The prior year saw the introduction of many changes to the Australian tax environment which presents additional tax risks and opportunities for investors from China and Hong Kong in the New Year. Many of these changes focus onfinancing transactions with related parties. Some of these rules are already in operation (e.g. transfer pricing, Diverted Profits Tax), while draft legislation has been released on others (e.g. hybrid mismatch rules).
去年，澳大利亚税务环境引进了多项变动，这对来自中国与香港行政区的投资者来说意味着今年会有更多的税务风险与机会。多项变动均聚焦于关联方融资交易。其中部分规定已开始实行（例如转移定价、转移利润税），另一些则公布了立法草案（例如反混合错配规则）。
All multinationals with Australian investmentsshould consider the application of these changes to their investment structuresand consider whether any restructuring is required to comply with the changing Australian tax environment.
所有在澳投资的跨国企业应考虑这些变动对投资架构的影响，并考虑是否需进行重组，以在不断变化的澳大利亚税务环境中实现合规。
This TaxTalk Alert outlines some of the key Australian tax developments during 2017 that are likely to be relevant to investors from China and Hongkong.
下文从2017年期间澳大利亚税务领域新动向中筛选出与中国和香港行政区投资者有关的主要变动，加以列述说明。
Transfer pricing on cross-border relatedparty financing
针对跨境关联方融资的转移定价
On 18 December 2017, the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) released the final version of its Practical Compliance Guideline PCG 2017/4 (PCG) which deals with cross-border related party financing arrangements. The PCG sets out the ATO’s complianceapproach to the taxation outcomes associated with a cross border related party ‘financing arrangement' or a related transaction or contract.
2017年12月18日，澳大利亚税务局 (ATO) 发布了税务实践合规指导条例PCG2017/4 (PCG) 最终版，对跨境关联方“融资安排”做出了相应规定。PCG列述了ATO针对与跨境关联方“融资安排”、关联方交易或合同相关的税务结果的监管方法。
The PCG sets out amultifaceted framework for how the ATO differentiates risks and how it proposesto tailor its compliance approach according to the features of the relatedparty financing arrangement, the profile of the parties and the choices and behaviours of the multinational group.
PCG针对ATO如何区分各类风险，以及ATO拟如何根据关联方融资安排、各方具体情况及跨国集团的选择与做法来量身打造监管方法，构建了一个包含多个层面的框架。
It seeks to ‘assist’taxpayers in assessing the tax risk of a related party financing arrangement in accordance with the ATO’s risk framework and understand the compliance approach the Commissioner is likely to adopt given the risk profile of a related party financing arrangement. In this respect,the PCG seeks to classify each financing arrangement in a particular colour-coded risk zone, which will then determine the compliance approach applied by the Commissioner.
这一框架旨在“协助”纳税人根据ATO风险评估框架来评估关联方融资安排的税务风险，以及了解税务局专员针对某关联方融资安排的风险程度可能采用的监管方法。因此，PCG将所有融资安排加以分类，对应特定颜色的风险区域，这一分类随后将决定税务局专员将采用的监管方法。
The PCG will have effect to both existing and newly created financing arrangements, structures, and functions from 1 July 2017.
PCG从2017年7月1日起生效，适用于现有及新建融资安排、结构与功能。
It follows the April 2017 decision in Chevron Australia HoldingsPty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2017] FCAFC 62. In short, the Full Federal Court disallowed a deduction claimed by Chevron in Australia with respect to interest incurred on loans provided to Chevron in Australia by a related company resident in the United States. Despite detailed transfer pricing analysis prepared by the taxpayer, the Court looked beyond the simple pricing of the interest payable on the loan based on its actual terms and conditions, and took regard to whether those other terms and conditions were consistent with what the Court considered an independent party in comparable circumstances would have agreed to.
PCG根据2017年4月雪佛龙澳大利亚控股有限公司与税务局之间的税务纠纷诉讼（Chevron Australia Holdings Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2017] FCAFC 62，下称“雪佛龙税务纠纷案”）的判决结果。简单来说，联邦法院合议庭驳回了雪佛龙在澳大利亚的税务抵扣申报，该申报针对作为美国税务居民的关联方公司向雪佛龙澳大利亚提供的贷款所产生的利息。虽然纳税人编制了详细的转移定价分析报告，但法庭不仅根据贷款的实际条款与条件为应付利息单纯定价之外，，还参照法庭认为在相似情况下独立方会协定的条款与条件，来判断其他这些条款与条件是否与之符合。
In assessing such related party debt, the PCG requires cumulative consideration to be given to the presence of various qualitative and quantitative risk indicators beyond mere pricing. These include, but are not limited to, foreign tax rate of lender, hybrid nature of instruments, residency of lender, and ‘exotic’ features.
为评估这类关联方负债，PCG要求在单纯考虑定价之外，需综合考量多个质量与数量风险指标。这些指标包括但不限于借方的外国税率、融资工具的混合架构性质、借方的税务居民属性以及“特殊”特征。
The Chevron decision and the publication of the PCG signalled to taxpayers to review their cross-border financing arrangements and to demonstrate a comprehensive narrative of the commercial imperatives and circumstances that support the interest rate applied.
雪佛龙税务纠纷案的判决结果与PCG的发布均在提醒纳税人审阅跨境融资安排，并全面阐述商业需求与环境，以此证明采用的利率的公平合理性。
Entities with related party financing arrangements that fall outside the low risk（or‘green zone’) category can expect the ATO to monitor, test and/or verify the tax outcomes of such arrangements. The higher the risk rating, the more likely an arrangement will be subject to specific ATO review and scrutiny. Taxpayers are expected to document their self-assessment of risk for related-party financing arrangements.
涉及关联方融资安排的实体若不属于低风险类别（或“绿色区”），则ATO将对其予以监控、测试及/或验证这类安排的纳税情况。融资安排的风险级别越高，受到ATO特定税务稽查和审查的可能性就越高。纳税人需要将关联方融资安排风险的自我评估材料整理归档。
Finally, it is important toremember that every industry is unique, as are the Australian debt markets and funding structures used by businesses every day. Identifying real market observations of comparable capital structures and loans for your industry and financing purpose will be key to defending you related party financing. In many cases, these may not fall within the green zone.
最后，重要的一点是每个行业都具有独特性，澳大利亚债务市场与企业日常采用的融资结构均各有不同。保护贵司关联方融资的关键在于了解市场可比资本结构及与贵司所在行业和融资目的相似的贷款的市场实际情况。在很多情况下，这些可能均被排除在绿色低风险类别外。
For further information, please refer to PwC Australia’s TaxTalk Alert: ATO related party finance guideline: PCG 2017/4.
更多详情请参阅澳大利亚税务资讯：ATO跨境关联方融资指导条例:PCG 2017/4。
Hybrid Mismatch Rules 混合错配规则
On 24 November 2017, the Australian Government released exposure draft law that proposes the legislative framework to implement the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) hybrid mismatch rules. The rules are aimed at eliminating double non-taxation benefits from hybrid mismatch arrangements which exploit differences in the tax treatment of an entity or instrument under the laws of two or more tax jurisdictions. The draft law is complex but very broadly, hybrid mismatches are differences in the tax treatment of an entity or instrument under the laws of two or more tax jurisdictions. There are two types of mismatches, being:
2017年11月24日，澳大利亚政府发布了法案意见征求稿，拟推出一套落实世界经合组织反混合错配规则的法律框架。这套规则旨在消除通过利用实体或工具在两个或更多国家/地区税收体制下的税务处理差异，从而获取的税务好处的混合错配安排。存在两种类型的错配：
1. deduction/non-inclusion mismatch – this occurs when a payment is deductible when working out the tax base of the payer, but not included in the tax base of the recipient within 12 months after the relevant income year in which the payments are deducted. In this scenario, the mismatch is taken to be the difference between the amount deductible to the payer and the amount included in the tax base of the recipient within the specified timefram.
抵扣/未计入税基– 当付款人计算税基时，支付金额可抵扣，但在进行抵扣的相应所得税年份之后12个月内未计入收款人的税基。在这种情况下，错配金额为付款人可抵扣金额与在特定时间框架内计入收款人税基的金额之间的差额。
2. double deduction mismatch – this occurs when a payment give srise to duplicate deductions in a foreign country and in Australia or another foreign country. In this case, the mismatch is taken to be the lesser of the deduction amounts in the two jurisdictions.
双重抵扣– 当支付金额在某国与澳大利亚或另一国享有双重抵扣时。在这种情况下，错配金额为两个国家/地区抵扣额相比之下较低的金额。
If a mismatch arises, it is neutralised by disallowing a deduction or including an amount in assessable income.
若出现错配情况，将通过禁止抵扣或在应纳税收入中包含特定金额来消除。
Note, it is unclear how the rules will operate where the foreign jurisdiction is a jurisdiction that has a corporate tax system, albeit at a zero rate of tax (e.g. British Virgin Islands). The media release accompanying the exposure draft suggests that an integrity rule will be included to address the use of zero tax rate jurisdictions in the final law.
值得注意的是，当某国虽然税率为零，但确实存在公司税制度时（譬如英属维京群岛），上述规则将如何操作尚不明确。与法案意见征求稿一并发布的媒体报道指出，在最终版法案中将包含一条完整性规定来解决使用零税率国家/地区的问题。
The commencement date of the proposed law is subject to the legislative process and will broadly apply to payments made on or after the day that is six months after the day that the relevant Bill receives Royal Assent, subject to limited transitional rules for regulatory capital. Based on Parliamentary timetables, this can be no earlier than 5 August 2018. There is currently no proposed grandfathering of existing arrangements.
拟议法案的起始日期取决于立法程序，将广泛适用于从相应法案得到皇家御准日期后的六个月及之后支付的款项（监管资本将享有有限过渡性规定）。基于国会时间安排，这可能不会早于2018年8月5日。目前没有拟对“现有安排”不溯既往的条款。
Australian taxpayers with cross-border transactions may wish to consider the potential impact of the hybrid mismatch rules sooner rather than later as the identification of hybrid mismatches may not be straightforward.
由于混合错配的认定并非简单明了，进行跨境交易的澳大利亚纳税人应尽早考虑混合错配规则的潜在影响。
For further information,please refer to PwC Australia’s TaxTalk Alert: Draft law onAustralia’s hybrid mismatch rules.
更多详情请参普华永道澳大利亚税务资讯:澳大利亚反混合错配规则立法草案。
Developments for Significant Global Entities 重大跨国企业发展
An entity is regarded as asignificant global entity (SGE) for a particular income year where it is a‘global parent entity’ whose ‘annual global income’ is at least AUD$1 billionin the income year, or it is a member of a group of entities that are consolidated for accounting purposes as a single group whose global parent entity's annual global income is AUD$1 billion or more in that income year. The global parent entity’s annual global income for a year is based on the total annual income as shown in the global financial statements for the previous year.
若企业作为“跨国集团母公司”在全球范围内的年收入达到10亿澳元或以上，或企业是会计合并企业集团成员之一，该会计合并集团的跨国母公司在全球范围内的年收入达到10亿澳元或以上，则该企业将被视为“重大跨国企业（SGE）”。跨国母公司在全球范围内的年收入基于上一年度公司的全球财务报表显示的年收入总额。
a) Diverted Profits Tax 转移利润税
During the year, the Diverted Profits Tax (DPT) was introduced to potentially apply to any SGE.
2017年引进了可能适用于任何SGE的转移利润税(DPT)。
Broadly, the DPT applies where a taxpayer that is a SGE obtained a ‘DPT tax benefit' as a result ofentering into a scheme involving a foreign related entity and an objective conclusion can be made that there was a‘principal purpose’ of enabling therelevant taxpayer to obtain an Australian tax benefit, or to obtain both an Australian tax benefit and reduce foreign tax liabilities. The DPT is extremely broad and applies to both financing and non-financing arrangements.
大体上来说，DPT适用于当SGE纳税人通过达成涉及外国关联方的安排取得“转移利润”的好处，可得出安排的“主要目的”是为了使相关纳税人取得澳大利亚税务利益，或在取得澳大利亚税务利益的同时减轻外国税负。DPT的征收范围特别广泛，可适用于融资与非融资安排。
There are certain carve-outs from DPT which includes (1) satisfying the ‘sufficient economic substance test'; (2) satisfying the ‘sufficient foreign tax test’; (3) if the totalAustralian income of the global group does not exceed AUD$25 million. Note, the ATO has recently released guidanceon how it would administer the DPT.
DPT存在特定的情况下不适用，包括(1)通过“足量经济实质测试”；(2)通过“足额外国税测试”；以及(3)若跨国集团在澳总收入未超过2500万澳元。请注意，ATO最近发布了DPT管理指导条例。
In the context of financing Australian operations, we recommend that consideration be given to the application of the DPT and whether the profits made by the lender is commensurate with the activities undertaken (or lack thereof). This may be relevant if the lender is a special purpose vehicle, as opposed to a corporate treasury centre that may have more economic substance.
在为澳大利亚运营提供融资的情况下，我们建议考虑DPT的适用情况，以及借方获利情况是否与承担的业务（或没有相关业务）相称。譬如若借方为特殊目的实体而非具备更重大经济实质的企业财资中心。
For further information, please refer to PwC Australia’s TaxTalk Alert: Diverted Profits Tax –guidance released by ATO.
更多详情请参阅澳大利亚税务资讯：转移利润税-ATO发布指导条例。
General Purpose Financial Statements 通用目的财务报表
For income years beginning onor after 1 July 2016, SGEs that are corporate tax entities must file general purpose financial statements (GPFSs) with the ATO at the time the SGE files its Australian income tax return. This is required unless the entity already files GPFSs with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC).
针对2016年7月1日开始的及之后的所得税年份，作为公司税实体的重大跨国企业必须在向ATO提交所得税申报时，一并提交通用目的财务报表（GPFSs）。除非实体已向澳大利亚证券与投资委员会（ASIC）提交GPFSs，否则必须达到这一要求。
SGEs most likely affected by the legislation are foreign-owned companies that are currently either not required to prepare and file GPFSs with ASIC or only currently are required toprepare and file special purpose financial statements (SPFSs).
最可能受该法影响的重大跨国企业是目前无需编制及向ASIC提交GPFs或仅需编制及提交特殊目的财务报表（SPFSs）的外资企业。
The GPFSs do not necessarily need to be audited, but appropriate records should be kept to demonstrate compliance with Australian Accounting Standards (where required) or Commercially Acceptable Accounting Principles (as applicable).
GPFSs无需经审计，但必须保存适当的记录，以证明符合澳大利亚会计准则（如要求）或公认的商业会计原则（如适用）。
For further information, please refer to PwC Australia’s TaxTalk Alert: ATO guidance onlodgement of GPFS.
更多详情请参阅普华永道澳大利亚税务资讯：ATO发布提交通用目的财务报表指导条例。
b) Extending the Multinational Anti-avoidance Law 扩大跨国企业反避税法的适用范围
In the 2017-2018 Federal Budget, the Australian Government announced that it will extend the scope ofthe Multinational Anti-Avoidance Law (MAAL) so that it will apply to corporate structuresthat interpose partnerships that have any foreign resident partners, truststhat have any foreign resident trustees, and foreign trusts that temporarily have their central management and control in Australia. This measure,intended to ensure the integrity of the original policy intent, will apply retrospectively from 1 January 2016.
澳洲政府在2017-18财年联邦预算中宣布将扩大跨国企业反避税法（MAAL）的适用范围，从而使该法适用于下述公司结构：包含任何外国税务居民合伙人的合伙关系、包含任何外国税务居民受托人的信托，以及在澳大利亚临时设有主要管理控制中心的外国信托。
Given the increase in scope,taxpayers should assess the potential impact of the extension of the MAAL ontheir transactions and corporate structures. This will require a holistic analysis of various aspects of their arrangements including identifying thelocation and amount of foreign taxes paid, the non-tax rationale forarrangements, and the economic substance of all relevant entities;consideration of reasonable alternatives to the arrangements and whether adifferent tax outcome could have arisen.
考虑到MAAL的适用范围扩大，纳税人应评估MAAL对其交易和公司结构带来的潜在影响。这将包含对安排的诸多方面进行整体分析，包括识别已付外国税的地点与金额，做出安排的非税务理据，以及所有关联实体的经济实质；考虑合理替代安排以及是否会引起不同的税务结果。
Australian corporate tax residency 澳大利亚企业税务居民属性
The ATO on 15 March 2017 released Draft Tax Ruling TR2017/D2setting out the Commissioner’s ‘preliminary but considered view's on how to apply the central management and control test for determining the tax residency of a company that is not incorporated in Australia. Some of the Commissioner’skey points of view include:
2017年3月15日，ATO发布了税务裁定草案TR2017/D2，其中列明了税务专员“经深思熟虑的初步意见”，针对如何适用主要管理控制测试，以决定澳大利亚境外成立的公司的税务局民属性。
It is not necessary for anypart of the actual trading or investment operations from which a company’sprofits are made to take place in Australia, simply having the centralmanagement and control of a business is sufficient.
公司并非一定要在澳大利亚进行实际交易或投资从而产生盈利，只要企业的主要管理控制位于澳大利亚就足以满足条件。
The nature of a company's activities and business define which acts and decisions are an exercise of its central management and control. Central management and control is the controland direction of a company’s operations, a key element of which is the making of high level decisions that set the company's general policies, and determine the direction of its operations and the type of transactions it will enter.
公司的活动与业务性质决定了哪些行为与决策属于行使主要管理控制职能。主要管理控制是对公司经营的控制和引导，其中的要素包括制定公司常规政策的高层次决策，以及决定经营方向和将从事的交易类型。
The identification of who exercises central management and control is a question of fact in each case. An individual with no formal authority who dictates or controls the directors’decisions may be deemed to exercise central management and control of the company.
识别谁行使主要管理控制职能是针对个体情况的事实问题。未经正式授权的个人命令或控制董事决定可被认定为行使公司主要管理控制职能。
The Draft Ruling departs from long-established authority on the application of the relevant test and is most likely to lead to uncertainty for companies that are not incorporated in Australia where there are potential decision making ‘influencers’ in Australia. Should the Commissioner’s view in the Draft Ruling ultimately hold, it may be difficult to draw the line in many cases.
税务裁定草案不同于在适用相应测试方面确立已久的权威，对在澳大利亚境外成立的公司增加不确定性，特别是在澳存在潜在决策影响者。如果税务裁定草案中税务局的看法最终确立，则在很多个案中难以清楚界定判断标准。
This decision should be a red flag to foreign incorporated entities whose decisions are made via consultation with Australian advisors and other personnel located in Australia. Boards and key management personnel located overseas should ensure that they are making the substantive decisions and not merely rubber stamping or mechanically implementing the decisions made by personnel located in Australia.
对那些在澳大利亚境外成立，通过询问澳大利亚顾问或其他在澳人员意见作出决策的企业来说，应格外重视这类决定。位于澳大利亚境外的董事会与主要管理人员应确保他们确实作出了实质性决策，而不是对在澳人员作出的决策草率盖章或不假思索地采纳执行。
Foreigh Investment Review Board 外国投资审核委员会（FIRB）
Investments in Australia by foreign investors may be subject to approval by FIRB. The protection of Australia’s tax base has long been one of the factors that FIRB has taken into account when assessing whetheran investment is in Australia’s ‘national interest’.
外国投资者在澳投资可能需FIRB批准。长期以来，FIRB在评估某项投资是否符合澳大利亚“国家利益”时，一直将保护澳大利亚税务基础列为考量因素之一。
The focus on tax has increased in recent years with the ATO becoming increasingly involved in the FIRB review process. We have been involved in anumber of cases in the past year where the ATO has sought information on the proposed transaction structure, terms of any related party debt and forecast distributions. Standard tax conditions are regularly applied to the clearance of foreign investment proposals to ensure that foreign investors are compliant with Australian tax laws.
近年来，由于ATO更多地参与FIRB审核程序，因此对税务领域的关注与日俱增。我们去年曾多次遇到ATO要求了解拟议交易架构、任何关联方债务条款以及预测利润分配信息。FIRB在审批外国投资意向时通常加入标准税务条件，以确保外国投资者满足澳大利亚税法要求。
With the focuson tax outcomes as part of the FIRB review, investors should seek tax adviceearly in the investment decision making process and ensure that submissions toFIRB are reviewed by their tax adviser. 由于FIRB审核过程将税务结果作为关注方面之一，投资者必须在投资决策过程中尽早取得税务建议，并确保其向FIRB提交的材料经税务顾问审阅。
Australian Trusted Trader programme
澳大利亚可信赖贸易商（Australia Trusted Trader）计划
The Australian Government announced in October 2017 that the 100th business has signed up to the Australian Trusted Trader (ATT) programme, and the delivery of a new streamlined reporting benefit that will reduce the reporting obligations and costs associated with the importation of consolidated cargo. The Government also announced that it is negotiating with the People's Republic of China andother key export markets to ease the administrative burden of free trade agreement compliance for Trusted Traders.
澳大利亚政府在2017年10月宣布，第100家企业签订了澳大利亚可信赖贸易商（AustralianTrusted Trader, ATT）计划，实施新的简化报告规定将减轻报告义务和降低混装货物的进口成本。政府也宣布正在与中国及其他主要出口市场进行谈判，以减轻可信赖贸易商在自贸协议合规方面的管理负担。
Broadly, the ATT seeks to provide preferential treatment for international traders who meet supply chain security and trade compliance standards, delivering reduced supply chain costs and improved speed to market, as well as a range of other commercial benefits for participating international businesses. Benefits available under the ATT programme include periodic streamlined reporting, duty deferral, the expedited border clearance, processing and release of shipments, reduced border intervention and the use of non-intrusive examination techniques, and Mutual Recognition Arrangements (MRAs) with export markets that offer similar schemes (e.g. AEO in the EU, Japan, South Korea, China, CT-PAT in the UnitedStates). On 27 November 2017, the Australian Minister for Immigration and Border Protection and the Minister of China Customs signed a landmark MutualRecognition Arrangement (MRA) which enables both countries to formally recognise each other's Authorised Economic Operator programmes, and is expectedto provide faster and more efficient access for Australian Trusted Traders into China.
大体上来说，ATT旨在向符合供应链安全与贸易合规标准的国际贸易企业提供优惠待遇，为这些企业提供较低的供应链成本和提升货品进入市场销售的速度，此外，参与该项目的国际企业还享有其他一系列商业好处。ATT项目的好处包括简化定期报告，推迟纳税，加快货物清关、处理及放行速度，降低海关干预程度，使用非侵入性查验技术，以及与现有类似项目的出口市场之间的双边认证安排（Mutual Recognition Arrangements, MRAs）（例如欧洲、日本、南韩、中国的“认证经营者项目”（AEO）以及美国的“海关-贸易联合反恐计划”（CT-PAT））。2017年11月27日，澳大利亚移民与边境保护部部长与中国海关部长签署了一项具有里程碑意义的双边认证安排（MRA），使两国能够正式承认彼此的授权经济运营商计划，希望向澳大利亚可信赖的贸易商提供更迅速与有效的渠道进入中国。
As part of MRA negotiations,the Australian Government is currently pursuing the delivery of a Certificate of Origin benefit. This benefit would seek to provide international recognition for Trusted Traders with certain jurisdictions. This would potentially eliminate the requirement to obtain Certificates of Origin in orderto access preferential duty treatment under specific FTAs with Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Thailand. Although this benefit will not extend to the China Australia Free Trade Agreement, the Australian Government is exploring anATT Origin Advice Ruling designed to simplify and streamline to processing forverifying that goods are China-originating.
作为MRA协商的一部分，澳大利亚政府目前正努力争取“原产地证明”（Certificate of Origin）待遇。这项待遇将通过向来自特定国家/地区的可信赖贸易商提供国际认证来实现。这可能免除取得原产地证明的要求，为享有与日本、南韩、新加坡与泰国之间特定自贸协议规定的关税优惠。虽然这项待遇不会延伸至中澳自贸协议，但澳大利亚政府正在制定ATT原产地建议裁定规则，旨在精简中国原产商品的验证程序。
For further information, please refer to PwC Australia’s TradeTalk Alert: Australian TrustedTrader – Pipeline of Future Benefits.
更多详请请参阅普华永道澳大利亚税务资讯：澳大利亚可信赖贸易商– 未来优惠待遇渠道。
Asia Region Funds Passport and Collective Investment Vehicles
亚洲地区基金护照与集合投资工具
IN 2017, the Australian Government sought comment on the proposed core legislative framework to give effect to the Asia Region Funds Passport regime. The Passport is a common framework of coordinated regulatory oversight to facilitate the cross border issue of managed investment funds. The Australian Government is currently considering the public responses submitted in respectof the preliminary draft legislation.
2017年澳大利亚政府对拟议的亚洲地区基金护照核心立法框架征集意见。基金护照作为常规协调监管框架，为管理投资基金的跨境发行事宜提供便利。澳大利亚政府目前正在考虑公众针对立法草案提出的反馈意见。
In its 2016-17 Budget, the Australian Government committed to developing a regulatory framework for acorporate collective investment vehicle (CCIV) followed by a regulatory framework for a limited partnership collective investment vehicle. The CCIV regime will offer an internationally recognisable investment vehicle which canbe readily marketed to foreign investors, including through the Passport. The policy intent of the CCIV is to establisha new form of passive investment vehicle which provides broad alignment with the attribution tax regime for managed investment trusts. The Australian Government is currently seeking submission on the exposure draft legislation in relation to the taxframework of the CCIV regime.
在2016-17财年预算中，澳大利亚承诺制定一套针对公司集合投资工具（CCIV）的监管框架，然后出台针对有限合伙关系集合投资工具的监管框架。CCIV制度将提供可通过国际认证的投资工具，可直接向外国投资者销售，包括通过基金护照。CCIV的政策目的是为了建立新的被动投资工具形式，使其大体上与管理投资信托的税收归属制度相一致。澳大利亚政府目前正在就针对CCIV制度的税务框架的立法草案征求意见。
For further information, please refer to PwC Australia’s TaxTalk Alert: Corporate CollectiveInvestment Vehicle – exposure draft law. 更多详情请参阅普华永道澳大利亚税务资讯: 公司集合投资工具 - 立法草案。
The takeaway 总结
The Australian tax developments outlined above are likely to apply to a wide range of multinationals with investments in Australia. Accordingly, multinationals investing in Australia should review their investment structures, consider the impact of these changes and start toprepare for the changes as soon as possible. It may be possible that action canbe taken to reduce or eliminate potential Australian tax exposures from thesenew developments, so we recommend taxpayers act quickly on this. However,restructuring of investments is typically a complex exercise that will require careful consideration of the legal, accounting, treasury, and Australian andforeign tax issues.
上述澳大利亚税务领域的变动可能适用于大量在澳投资的跨国企业。因此，在澳投资的跨国企业应审阅其投资架构，考虑这些变动带来的影响，并尽快做好相应准备。企业可采取行动来避免或消除这些变动带来的潜在澳大利亚税务风险，因此我们建议纳税人尽快行动。然而，投资重组往往十分复杂，需慎重考虑法律、会计、资金和澳大利亚与海外税务事宜。
© 2017 PricewaterhouseCoopers.All rights reserved. In this document, “PwC” refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers apartnership formed in Australia, which is a member firm ofPricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited, each member firm of which is aseparate legal entity. This publication is a general summary. It is not legalor tax advice. Readers should not act on the basis of this publication beforeobtaining professional advice. PricewaterhouseCoopers is not licensed toprovide financial product advice under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). Taxationis only one of the matters that you need to consider when making a decision ona financial product. You should consider taking advice from the holder of anAustralian Financial Services License before making a decision on a financial product.
Liability limited by a scheme approvedunder Professional Standards Legislation.
