
For most investors, owning a healthy allocation of international shares is a wise investment decision. Offshore markets provide access to sectors not well represented in the NZ market (technology and pharmaceutical companies are good examples), offer geographic diversity, and exposure to high growth economies (particularly via emerging markets).
Owning international shares is usually via investment funds – NZ based or overseas based – or could be via direct holdings in international companies (which in terms of this blog post, are treated in the same way as overseas based investment funds).
Interestingly and worryingly, international investments are taxed differently depending on whether the investment is with a NZ based provider (many KiwiSaver funds would be good examples of this), or with an overseas based foreign investment fund – also known as a FIF.
With a NZ based fund the international holdings are taxed via a mechanism called the Fair Dividend Rate (FDR). Under FDR, you pay tax on 5% of the value of your international shares at the start of that tax year. This is regardless of whether your international shares have increased or decreased in value over the course of the tax year. Why is there an FDR regime at all? It was introduced to account for the fact that international companies tend to reinvest their profits more than NZ companies (which pay more taxable dividends).
FDR is a swings and roundabouts approach. Say your international shares increase by 20% in one year – under FDR you will still only pay tax on 5% of the start of year value … nice! But if your international shares decrease by 20% in a year, you will still pay tax on 5% of the start of year value … ouch!
However, things are different if you are invested internationally via a FIF (Foreign Investment Fund). Rules for FIFs give you two options for paying tax. Either the FDR approach described above, or you can use the Comparative Value approach that compares the value of your shares at the start and end of the tax year, and you pay tax on the difference. Under FIF rules you get to choose which tax method (FDR or Comparative Value) is most beneficial – ie results in the least tax payable. In negative years, where the value of your international shares has fallen, under FIF you can choose the Comparative Value method for that year, and effectively pay no tax.
So … if you managed to follow the above, you will see foreign funds have a distinct tax advantage over NZ based funds in years where the value of the international shares declines (in fact the advantage is present for year on year declines, and for gains of up to 5%).
This different tax treatment is sub-optimal, and unfair for NZ based funds. But until this situation changes, from a tax perspective only, it is preferable to hold international shares via foreign-based funds (or direct investments in overseas companies).
Of course, there are other considerations beyond tax. For example most NZ based funds will calculate and pay the tax on international holdings on your behalf, versus possibly having to work it out yourself for foreign investment funds. And many NZ based funds will hedge their international holdings against currency movements (which can be either advantageous or disadvantageous, depending on whether the NZ$ rises or falls).
Dean Edwards
PS. Tax of course is nothing if not complex. There are a few nuances which I haven’t included here as I want to keep this blog post readable! If in doubt, please consult a tax specialist.
Hi Dean,
Nice blog and some interesting posts. What are your views on using LICs on the ASX to gain international exposure? For example, Platinum Asia Ltd (PAI). If I understand correctly, these are not subject to FIF rules. It seems strange that these would not be but the equivalent on the NZX (e.g. City of London) is subject to FIF.
Regards, Geoff
Hi Geoff,
You are touching on one of the complexities of the FIF regime, that is that Australian listed securities are, generally speaking, not subject to FIF rules. However, it looks like Australian Listed Investment Companies (LICs) are indeed subject to FIF taxation rules. There is an IRD tool (see link below) where you can search for particular ASX securities to view how they are taxed. I suspect IRD have very deliberately excluded LICs from FIF-exempt Australian securities.
Regards,
Dean
Link to IRD tool:
http://www.ird.govt.nz/calculators/keyword/individualincometax/aus-share-exemption-calc-2017.html
Hi again Dean,
I am not so sure. Up until 2015 the IRD used to include LICs in their annual exemption list, but in 2015 they removed them due to copyright restrictions after the LICs were placed in a FTSE Index. I see they refer to this on the 2017 tool page that you linked to above:
“Qualified listed investment companies (LICs)
Due to copyright restrictions over the FTSE AFSA Australia Listed Investment Companies (LIC) Index, we can’t include LIC information in this tool. Contact the investment company or the FTSE to confirm whether your investment is part of the LIC Index”
I just checked and they specifically exclude LICs from FIF on page 12 of the FIF Guide: http://www.ird.govt.nz/resources/7/6/766e61804d5325af8370e7057ca1dd2d/ir461.pdf
It is a bit frustrating that we appear to have to rely on a list that is not in the public domain (I can’t find a way to access it). I own a couple of these LICs and am thinking of some others (e.g. MFF).
As opaque as the rules are, it seems like a viable option to own ASX LICs to gain international exposure without FIF taxes.
Would you agree? Now, which LICs to select? An entirely different matter …..
Regards, Geoff
Yes, you might be on to a loophole here. However, I would be cautious about making an investment decision purely on the basis of a tax advantage for ASX listed investment companies (that could end at the stroke of a pen).
Further to the previous comment, also note that for Australian LICs, you will pay NZ Resident Withholding Tax on dividends received. So while the LICs may escape the FIF regime, in many cases this will not be a good thing – the FDR or CV method will result in less tax being payable overall. A good example of this is in a down year – under CV it is likely that no tax would be payable (v paying tax on the dividends received for an Australian LIC). Likewise if dividends are more than 5%, then FDR (where you don’t pay tax on dividend income) will result in less tax.