You can no longer claim deductions for travelling to your investment property

New rules came in to effect from 1 July 2017, that prevent taxpayers claiming a deduction for expenses they incur travelling to and from their residential investment property.

The Government restricted travel deductions to curb “widespread abuse around excessive travel expense claims relating to residential investment properties….This will stop residential property investors from using the tax system to pay for their holidays by claiming costs as a rental expense.”

The new rules prevent a deduction from being claimed for a loss or outgoing if it relates to travel and the expense is incurred in gaining or producing assessable income from the use of residential premises as residential accommodation.

The purpose of the travel is not really relevant under these rules. They simply prevent a deduction from being claimed if the travel is undertaken in connection with a residential rental property, which could include travel to inspect the property, undertake repairs, collect rent or meet with real estate agents.

The restriction applies to transport costs (regardless of the mode of transport used), meals and accommodation expenses incurred in relation to a residential rental property.

There are some exceptions to these changes.

Firstly, the rules will not prevent a deduction from being claimed if the expense is necessarily incurred in carrying on a business. This means that if you carry on a business of renting properties, you can continue claiming travel deductions if you carry on a business of property investing or a business of providing retirement living, aged care, student accommodation or property management services.

The distinction between someone merely investing in property and someone carrying on a business of property investing is a matter of fact. The ATO will look at the characteristics of the business including:

• the total number of residential properties that are rented out

• the average number of hours per week you spend actively engaged in managing the rental properties

• the skill and expertise exercised in undertaking these activities, and

• whether professional records are kept and maintained in a business-like manner.

The fact that a taxpayer has multiple properties does not necessarily mean that they are in business. It will really depend on whether you can prove that you actively manage the properties like a business. In a recent case, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal found that a taxpayer with 9 rental properties was considered to be carrying on a business of property rental largely because the taxpayer actively supervised the real estate agent employed and managed issues associated with the properties (thus having a discernible pattern of trading to their activities), the capital employed was significant and they had conducted property rental activities for a number of years.

Also, the rules do not apply to certain entities including:

• Companies;

• Superannuation funds, except SMSFs;

• Managed investment trusts;

• Public unit trusts;

• Unit trusts or partnerships, but only if all unit holders or partners fall within one of the categories above.

In addition to the rules that prevent a deduction from being claimed, the changes also ensure that these travel expenses cannot be included in the cost base or reduced cost base of a property. This means that they cannot be used to reduce a capital gain or increase a capital loss made on sale of the property.

If you have any questions please don’t hesitate to contact us