Legislative Wrap-Up 2022: Grant of option now dutiable

Legislative Wrap-Up 2022: Grant of option now dutiable

Legislative Wrap-Up 2022: Grant of option now dutiable

On 19 May 2022, the Duties Act 1997 (NSW) was amended by the State Revenue and Fines Legislation Amendments (Miscellaneous) Act 2022 (NSW) (the Act). Upon its royal assent, a new head of duty and substantial amendments to the current Act were made and imposed on transactions which result in a “change of beneficial ownership”.

Pursuant to s 8(1)(b)(ix) of the Act, the term “change in beneficial ownership” includes:

    • the creation of dutiable property;
    • the extinguishment of dutiable property;
    • a change in equitable interests in dutiable property;
    • dutiable property becoming the subject of a trust; and
    • dutiable property ceasing to be the subject of a trust.

The above is designed to broaden the scope of transactions which are now considered dutiable under this Act.

 

How does this affect you?

    One of the most important outcomes from the introduction of this legislation is that duty is now payable on the grant of an option.

    Under ss 11(1)(K) of the Act, an option to purchase land in NSW is a creation of dutiable property. Pursuant to s 8(3) of the Act, the creation of dutiable property constitutes a change of beneficial ownership. Therefore, duty is now payable on a grant of an option to purchase land in NSW.

    At the time the Act came into effect, there was much ambiguity on whether the above assessment was in fact correct. However, Revenue NSW have been quick to suppress any uncertainty, noting the following in their published guidance notes:

    “A put option and/or call option granted over dutiable property in NSW (such as over land or an interest in land) is a ‘change in beneficial ownership’.  This means that duty is payable on any grant fee paid for a put and/or call option entered into from this date”.

    “Section 8(1)(b)(ix) of the Duties Act 1997 introduces duty on certain transactions that results in a change of beneficial ownership of dutiable property. This includes the creation of dutiable property. This means that duty will be payable on the grant of a put and/or call option.”

    The Act also made the following amendments which must be noted:

     

      • duty on acknowledgement of trust;
      • providing for a refund of foreign purchaser surcharge duty/ surcharge land tax in relation to a transfer of land, after the transfer, the land is used by the transferee whole or predominantly for commercial and industrial purposes; and
      • the introduction of a new anti-avoidance regime into the Taxation Administration Act, which replace anti-avoidance provisions in Part 11A of the Duties Act.

    Legislative Wrap-Up 2022: Corporations Act gets a new virtual look

    Legislative Wrap-Up 2022: Corporations Act gets a new virtual look

    Legislative Wrap-Up 2022: Corporations Act gets a new virtual look

    In late February, the Corporations Amendment (Meetings and Documents) Act 2022 (Cth) (Meetings and Documents Act) came into effect, amending the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act). Shaped by the evolving role technology plays in a post-COVID world, the Meetings and Documents Act came with a raft of changes.

    What has changed?

    The Meetings and Documents Act accommodates for the increasingly virtual nature of business by amending sections 249R and 252P of the Corporations Act to allow a meeting of members to be held online. In addition to being held physically, meetings can now be held at both physical venues and virtually (a hybrid meeting), or entirely virtually, if the technology has been consented to by all directors.

    As well as this, the Meetings and Documents Act also allows for technology-neutral signing of documents, so long as the method of signing properly identifies the person and indicates their intention and is as reliable as would be appropriate.

    Sole director signing now easier

    The Meetings and Documents Act also amended the Corporations Act to permit a sole director of a company that has no company secretary to sign under s 127(1) of the Corporations Act. Previously, a sole director could only sign under s 127(1) if they were also the company secretary. Importantly, this change means the assumptions made under s 129(5) as to the due execution of company documents applies and extends to documents which are signed by a sole director only, without the signature of a company secretary.

    Legislative Wrap-Up 2022: Strata schemes required to disclose more

    Legislative Wrap-Up 2022: Strata schemes required to disclose more

    Legislative Wrap-Up 2022: Strata schemes required to disclose more

    On 30 June 2022, new regulations under the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (NSW) were written in through the Strata Schemes Management Amendment (Information) Regulation 2021 (NSW) (the Regulations). The Regulations impose a number of new reporting requirements that owners’ corporations must follow.

    In summary, strata schemes must ensure the following requirements are adhered to.

      • Pursuant to s 43 of the Regulations, owner’s corporations are required to provide information specified under s 43A annually. Section 43A details the kind of information to be disclosed to in the public annual report. The list is extensive, which includes details from the date of registration of the strata scheme, to information regarding building and safety inspection.
      • Owners’ corporations must help cover the cost of administration and enforcement of the scheme by payment of a lodgement fee of $3 per lot with their annual report.
      • Owners’ corporations must submit their first report within three months from 30 June 2022 to 30 September 2022.
      • Owners’ corporations are required to upload their report online through the Strata Hub. We note that if owners’ corporations do not provide their annual report within the allotted time from 2022 onwards, they may be fined a maximum of $5,500.

    The new reporting requirements under s 43A are detailed, and perhaps intrusive. However, the intention of the new regulations are to create public transparency for strata schemes in NSW.  

    Legislative Wrap-Up 2022: Further disclosure required in off the plan sales

    Legislative Wrap-Up 2022: Further disclosure required in off the plan sales

    Legislative Wrap-Up 2022: Grant of option now dutiable

    On 19 May 2022, the Duties Act 1997 (NSW) was amended by the State Revenue and Fines Legislation Amendments (Miscellaneous) Act 2022 (NSW) (the Act). Upon its royal assent, a new head of duty and substantial amendments to the current Act were made and imposed on transactions which result in a “change of beneficial ownership”.

    Pursuant to s 8(1)(b)(ix) of the Act, the term “change in beneficial ownership” includes:

      • the creation of dutiable property;
      • the extinguishment of dutiable property;
      • a change in equitable interests in dutiable property;
      • dutiable property becoming the subject of a trust; and
      • dutiable property ceasing to be the subject of a trust.

    The above is designed to broaden the scope of transactions which are now considered dutiable under this Act.

     

    How does this affect you?

      One of the most important outcomes from the introduction of this legislation is that duty is now payable on the grant of an option.

      Under ss 11(1)(K) of the Act, an option to purchase land in NSW is a creation of dutiable property. Pursuant to s 8(3) of the Act, the creation of dutiable property constitutes a change of beneficial ownership. Therefore, duty is now payable on a grant of an option to purchase land in NSW.

      At the time the Act came into effect, there was much ambiguity on whether the above assessment was in fact correct. However, Revenue NSW have been quick to suppress any uncertainty, noting the following in their published guidance notes:

      “A put option and/or call option granted over dutiable property in NSW (such as over land or an interest in land) is a ‘change in beneficial ownership’.  This means that duty is payable on any grant fee paid for a put and/or call option entered into from this date”.

      “Section 8(1)(b)(ix) of the Duties Act 1997 introduces duty on certain transactions that results in a change of beneficial ownership of dutiable property. This includes the creation of dutiable property. This means that duty will be payable on the grant of a put and/or call option.”

      The Act also made the following amendments which must be noted:

        • duty on acknowledgement of trust;
        • providing for a refund of foreign purchaser surcharge duty/ surcharge land tax in relation to a transfer of land, after the transfer, the land is used by the transferee whole or predominantly for commercial and industrial purposes; and
        • the introduction of a new anti-avoidance regime into the Taxation Administration Act, which replace anti-avoidance provisions in Part 11A of the Duties Act.

      Landlords and Tenants: At what stage do lease documents become binding?

      Landlords and Tenants: At what stage do lease documents become binding?

      Landlords and Tenants: At what stage do lease documents become binding?

      Published: 29 November 2021

      Written by: Duane Keighran and Sara Ibrahim

      The case of Thorn Australia Pty Ltd v Centuria Property Funds Ltd [2021] NSWSC 1217 considers whether provisions of a signed lease and incentive deed which were signed by the tenant and delivered to the landlord could amount to the tenant (Thorn) being immediately bound by the deeds. Due to Covid-19 lockdown restrictions, the landlord (Centuria) was unable to complete execution of the documents in a timely manner after the tenant had delivered its signed copies. It was during this period of inaction by the landlord that Thorn withdrew from the transaction. Thorn contended that it did not intend to be immediately bound on delivery of the signed deeds.

       

      How did this issue arise?

      In April 2021, both parties had entered into a heads of agreement which was prepared by Centuria (as landlord). Within the heads of the agreement, the following relevant provisions were set out:

      “The information contained in this proposal is not a binding lease between the prospective Lessee and the Lessor and is subject to final Lessor and Lessee board approval.
      The Lessee and the Lessor reserve the right to withdraw from and terminate negotiations at any time prior to execution of formal Lease documents by both the Lessee and the Lessor. The Lessor’s rights in respect of the deposit and legal costs remain irrespective of approval.”
      In early May the draft transaction documents (comprising an incentive deed and a lease) were sent to Thorn’s lawyers. Following negotiations between the parties, Thorn signed the incentive deed and lease. The next day, Thorn’s lawyers again sent two signed copies of the lease and one signed copy of the incentive deed. Attached with the signed documents was a cover letter which referred to “formalising the arrangements”. Under this agreement, Thorn proposed arrangements which would include Centuria sending Thorn a scanned copy of the documents signed by Centura as landlord, and if the tenant was satisfied at that point, they would authorise Centuria to exchange and date the incentive deed and date the lease.

      Centuria did not agree to these conditions. Following subsequent discussion, the parties agreed that Centuria would arrange execution of both counterparts and then would arrange registration of the lease, and upon completion, documents would be sent to Thorn. This meant there would be no exchange of counterparts.

      As requested by Centuria, Thorn provided another signed incentive deed, attached with the required bank guarantee provided as security for Thorn’s obligations under the lease and incentive deed. However, Centuria could not promptly proceed with its execution due to COVID-19 lockdown restrictions. Consequently, Thorn decided to withdraw.

      Centuria argued against Thorn’s withdrawal, stating they were bound by the terms of the lease and incentive deed as signed and delivered by Thorn.

       

      What did the court decide?

      The critical question for the Court to decide was to determine was whether the tenant had displayed an intention to be bound immediately on execution and delivery of the deeds.

      Presiding Judge, Darke J determined Thorn did not intend to be immediately bound on delivery of the deeds. Darke reached this conclusion for various reasons. Most importantly, he noted:

      Under the heads of agreement, both parties had a specific right to leave the negotiations at any time until any formal documents had been signed.
      An intention for Thorn to be immediately bound was not evidenced by simply signing the deeds and sending them electronically prior to the submission of the original signed documents.
      When Thorn had submitted the original documents with only one signed copy of the incentive deed it was believed that Thorn was intending that the exchange of the incentive deed would be the first act giving rise to legal rights and obligations. Thorn did not intend to become bound by the Lease (even conditionally) before being bound by the Incentive Deed. In addition, the submission of a second incentive deed was merely procedural and did not manifest this intention to be bound.
      This case follows a similar judgement to the case of Pittmore Pty Ltd v Chan [2020] NSWCA 344, and also reconsiders principles found in Realm Resources v Aurora Place Investments [2019] NSSWC 379. Where an intention to be bound exists, a party will be bound by the deeds on delivery. This will be the case regardless of whether a deed is delivered unconditionally or delivered to be held in escrow.

       

      Key point to note

      Ultimately, physical delivery of signed deeds does not alone evidence an intention to be immediately bound. The words, conduct and facts surrounding the execution are required to be examined to ascertain a party’s intention.

      Deal Announcement: The delivery and handover of social and affordable housing rental dwellings

      Deal Announcement: The delivery and handover of social and affordable housing rental dwellings

      Deal Announcement: The delivery and handover of social and affordable housing rental dwellings

      Developed by Traders In Purple, in partnership with Housing Trust, the project delivered much needed social and affordable housing rental units to the community in Corrimal as part of NSW Land and Housing Corporation‘s Communities Plus Scheme. A fullfilling project for the team at Keighran Legal + Advisory to be involved with, led by Duane Keighran and John Momitsas. We applaud the committment of the project partners in tackling the housing crisis in these areas.