In this article:
Livestock, Trust Entitlements, GST and WA DutyLivestock, Trust Entitlements, GST and WA Duty
Parts 1 and 2 left the Calder family of Glenmore with a clear target: Mum and Dad retain the farming land and lease it to a new company; the company ultimately runs the sheep and cropping business; Sarah manages now and takes ownership under an agreed pathway.
The chart is simple. The balance sheet is not. The breeding flock and other livestock have a market value of about $5 million but a tax value of $1.1 million. The trust owes $7.5 million of unpaid entitlements to Mum, Dad and Sarah. The machinery is financed. The family expects the transfer to be GST-free. Every one of those items can go wrong on its own.
Haven't read Part 2?
-
Follow the link below to start with the second article in the series.
A low-tax-value breeding flock can create tax without a sale
Livestock is trading stock. If you sell the livestock as part of a restructure, it is treated as a sale at market value under section 70-90. For Glenmore’s ewes, lambs, rams and wethers, that substitutes approximately $5 million of market-value proceeds. Compared with the $1.1 million tax value, that can create an additional taxable uplift of roughly $3.9 million while the sheep remain in the same paddocks and no external cash is received.
The small business CGT concessions do not help, because this is income, not a capital gain. Division 122 does not shelter trading stock. The remaining tool is the section 70-100 election.
The interim partnership must be real
Section 70-100 can allow trading stock to move at its closing tax value rather than market value. The usual design: the trust and the new company first run the business together in partnership, with the trust retaining an economic interest in the livestock representing at least 25% of its market value, before a later step toward the final structure. The joint election is due by 1 September in the year after the change, the elected value must be below market, and the stock must immediately become an asset of a business the partnership carries on.
This two-step is not automatic. An integrity rule can defeat the election where the dealing is outside ordinary family or commercial dealing, and a partnership that exists for one day, holds one meeting and posts two journals invites that argument. The partnership should trade for a supportable period, a practical safeguard rather than a statutory minimum: owning the stock, selling the wool and lambs, paying the bills and splitting profit under a written agreement.
One more reason to run it properly: while the interim partnership continues as a genuine operating structure, eligible individual partners may retain access to income averaging and farm management deposits, depending on their continuing primary production activity and the actual arrangements.
And the contracts must match the election. If the stock moves at $1.1 million, no document may say the partnership paid $5 million. A market-value contract with a book-value journal behind it can defeat the treatment and leave a tax debt with no cash behind it.
How this looks in an Augusta cattle operation
Lets take cattle business near Augusta running 1,200 breeders and about 2,800 total head across 1,900 hectares of pasture faces the same problem at higher value per head. A herd built by natural increase can carry a tax value a fraction of its market value, so the gap is wider and the case for a properly trading interim partnership stronger again.
Division 7A after Bendel
On 10 June 2026 the High Court decided Commissioner of Taxation v Bendel. On the facts before the Court, the corporate beneficiary’s unpaid entitlements were not loans for Division 7A purposes. That ended a fifteen-year ATO position. The ATO issued its Decision Impact Statement on 26 June 2026, withdrew TD 2022/11 and is rewriting its related guidance.
Â
It would be a mistake to read that as the all-clear where a trust is the structure and corporate beneficiaries are the ideal business structure. The Bendel decision turned on the trust deed, the resolutions and the accounts, and the ATO says it will keep testing section 100A and Subdivision EA. The Calder entitlements are owed to individuals, not a company, so Bendel does not decide them at all.
Actual loans from the new company to family members can still attract Division 7A. Unless an exception applies or the loan is repaid within the required period, it will generally need complying terms and minimum yearly repayments. Design the structure so it works even if the rules tighten again.
What happens to family entitlements
An unpaid entitlement is a CGT asset in the beneficiary’s hands. Forgiving it, assigning it or converting it can trigger a CGT event, and on one available analysis a nil cost base produces a gain equal to face value. On $7.5 million, that is not a year-end journal decision.
The options need analysis before signing: leave an entitlement in place and document it; pay it and have the beneficiary lend the money back under a written deed; or have the trust borrow to repay it, where interest can be deductible if the borrowing refinances money that stayed in and was used by the business. Evidence decides the last option: the trustee should be able to show when each entitlement arose, that the funds remained in the business, and that the new borrowing replaced them and nothing else.
Sarah’s position deserves its own line in the plan. Her $1.6 million entitlement should not disappear into the restructure or be treated automatically as payment for future equity, and the family should decide whether prior under-remuneration is being recognised.
Responsibility must match authority
Sarah should not be expected to take on full director responsibility or personal guarantees without management authority, financial information rights and an agreed pathway to equity. The governance documents should say which decisions stay reserved while the transition runs: major borrowing, new land leases, material capital expenditure, dividends, related-party payments, admission of shareholders and any sale of the business.
GST and duty require separate documents
The business transfer can be GST-free as a going concern, but only if the supply is for consideration, the recipient is registered or required to be registered for GST, the parties agree in writing before supply, everything necessary to continue the enterprise is supplied, and the trust carries on farming until settlement. Because the land is not moving, the farm lease must be in place at transfer, and any machinery staying in the trust must be covered by leases or licences. The company must be able to farm on day one.
The land-leasing arrangement is a separate enterprise. The leasing entity, which may be a tax law partnership of Mum and Dad, must consider GST registration based on its projected GST turnover, and the rent may then carry GST that the company claims back. Employees are not supplied for going concern purposes but still need new TFN declarations and super choice forms, and doubtful trade debtors are often better left in the trust.
An income tax rollover does nothing for transfer duty. Western Australia exempts transfers of farming property between family members from transfer duty, and separate landholder duty relief may apply where shares in a family-owned farming company pass between family members. A direct transfer of farming land to an operating company should not be assumed to qualify.
For the Calders, no transfer of the land occurs as part of the present restructure. Keeping it with Mum and Dad may preserve a family farm exemption pathway for a later transfer to Sarah, subject to the conditions applying at that time. The duty treatment of the livestock, plant and lease must still be confirmed with RevenueWA before documents are signed, not after.
The succession succeeds in the sequence
For Glenmore the order matters as much as the destination: lender consent first; the asset schedule and valuations; the lease; the interim partnership trading properly; the section 70-100 election on time; the machinery transfers with rollover relief; the entitlement strategy documented; the written going concern agreement; the duty position confirmed. Every document must describe the same transaction.
Common questions
Generally yes. Trading stock moved outside the ordinary course of business is treated as sold at market value, even with no buyer and no cash. A section 70-100 election through a properly run interim partnership can move stock at tax values instead.
Partly, in unique circumstances. On the facts before the Court, the High Court held that the corporate beneficiary’s unpaid entitlements were not Division 7A loans, and the ATO has withdrawn TD 2022/11. The ATO says it will keep testing section 100A and Subdivision EA, and entitlements owed to individuals raise different issues again.
It can be, as a going concern, but only if the supply is for consideration, the recipient is registered or required to be registered, the parties agree in writing, everything needed to run the enterprise is supplied, and the business runs until settlement. Leases of retained land and machinery must be in place at transfer.
A direct transfer of farming land to an operating company should not be assumed to qualify. The principal transfer duty exemption concerns transfers of farming property between family members, and separate landholder duty relief may apply where shares in a family-owned farming company pass between family members. Obtain specific WA duty advice before any document is signed.
The next step
Westcourt Private Business Accountants coordinates the tax design before documents are locked in. Ask us for an implementation sequence workshop: the livestock election, the entitlement strategy, Division 7A, GST, duty and the bank, in the right order, with the evidence file built as the transaction proceeds.
The Calder family and Glenmore are fictional and the figures are illustrative. This article is general information, not advice on your facts.