Windfall tax on bankers' bonuses

was here last weekend

Britain and France have decided to impose a windfall tax on bankers' bonuses.

Under the new one-time tax, any bank operating in Britain must pay a tax of 50% on all discretionary bonuses of more than GBP25,000 (SGD$56,500) paid between now and April 5 next year. Banks attempting 'avoidance schemes' by postponing bonuses would face further, unspecified punishments. As the bonus payouts are mostly contracted, the banks are obliged to pay. Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman supports the idea.

So what could these fat cat bankers do?
Firstly, they can fly out of Europe to anywhere else such as Asia. They can then do whatever they are doing in Europe but do it in Singapore or Hong Kong instead.

Or secondly, they can stop calling themselves "bankers". The windfall tax is on bankers' bonuses and not cleaners'. Perhaps the bankers can call themselves cleaners and they get to keep their bonuses after deducting a nominal income tax. A small humiliation with full pockets.

Top chefs in hot soup?

Some top hotels in Singapore are now without their respective chefs in their Chinese restaurants. They have been summoned to Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) to "assist" in investigation of accepting bribes from a seafood provider.

What is the modus operandi?
Top chefs are king of their mountain ie. kitchen, in the hotels. They dictate what to buy and from who in the name of ensuring quality for their top Chinese restaurants. Suppliers have to show their appreciation for a more than amicable business relationship by showering them with "love" and "attention" in the form of gifts and money.

How did CPIB got a sniff of these violations?
CPIB was notified by Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS). IRAS is investigating a seafood supplier on tax evasion. IRAS found some computer files with payout information in computers seized from the seafood supplier.

So the next time when you are eating sharkfins, fish maw, scallops in these expensive restaurants, you are not sure whether they are really "clean" or not.

Tax spies and top income bracket

Mr Ooi Boon Jin, head of international executive services at KPMG, made this observation in today's BT. He said, "Our study has recorded a general decline in top personal income rates over the past seven years, but for 2010 we are seeing indications that a reversal may be on the way."

A reversal in falling tax rates in attempt to drive tax collections to pay for the trillions of stimulus packages implemented over the last 12 months.

In another development reported in today's BT, Mr Mochamad Tjiptardjo, the new tax chief since last month, said, "(Indonesia) must boost tax revenues significantly to meet the government's ambitious target in a country where tax evasion has been routine."

How does he plan to do it? Among the many initiatives, he intends to send "tax spies" to places to gather evidences of Indonesians have stowed their ill-gotten gains and evading taxes.

So if you are a high income earner, it is time you seriously review your tax residency status if you have not.

KPMG illustrated that a Singapore tax resident would pay top personal tax rate of 20% if and if their next chargeable income exceeds SGD$320,000 or USD217,317/-. If you are a Malaysia tax resident, you would have the honour of paying the top personal income tax rate of 27% at a significantly modest annual income of USD28,470/-.

Enhanced Loss Carry Back - Priority issue

Rule - A company that has assessable income for a particular YA may be eligible to offset the income with losses carried forward from a prior YA as well as losses carried back from a subsequent YA.

Consider this scenario. There could be loss carried forward from YA2006 available to offset the
assessable income of $80,000 in YA 2007 in addition to the loss carried back from YA2009.

Question - What should the priority of offset be? Should it be carry forward first, then carry back, or vice versa?

Answer - Based on section 37E(1) and (17) of the Income Tax Act, the losses brought forward would be deducted first.

Transfer pricing in retro - 2006

a portrait

Back in July 2006, the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) organised its first transfer pricing conference in collaboration with several renowned tax and business consulting firms, including PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC).

Over 600 executives and tax practitioners attended the half-day forum titled: Transfer Pricing in Singapore – What you need to know.

It officially signalled IRAS's intention to focus resources in this area in the coming years. In future postings, I will attempt to provide the latest update on this front.

In 2006, Mr. See Jee Chang, IRAS’s Director for International Tax/Tax Policy & Ruling, highlighted two areas that require further clarification.

• One area relates to the current practice of not requiring interest on intercompany loans.
• The second relates to the common practice of charging a 5% profit mark-up for intercompany services.

At that preliminary stage, IRAS did not provide any detailed guidance but only signalled that related party loans involving foreign entities may be subject to adjustments.

With regard to intercompany services, IRAS mentioned that while a 5% mark-up may be accepted for routine services, the arm’s length principle may imply higher mark-ups for non-routine, value-added services.

Transfer pricing in taxation

In management accounting, transfer pricing is a topic which addresses the issues with regard to determining a price for the transfer of goods and services between two divisions in a decentralised set-up.

In taxation, transfer pricing relates to the following areas:-

• When entity A sells goods on credit to entity B and the receivable remains outstanding beyond the normal credit term - Entity A may be deemed to have provided interest-free funding to entity B.

• Entity A and entity B are related. Entity B uses entity A's accounts department as its accounting resource. How much should entity A charge entity B? IRAS is prepared to accept a 5% mark-up on the basis that this has been a practice commonly adopted by related party service providers in Singapore as remuneration for providing routine support services. Other mark ups are acceptable. subject to arm's length principle.

• In the third situation, entity A and entity B are utilising a service provided in a cost pooling arrangement. Issue here is the way the costs are allocated between the entities.

ACCA F6 - Discussion with Examiner

Below is my interpretation of what was discussed in today's meeting with the Examiner.

Generally computation ie. greater than or equal to 60% of total marks.

Question 1
Only 21% has >15 marks based on sample.
There are more parts to this question.
And this change in question structure is apparently the main reason for the generally poor overall performance of F6 students.

Question 2
56% achieved more than 11 marks based on sample.
The peculiar exceptions below were the killers ie.
- spousal transfer
- tax concession on royalty income of an author
- accrued income concept
- unable to compute net rental income

Question 3
less than 1% achieved more than 11 marks (Shocking!!!!)
Limited Liability Partnership is almost a sure thing for the coming exam.
Students unable to appreciate that past relevant deductions > than contributed capital.

Question 4 - GST
Part (a) and (b) were on GST. Part (c) - not GST.
Examiner said at least 10 marks will be assigned to GST in the exam.
Students unable to address pre-commencement expenses.

Question 5
51% scored more than 11 marks.

Other comments
Students did well in June 2008 exam but did very badly for Dec 2008 exam.
Warning to students - Order of set-off must be correctly stated in the utilisation of Capital Allowances/Losses/Donations.
Budget 2009 will not be examined in June 2009 exam.
Try to find out about tax-on-tax, tax reimbursement and tax allowance for the coming exam.

ACCA P6 Meeting with the Examiner

The following is my interpretation of what was discussed in the meeting the Examiner this afternoon.

What was done well?
- Knowledge - particularly in personal income tax, recent tax changes and withholding tax (but lacking in mitigation of liability under witholding tax).
- Approach & structure - students are observed to be attempting the more "approachable" questions in Part B first, then Part A. (Statistically from a worldwide basis, questions should be attempted in the order as per numbered ==> otherwise perform badly)

What was not done well?
Students failed to plan their time and answers. How?
Massive download of unnecessary info into the answers.
Don't produce rote answers.
Don't do unnecessary calculations.
Unable to structure answers to "advisory" questions.
Students should "tailor" their answer to the requirements of each question.
Poor performance on GST in all three sittings under the new syllabus to date. (wink! wink! study harder in this area)

What to focus on?
Need to know the technical details under F6 being foundation knowledge to P6.
Answer all parts of the questions. Address each paragraph in the question.
Focus on command words.
"What you intend to write must be to earn marks"

Other comment
Do the students have enough questions to practice? The old Paper 3.2 is different from current P6.
When the question asked for "a five-year period", students only need to do one calculation for 5 years and NOT five single-year calculations.
P6 questions are on multi-tax type basis.

In the last sitting, there was someone who scored "zero" mark despite having written pages after pages. Why? The person spent the time copying the exam questions word for word twice into the answer script.

Students do not seem to under the meaning of "business undertaking".

Tax cases are examinable. But the participants had a very vigorous discussion on where to get the details of the tax cases.

Tax Deferment Scheme

What is the Scheme about?
Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) allows taxpayers with GIRO arrangement to defer income tax instalments for 3 months, from May 2009 to July 2009.

I thought IRAS was in the same helpful mode as per Budget just presented earlier ie. delaying its collection of current tax payable due to IRAS.

But which 3 months are we talking about? May, Jun and July 2009!!! For these months, we are actually paying tax in ADVANCE ie. for YA2009. They are actually not due until we receive our Assessment after we report our income on April 15.

So IRAS, are you really helping us to alleviate our financial burden? I don't think so.

Bottomline - You are not defering tax on money I owe you but rather you are defering on tax I am not due to pay you.

Singapore Budget 2009 - My budget chats

Dear Friends,

Happy 'Niu' Year to you.

The Singapore Budget 2009 has been touted as bold. I do agree with this labelling to a big extent.

I have placed my comment at AccountingWithEdgar blog. My latest entry is my views on Dr Basant Kapur's idea to roll back GST to stimulate Consumption.

So please have a read through and share with me your views and comment too.

Gongxi to you!

Suggestion to IRAS

where was i?

There is a significant difference in value placed on a gardener and a household servant in the computation of taxable benefits granted to an employee.

Current laws

• For a gardener, it is $35 per month or actual wages paid by employer, whichever is lower.
• Whereas for a household servant, it is based on the actual wages paid by employer.

Refer - www.iras.gov.sg/irasHome/page03.aspx?id=3638

Perhaps the "discrepancy" could be due to:-

• the gardener's thingy has been around since the British colonial days where expatriates stayed in bungalows with gardens groomed by gardeners getting $35 salary
• the household servant is a more recent phenomenon
• or is it that gardeners are part-timers who come around once a while to touch up on your garden

Whatever it is, I am just trying to cheekily explain the "discrepancy" in IRAS' valuation of a gardener as compared to a household servant.

So can I advise expatriate employees (if there is any left) to ask their employers to hire "gardeners" who can do household chores to effectively lower your taxable employment income? :)