR 113, Negative
Instruments Pty Ltd v. FC of T (No. 2) 94
ATC 4813; (1994) 29 ATR 429 and Case
11/97 97 ATC 173; AAT
Case 11,655; (1997)
35 ATR 1022.
[16]
Whose judgment was affirmed by the Court of Appeal at [1989] STC
273.
[17]
[1988] STC 149 at 173.
[18]
Macquarie Worsteds Pty Ltd v. FC
of T 74 ATC 4121
at 4125; (1974) 4 ATR 334 at 338.
[19]
Macquarie Worsteds Pty Ltd v. FC
of T 74 ATC 4121
at 4125; (1974) 4 ATR 334 at 338.
[20]
Macquarie Worsteds Pty Ltd v. FC
of T 74 ATC 4121
at 4125; (1974) 4 ATR 334 at 338. Followed in Carpentaria
Transport Pty Ltd v. FC of T 90
ATC 4590 at 4592; (1990) 21 ATR 513 at 514.
[21]
(1969) 119 CLR 1 at 10; 69 ATC 4095 at 4101; (1970) 1 ATR 329 at
335.
[22]
(1970) 120 CLR 396 at 398; 70 ATC 4024 at 4025; (1970) 1 ATR 450
at 451.
[23]
With whom Lord Salmon, Lord Fraser and Lord Bridge agreed.
[24]
[1982] 2 All ER 230 at 237.
[25]
[1982] 2 All ER 230 at 238.
[26]
With whom Lord Salmon, Lord Fraser and Lord Bridge also agreed.
[27]
[1982] 2 All ER 230 at 233.
[28]
[1982] 2 All ER 230 at 233.
[29]
[1982] 2 All ER 247 (Cole
Bros) .
[30]
[1982] 2 All ER 247 at 254.
[31]
[1982] 2 All ER 247 at 251.
[32]
[1988] STC 149 at 165.
[33]
[1988] STC 149 at 156.
[34]
[1988] STC 149 at 160.
[35]
Apart from one item which Hoffmann J considered should have been
held to be plant based on the Special Commissioners' findings as
to the role of the item in creating a particular atmosphere and
that the item was not part of the premises.
[36]
[1989] STC 273.
[37]
97 ATC 173 at 184-185; AAT
Case 11,655 (1997)
35 ATR 1022 at 1034-1035.
[38]
Carpentaria Transport Pty Ltd v.
FC of T 90 ATC
4590 at 4593; (1990) 21 ATR 513 at 515.
[39]
See the concept of 'unit of property' in sections 55 and 56 of
the ITAA 1936 as originally enacted.
[40]
See subsection 40-30(4).
[41]
See for example the former section 42-19.
[42]
Telecom Auckland Ltd v. Auckland
City Council [1995]
3 NZLR 489 at 502, per Fisher J.
[43]
The same principle is also embodied in subsection 40-30(4) in
the context of identifying depreciating assets.
[44]
See particularly paragraphs 3 to 7 of TR 94/11.
[45]
Auckland City Corporation v.
Auckland Gas Co Ltd [1919]
NZLR 561 at 586, per Sim J.
[46]
Auckland City Corporation v.
Auckland Gas Co Ltd [1919]
NZLR 561 at 586, per Sim J.
[47]
Hutt Valley Electric Power Board
v. Lower Hutt City Corporation [1949]
NZLR 611 at 636-637, per Hutchinson J.
[48]
Toyota Tsusho Australia Pty Ltd &
Anor v. Collector of Customs (unreported,
Federal Court, No. VG113 of 1991, 14 May 1992), per Gray J at
paragraph 4.
[49]
Toyota Tsusho Australia Pty Ltd &
Anor v. Collector of Customs (unreported,
Federal Court, No. VG113 of 1991, 14 May 1992), per Gray J at
paragraph 4.
[50]
Toyota Tsusho Australia Pty Ltd &
Anor v. Collector of Customs (unreported,
Federal Court, No. VG113 of 1991, 14 May 1992), per Gray J at
paragraph 6.
Previous draft:
TR 2007/D4
References
ATO references:
NO 2006/13137
ISSN: 1039-0731
Related Rulings/Determinations:
TR 94/11
TR 97/23
TR 2006/10
Subject References:
articles
capital allowances
capital works
depreciating asset
machinery
plant
Legislative References:
ITAA 1936 54(2)
ITAA 1936 55
ITAA 1936 56
ITAA 1997 8-1
ITAA 1997 25-10
ITAA 1997 Div 40
ITAA 1997 40-30(4)
ITAA 1997 40-45(2)
ITAA 1997 42-18
ITAA 1997 42-19
ITAA 1997 Div 43
ITAA 1997 43-20(1)(a)
ITAA 1997 43-25
ITAA 1997 43-70(2)(e)
ITAA 1997 43-90
ITAA 1997 43-95
ITAA 1997 43-145
ITAA 1997 45-40
ITAA 1997 45-40(1)
ITAA 1997 995-1(1)
TAA 1953
Case References:
Auckland City Corporation v.
Auckland Gas Co Ltd
[1919] NZLR 561
Carpentaria Transport Pty Ltd v.
FC of T
90 ATC 4590
(1990) 21 ATR 513
Case 11/97; AAT Case 11,655
97 ATC 173
(1997) 35 ATR 1022
Cole Brothers Ltd v. Phillips
(Inspector of Taxes)
[1982] 2 All ER 247
FC of T v. Faichney
(1972) 129 CLR 38
3 ATR 435
72 ATC 4245
Hutt Valley Electric Power Board
v. Lower Hutt City Corporation
[1949] NZLR 611
Imperial Chemical Industries of
Australia and New Zealand Ltd v. Federal Commissioner of
Taxation
(1970) 120 CLR 396
70 ATC 4024
(1970) 1 ATR 450
IRC v. Barclay Curle and Co Pty
Ltd
[1969] 1 All ER 732
IRC v. Scottish & Newcastle
Breweries Ltd
[1982] 2 All ER 230
Macquarie Worsteds Pty Ltd v. FC
of T
74 ATC 4121
(1974) 4 ATR 334
Negative Instruments Pty Ltd v. FC
of T (No. 2)
94 ATC 4813
(1994) 29 ATR 429
Pearce v. FC of T
89 ATC 4064
(1988) 20 ATR 113
Quarries Ltd v. FC of T
(1961) 106 CLR 310
Schofield (Inspector of Taxes) v.
R & H Hall Ltd
[1975] STC 353
Telecom Auckland Ltd v. Auckland
City Council
[1995] 3 NZLR 489
Toyota Tsusho Australia Pty Ltd &
Anor v. Collector of Customs (unreported, Federal Court, No. VG113
of 1991, 14 May 1992)
[1992] FCA 282
Wangaratta Woollen Mills Ltd v.
Federal Commissioner of Taxation
(1969) 119 CLR 1
69 ATC 4095
(1970) 1 ATR 329
Wimpy International Ltd & Anor v.
Warland (Inspector of Taxes)
[1988] STC 149
Wimpy International Ltd & Anor v.
Warland (Inspector of Taxes)
[1989] STC 273
Yarmouth v. France
(1887) 19 QBD 647
Other References
Australian Concise Oxford Dictionary, 4th edn, 2004
The Macquarie Dictionary, 3rd edn, 1999