The slow and tortuous wind up of the MIS companies
Great Southern and Timbercorp has laid bare the legal complexities that were
not envisaged by the Masters of the Universe who first created the monsters.
But it’s getting worse.
If Eucalyptus Nitens are causing toxicity problems
in the Georges River area, then maybe the owners of the trees should be getting
a little twitchy.
It’s not Gunns or FEA, but the thousands of investors who have arranged for Gunns and FEA as Responsible Entities/ Managers to plant and manage the trees on their behalves.
It’s not Gunns or FEA, but the thousands of investors who have arranged for Gunns and FEA as Responsible Entities/ Managers to plant and manage the trees on their behalves.
It must be remembered that prior to 1st July 2007
investors needed to pretend they were carrying on a business of primary
production for their MIS payments to be fully and immediately deductible.
They leased some land, at least 1/3rd of a hectare,
and arranged for trees to be planted. The investors own the trees not the
Manager. They were carrying on a business. With that must flow some
responsibilities.
The new Div 394 of the Tax Act which applies since
1st July 2007 doesn’t require the pretence of running a business. But each
investor still owns a woodlot as a Participant in a Forestry Management
Investment Scheme. The Manager only looks after the trees, a sort of
babysitter. It would appear Participants post 1st July 2007 have similar legal
obligations to investors prior to that date.
They are the tree owners.
Alas, most don’t know whether their woodlots are
located on the sand dunes at Temma or the termite infested hinterlands of the
Tiwi Islands. Their first confirmation may be when they receive registered mail
from Messrs Slater and Gordon.
Future participants might be reluctant to take up
an interest in a MIS is there’s a chance they, as owners, might become liable
for toxins emitted by their trees.
Who then is going to chip in and fund tree
plantations in the future?
No comments:
Post a Comment