The following article has been published in Daily Nation, dated 21st July 2015
(E-Paper (Print Edition): http://nation.com.pk/E-Paper/lahore/2015-07-21/page-9)
Finance Act 2015-16: Dissecting major reforms – II
By: Omer Zaheer Meer
We’ll continue to discuss some important reforms carrying on from where we left in the first part on the above topic on 13th July and conclude the write-up today. The need for a structural overhaul has been lauded for years now. While many concrete proposals for reforms continue to fall on deaf ears, a few have been implemented in the finance act. This indeed is commendable and something to expand upon.
In our budget proposals we have suggested the relevant authorities to allow the use of CNIC as both the NTN (National Tax Number) and STRN (Sales Tax Registration Number) on these pages. Section 181 has now declared that for individuals the CNIC will be used as the NTN. Although it is only for individuals as of now but it is a step in the right direction. By removing the hurdles in tax registrations by allowing the above mentioned proposal not only can the FBR expand the tax-net but also assist in promoting the entrepreneur culture by removing unnecessary formalities.
Similarly another positive reform has been introduced in section 114 of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001. The requirement of obtaining prior approval from the Commissioner for filing a revised return is now dispensed away with if the revised return is filed within 60 days of filing of the original return. This would remove the long-standing complaint of many tax payers faced when a genuine mistake resulted in tax losses to them.
Yet another change introduced via Finance Act 2015-16 is regarding the income earned from property. Now, any expenditure incurred whether wholly or exclusively for the purposes of deriving rental income including the administration and collection charges shall be admissible as allowable expense with a cap of 6% of rent chargeable. While it’s a positive move it is certainly not sufficient considering the levels of inflation increasing the repairs and maintenance as well employee costs.
Moving onto another significant change we’ll briefly discuss Section 37A and Division VII of Part 1 of the First Schedule dealing with Capital Gains Tax on securities disposed off. A revised status of tax on Capital Gains on disposal of ‘securities’ under section 37A has been prescribed as below:
Holding period Tax Year
- < 12 months 15% 12.5%
- 12 months to < 24 months 12.5% 10%
- 24 months to < 48 months 7.5% 0%
- > 48 months 0% 0%
This revision is multi-dimensional. Firstly the rates have been revised upwardly while at the same time the holding period for taxable gains has also been increased. This enhancement of holding period will effectively apply retrospectively as gains for holding period between 24 to 48 months which were exempt from tax prior to Finance Act 2015 will now fall under taxable incidence. The motivation for this is to incentivize investors to hold onto their investments for longer while at the same time trying to balance off avoiding disillusioning the small investor. How much has the finance ministry succeeded in this will only be reliably known with the passage of time and the results of the stock markets.
Next up is an extremely important issue with serious ramifications. Minimum tax on service companies is that hotly contested issue. Under pressure from international lenders, Government of Pakistan decided to introduce a controversial insertion in section 153 few years back. The way this was done raised serious questions as there were arguments that despite an existing section dealing with the issue the insertion was done against the prescribed way and even leaving the existing provisions intact, hence creating a gulf of confusion. Furthermore a series of conflicting SROs were then issued further complicating the matter.
As per the insertion introduced, despite the existing section 113 dealing with minimum tax on service companies, the corporate service companies were made liable to a minimum tax. What this meant was that even if any company in the sector incurred losses they’d not be able to claim a refund of any tax already paid by them. The reason this is problematic is that service companies particularly during startup years are susceptible to losses. This led to calls of review and resulted in Clause 79 in Part IV of the Second Schedule being added to clarify the matter and declare that minimum tax would not be liable on service companies. The implication was in effect from tax year 2012 onwards.
The initial proposal in finance bill 2015 was to clarify the matter since 2009 but instead the government decided to introduce the minimum tax on service companies from tax year 2015 onwards while the clause 79 mentioned above was also deleted. This has led to serious reservations by corporate sector and is part of the package being negotiated between finance ministry officials and traders.
Furthermore a minimum tax of 2% has been levied on land developers. This 2% shall be levied on the value of the land as notified by the authorities for stamp duty. This would increase the revenues for the exchequer and can be seen as an indication of the policy direction.
We hope that the policy makers would also consider our other proposals in future budgets for the betterment of economy and that these write-ups have been enlightening to our readers. We shall continue to apprise our readers on relevant developments in the future too.
The author is Director of the think-tank “Millat Thinkers’ Forum”. He is a leading economist, CFA Charterholder, experienced fellow Chartered Certified Accountant and anti-money laundering expert with international exposure who can be reached on Twitter and www.myMFB.com @OmerZaheerMeer or firstname.lastname@example.org