12.05.2023

Australia’s immigration announcement may have tax consequences for New Zealander’s living in Australia

In April, the Australian Government announced a direct pathway to citizenship for New Zealand citizens who live in Australia for four years or more and meet certain requirements.  While the announcement is welcomed for many reasons, the tax consequences remain unclear. 

Since 26 February 2001, New Zealand citizens living in Australia have held a ‘non-protected’ Special Category Visas (SCV) and been treated as temporary residents.  Temporary residents have a favourable Australian tax status in that they are only taxed on Australian sourced income.

Once a temporary resident becomes a permanent resident or Australian citizen, foreign income is exposed to Australian tax consequences.  Having a spouse who is an Australian permanent resident or citizen may also expose a temporary resident’s foreign income to Australian tax consequences.

Prior to 26 February 2001, New Zealand citizens living in Australia held protected SCV and were eligible for Australia’s social security system. Protected SCV holders are not considered temporary residents and are therefore taxed in Australia on worldwide income.  

With effect from 1 July 2023, all New Zealand citizens holding an SCV will be considered permanent residents for citizenship purposes.  What is unclear from the initial announcement is whether they will remain temporary residents for tax purposes.  

From a New Zealand trust perspective, generally an Australian resident beneficiary (who is not a temporary resident) must pay income tax in Australia on all distributions received from a foreign trust.  It may be possible for trustees to stream corpus (original trust settlements) to the Australian resident beneficiary free of tax, but the corpus must be easily identifiable and tracked.  Tracking corpus is not something many New Zealand trusts do as it is not necessary from a New Zealand tax perspective.  A resettlement can be appropriate in some circumstances to identify and increase corpus.

If you have any questions about what actions a New Zealander living in Australia as a temporary resident, particularly those with trust structures in New Zealand, should take prior to 1 July 2023, Hesketh Henry would be happy to work with Australian advisers to clarify your position and any necessary trust changes.     

Disclaimer: We do not provide tax advice.  However, we regularly interact with clients and their specialist New Zealand and Australian tax advisers on private wealth matters.  The information contained in this article is based on our working knowledge, is current at the date of publishing and is of a general nature.  It should be used as a guide only and not as a substitute for obtaining legal advice. Specific legal and tax advice should be sought where required.

Do you need expert legal advice?
Contact the expert team at Hesketh Henry.
Kerry
Media contact - Kerry Browne
Please contact Kerry with any media enquiries and with any questions related to marketing or sponsorships on +64 9 375 8747 or via email.

Related Articles / Insights & Opinion

UK Court of Appeal rules that that courts can order parties to engage in ADR: Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council [2023] EWCA Civ 1416
The England and Wales Court of Appeal (EWCA) has held that in certain circumstances, the courts can order parties to engage in alternative dispute resolution (ADR) or stay proceedings to allow the par...
24.07.2024 Posted in Construction & Disputes
Health and Safety Tiles
Updated Guidance: IOD and WorkSafe release ‘Health and Safety Governance – A Good Practice Guide’
While we wait with bated breath for the outcome in the prosecution of former Ports of Auckland CEO, Tony Gibson, officers’ duties are very much at the forefront of everyone’s mind. Section 44 of t...
23.07.2024 Posted in Employment & Health & Safety
Knowing your limits: High Court confirms liability caps in engineering consultancy agreements are consistent with Building Act duties
Design errors in a construction project can result in millions of dollars in loss.  Standard form consultancy agreements typically limit the amount that can be recovered for such errors.  The cap on...
09.07.2024 Posted in Construction & Disputes
glenn carstens peters npxXWgQZQ unsplash
Sender beware – how private are digital workplace conversations?
Following on from the recent Official Information Act request for correspondence between Ministry of Justice employees, employees may be wondering how private their online conversations with colleague...
04.07.2024 Posted in Employment
Concrete pillars impressive
TCC confirms Slip Rule limits in Adjudications
The Technology and Construction Court (TCC) has confirmed the narrow parameters of the ‘slip rule’ in the UK, which allows adjudicators to amend their determination to correct for any clerical or ...
02.07.2024 Posted in Construction & Disputes
Scots rule standard notification clause was condition precedent
In a warning for contractors, a Scottish Court has ruled that a standard form notification clause was a condition precedent to recovering time-related costs (TRCs) (FES Ltd v HFD Construction Group Lt...
01.07.2024 Posted in Construction
rape blossom
Anticipatory Repudiatory Breach and the Date of Default: Ayhan Sezer v Agroinvest
The decision in Ayhan Sezer v Agroinvest [2024] EWHC 479 (Comm) clarifies that where there has been an anticipatory repudiatory breach of contract, the “date of default” is the date of the breach ...
25.06.2024 Posted in Trade and Transport
SEND AN ENQUIRY
Send us an enquiry

For expert legal advice, please complete the form below or call us on (09) 375 8700.