Accounting assignment代写:资本损益案例分析
100%原创包过,高质代写&免费提供Turnitin报告--24小时客服QQ&微信：120591129
回答
从9月20日起作为资产或事件的应纳税收入征税的资本利得。在此日期之前获得的资产，在随后以资本利得处置时免税。
这个过程有三个步骤。
一。你做了资本利得还是资本损失。
2。计算出资本损益的数额。
三。计算出收入年度的净资本损益。
布莱恩指控最近的房产价值75万美元，10年后以188万美元的价格出售。这与布鲁克斯诉FCT案类似。出售不动产的押金被没收。联邦法院认为，这是卖方保管押金和寻找新买家的地方。如果他们起诉要求特定的业绩，那么就没有支付定金，也没有资本收益。在这种情况下，是实际的土地买卖合同，而不是“潜在买家”。这是ITAA 1997第104-10节CGT事件AI的条件。
这里的资本收益是1880000美元-750000美元=1130000美元
他通过签订一份在方圆10公里范围内未来5年内不做生意的合同，获得了2万美元的现金对价。这种情况类似于陈述的例子：许多CGT事件与资本收入有关，不涉及CGT资产，例如，您出售了一家企业，但同意买方不在该地区经营类似的企业，支付25000美元-CGT事件，但不涉及资产。CGT事件D1：一个人同意在指定时间内不与另一个人竞争。在这种情况下，他的资本收益是20000美元
由于他在12个多月前购买了该房产，他将在1997年ITAA第115 A和B分部下获得50%的一般折扣，9月21日后将获得折扣。
总资本收益为50%*$1130000+$20000=$1150000*50%=$575000
与本案一样，该店的财务营业额为54万美元，这表明该店是一个小型企业，因为营业额不足200万美元。如果资本收益是由个人或信托中的个人受益人获得的，则为50%。根据1997年ITAA第152条规定，他将获得50%的小企业特许权减免。
现在他的资本收益是50%*575000美元=287500美元
Brain必须为287500美元的资本收益缴税，因为ITAA第152-210条将不适用于他，因为他没有为他出售的商业资产购买任何替代性活跃资产。他不必为价值180万美元的房子纳税，因为那是他的主要住所。
在一家房地产开发公司拥有45%的权益和他妻子5%的权益不会引发任何CGT事件。如果公司就他的股份向布莱恩付款，他就需要付款。
乔治是一家养牛公司的老板，他允许史密斯进入土地，砍伐木材，作为回报，每棵树20美元的报酬，之后史密斯付给乔治10000美元。在这种情况下，10000美元将被视为特许权使用费。这类似于macaulay v fct（1944）69 clr 235，在该案中，高等法院裁定，纳税人收到的款项是与砍伐木材有关的特许权使用费。特许权使用费普通收入，第6-5节，但如果资本收入，则第15-20节将该金额视为法定收入。根据ITAA1997第15-20节，特许权使用费是法定收入，但本节适用于普通收入的特许权使用费。
如果史密斯答应把木头移走，答案就会改变。如果乔治和史密斯作出承诺，这笔交易将是预先确定的付款。因此，这将是一笔资本，因为乔治亚从史密斯那里得到的钱不是版税。
答案2
本案与Stanton v FCT（1995）92 CLR630案有关，在这种情况下，很明显它不是应评税收入。这是一个预先确定的付款和资本性质，因为乔治从史密斯那里得到的钱不是版税。所以我想建议乔治，他必须为他的收入纳税，因为这是资本性质的付款。
答案3
根据ITAA1997年第104-A1号CGT事件，乔治将获得的金额，即其资本收益和特许权使用费，即未来10年从土地上移除的每棵树10美元，视为ITAA1997年第104-10（1）条下的普通收入。
Answer
Capital gains taxed as assessable income on assets or events from 20 September. Assets acquired prior to this date exempt when later disposed of with a capital gain.
There are three steps in this process.
1. Have you made a capital gain or a capital loss.
2. Work out the amount of capital gain or loss.
3. Work out your net capital gain or loss for the income year.
Brain Accuired the recent premises for $750000 and sold it for $1880000 after 10 years. This is similar to the case Brooks v FCT. Deposit on th4e sale of real property was forfeited. Federal Court held that it was where the seller keeps the deposit and looks for a new buyer. If they sue for specific performance then no deposit paid, no capital gain. In this case an actual contract for the sale of land and not ‘prospective purchaser’. This is the condition of CGT event AI of s.104-10 f ITAA 1997.
Here the capital gain is $1880000-$750000=$1130000
He receives cash consideration of $20000 by signing a contract of not entering into a business for next 5 years within 10km radius. This case is similar to the example of the presentation: many CGT events are concerned with capital receipts and do not involve a CGT asset e.g. You sell a business, but agree with the purchaser not to operate a similar business in the area for a payment of $25000- CGT event but no asset involved. CGT event D1: a person agrees not to compete with another person for a specified period for a specified time. In this case his capital gain is $20000
He will get 50% general discount under sub division 115 A and B of ITAA 1997 as he acquired the premises for more than 12 months ago.He will get the discount after 21st September.
The total capital gain is 50%* $1130000+$20000=$1150000*50%=$575000
As in the case the financial turnover of the shop was $540000 which shows the business as a small type because the turnover is less than $2 million. 50% if capital gain is made by an individual or a individual beneficiary in a trust. He will get small business concession relief of 50% of taxable amount under DIV 152 of ITAA 1997.
Now his capital gain is 50%*$575000=$287500
Brain has to pay tax on capital gain of $287500 because section 152-210 of ITAA will not be applied to him as he has not acquired any replacement active asset for the business asset he sold. He doesn’t have to pay tax for his house valued $1.8 million because that was his main residence.
Having 45% interest and his wife’s 5% interest in a property development company do not give rise to any CGT event. He would need to pay if the company had made payment to brain in respect of his shares.
George is a owner of cattle firm and he allowed smith to enter the land and felling timber in return for payment of $20 per tree and after that smith pays $10000 to George. In this situation this payment $10000 will be consider as royalty payment. This is similar to macaulay v fct (1944) 69 clr 235, where the high court decided this as the payment received by the tax payer was royalty as it payment made in relation to the amount of timber removed. Royalties ordinary income, s 6-5, but if a capital receipt then s 15-20 deems the amount to be statutory income. Under section 15-20 of ITAA 1997 royalties is a statutory income but this section apply to royalties that are ordinary income.
The answer will change if Smith had promised to remove the timber. If George and Smith made a promise, this transaction will be a pre determined payment. Thus this will be a capital because the money georage received from smith is not royalties.
Answer 2
This case is related to the case of Stanton v FCT (1995) 92 CLR630 in this circumstance it is very clear that it is not a assessable income. it is a pre determined payment and capital nature because george received money from smith that is not royalties. So I would like to advice george that he has to pay tax for his income because this payment are capital in nature.
Answer 3
Based on CGT event 104-A1 of ITAA 1997 the amount george will earn that is his capital gain and royalty payment $10 for every tree removed from the land for the next 10 years is consider as ordinary income under section 104- 10 (1) of ITAA 1997.
Accounting assignment代写:资本损益案例分析
