Tax Residency is one of the main decisive factors for establishing the category of taxpayer and devising nexus with a country's tax laws. Globally, the residential status of a person is a key factor in determining his or her taxability in a particular country which is different from citizenship. In India, Tax residency is determined u/s 6 of the Income-tax Act which until the amendment brought in by Finance Act, 2020 did not consider citizenship to be a determining factor/ condition. Indian Government introduced certain major amendments in Sec. 6 as anti-avoidance provisions that largely base its premise on 'citizenship' rather than 'the number of days of stay in India'.
Against this backdrop, we elucidates on the
amendments and their likely impact on the stakeholders particularly the NRI
community as well as the ordinary residents in India. Here, we explains the
concept of deemed residency introduced by the Finance Act, 2020 through the
insertion of a new clause (1A) in Section 6. We opines "In essence, there are many Indian
citizens who become NRIs by taking the tax residency certificate of a tax
haven. Such people not only avoid paying taxes in such tax heaven (i.e.
stateless person) due to the NIL tax rate in such jurisdictions, but also
continue to stay in India for 6 months and enjoy the NRI status, thus taking
benefit of all concessional tax rates and exemptions available to an NRI as per
Indian tax laws". Further, we also
analyses the amendments from a tax treaty perspective.
Tax Residency is one of the main decisive factors
for establishing the category of taxpayer and devising nexus with a country's
tax laws. Under Indian tax laws, the scope of total income as envisaged in
section 5 is dependent on the residential status of a person. Residential
status is different from citizenship. Until recently (Finance Act 2020), under
Indian tax laws, citizenship wasn't a relevant factor/ condition for determining
tax residency. Through the Finance Bill of 2020, the Indian government
introduced certain amendments in section 6 of the Income Tax Act, as
anti-avoidance provisions that largely base its premise on 'citizenship' rather
than 'the number of days of stay in India'. In this article, we shall analyse
and demystify what the aforesaid amendments are and their likely impact on the
stakeholders, particularly the NRI community as well as the ordinary residents
in India. For the sake of maintaining brevity in the article, the irrelevant
portions of the law have not been discussed.
Section 6 classifies a person into 3 categories:
• Ordinary resident
• Not ordinary resident
• Non-resident
I. Scope of income of a person as defined under
section 5, is dependent upon the residential status of a person as analyzed
below:
• Taxability of Ordinary Residents -
Section 5(1) defines the scope of total income for ordinary residents as
follows: All incomes that are received or deemed to be received in India,
accrues or arises or deemed to accrue or arise in India or any income that
accrues or arises outside India, altogether is taxable in the hands of an
ordinary resident. In a nutshell, the worldwide income of an ordinary resident is
taxable in India. Hence, provisions of section 5(1) imply that an Indian
resident is taxed on its global income. Accordingly, India follows the
"principle of residence" for taxing the income of its ordinary
residents.
• Taxability of Not-Ordinary Resident -
There is a unique category of residency in India, named as Not Ordinary
resident ('NOR') wherein the 'principle of residence' is replaced with the
'source rule' to tax income of the taxpayer. Hence, all income from whatever
source that is received or deemed to be received in India, accrues or arises or
deemed to accrue or arise in India shall be taxable in the hands of a NOR
Proviso o section 5(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1962. Further, the overseas
income of a NOR shall be taxable only to the extent of that part of the income
as is arising from or accruing outside India or the part of income that is
derived from a business controlled or professional set up in India.
Accordingly, there should be a clear nexus and only the foreign income that is
sourced from India shall be taxable in the hands of a NOR.
• Taxability of Non-Resident – In the
case of a non-resident, Indian legislature follows a very strict approach of
taxing only that income that either is received or deemed to be received in
India or accrues or arises or deemed to accrue or arise in India in the hands
of a Non-Resident Section 5(2) of Income Tax Act, 1962o clause (1). However,
there are several deeming provisions in section 9 that demonstrate India's
unilateral approach in taxing the incomes that "deemed to accrue or arise
in India". Since section 9 is not discussed in this article and is a
subject worth analyzing in detail separately, it can be seen that the foreign
income of a non-resident is not taxable in their hands if such income is not
received in India and such income does not attract the deeming provisions of
accrual under the Indian income tax laws.
II. Test of residency for an individual u/s 6:
Test of residency under Indian Tax laws has been
defined under section 6(1) as follows:
a) If he stays in India in that year for an
aggregate period of 182 days or
b) ***
c) If he stays in India
i. Within 4 years preceding that year for an
aggregate period of 365 days or more and
ii. In that year for an aggregate period of 60 days
or more.
Pre-Amendment exceptions to Section 6(1)
Pre-Amendment Explanation 1(a) carves out an
exception to clause (c) of Section 6(1) as follows:
1 Proviso o section 5(1) of the Income Tax Act,
1962 2 Section 5(2) of Income Tax Act, 1962o clause (1)n
Any citizen of India, who leaves India in the previous
year:
a) As a member of the crew of an Indian ship; or
b) For employment outside India,
The period 60 days in sub-clause (c) shall be
substituted by 182 days for the previous year in which he/ she leaves India.
Pre-Amendment Explanation 1(b) :
Any individual being a citizen of India, or a
Person of Indian Origin (PIO), who is outside India, comes on a visit to India
in any previous year, the provisions of sub-clause (c) shall apply concerning
that year as if for the words "sixty days", occurring therein, the
words "one hundred and either two days" had been substituted.
• Amendments to Explanation 1(b) – as proposed
in Finance Bill, 2020
Any individual being a citizen of India, or PIO,
who, being outside India, comes on a visit to India in any previous year, the
provisions of sub-clause (c) shall apply concerning that year as if for the
words "sixty days" occurring herein, the words "one hundred and
twenty days" had been substituted.
• Amendments to Explanation 1(b) – as
legislated in Finance Act, 2020
Any individual being a citizen of India, or a PIO,
who, being outside India, comes on a visit to India in any previous year, the
provisions of sub-clause (c) shall apply concerning that year as if for the
words "sixty days" occurring herein, the words "one hundred and
eighty days" had been substituted and in case of the citizen or PIO having
a total income, other than the income from foreign sources, exceeding fifteen
lakh rupees during the previous year, "for the words "sixty
days" occurring therein, the words "one hundred and twenty days"
had been substituted.
Impact
Analysis
Finance Bill of 2020 proposed to amend Explanation
1(b) to introduce anti-avoidance provisions by enhancing the scope of NRIs to
be taxed in India. The simplest way of doing that was to cut short the 'number
of days' time window relaxation provided to the NRIs from 181 days to 119 days.
Since this move would make it difficult for an NRI to remain an NRI and yet
look after the Indian business, he must ensure that his stay in India is for
less than 120 days. However, his pose a bigger problem for NRI workmen and
blue-collar workers who would stay in India in an offseason and yet remain an
NRI and hence not pay taxes in India. The NRIs living in the USA and other high
tax jurisdictions areas is not very likely to dwell in India for long periods
for growing their Indian business. The case is different for those who take
citizenship of tax havens to avoid paying taxes on India sourced income.
Nevertheless, this proposed amendment affected NRIs
and there was a worry and a ripple of protest against the cut down in the
relaxation given to an NRI visiting India. Accordingly, the Indian government
listened to the affected NRI community and while passing the Finance Act 2020,
amended Explanation 1(b) to affect that the cut down from 180 days to 120 days
shall be applicable on only those NRIs who have India sourced income exceeding
fifteen lacs in a year and are a citizen or PIO, coming to India on a visit. By
providing the threshold of 15 lace (which is also apparently the highest income
tax threshold bracket in India), the government ensured that only those NRIs
face the risk of becoming tax residents of India who already have a high income
of 15 lacs being sourced from India in a particular tax year.
However, even this move was watered down by the
insertion of clauses (c) and (d) to section 6 (6) as discussed in part V of the
Article.
III. The New
Residency Rule – Doctrine of Deemed Residency
The Finance Bill of 2020 further introduced the
concept of Deemed Residency as a non-obstante provision to clause (1) to
section 6, which is as follows:
• New clause (1A) to section 6 – As proposed
in Finance Bill, 2020
Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (1),
an individual, being a citizen of India, shall be deemed to be resident in
India in any previous year, if he is not liable to tax in any other country or
territory because of his domicile or residence or any other criteria of similar
nature.
• New clause (1A) to section 6 – As legislated in Finance Act, 2020
"(1A) Notwithstanding anything contained in
clause (1), an individual, being a citizen of India, having a total income,
other than the income from foreign sources, exceeding fifteen lakh rupees
during the previous year shall be deemed to be resident in India in that
previous year if he is not liable to tax in any other country or territory
because of his domicile or residence or any other criteria of similar nature.
Impact
Analysis
The concept of deemed residency based on 'Indian
citizenship' was not in existence before the amendment of 2020. Since in India,
both the concepts of 'residency principle' and 'source rule' of taxation
co-exist in section 5. Hence, the Indian Government did not place any
additional burden of establishing tax residency through the use of 'test of
citizenship' on the taxpayers. However, the use of single criteria of 'number
of days of stay' in India gave rise to certain tax planning opportunities for
NRI who could continue to source their income from India and stay in India for
6 months as well in the same financial year. Accordingly, the introduction of
'Deemed Residency' through the insertion of new clause (1A) in Section 6 was
done through Finance Act, 2020 as an anti-avoidance measure.
In essence, many Indian citizens become NRIs by
taking the tax residency certificate of a tax haven. Such people not only avoid
paying taxes in such tax heaven (i.e. stateless person) due to the NIL tax rate
in such jurisdictions, but also continue to stay in India for 6 months and
enjoy the NRI status, thus taking benefit of all concessional tax rates and
exemptions available to an NRI as per Indian tax laws.
Though the introduction of the draft clause (1A)
created a stir in the NRI community since it implies that under mere
citizenship of India, a person would become a tax resident in India in case
such person is not liable to tax in any foreign country. Accordingly,
'stateless persons' aka individuals who were not liable to tax in any other tax
jurisdiction on the world map, would become tax residents in India and hence
shall be liable to pay tax on their global income in India. This posed as a
particular issue with most NRIs settled in the USA and Europe who haven't taken
foreign citizenship (and continue to hold Indian citizenship) and are not
liable to tax in any other tax jurisdiction, even when they have not come on a
visit to India for a single day. All such individuals would be liable to pay
tax in India on their foreign-sourced income. This proposed law, hence, was
posing as a perfect breeding ground for dislike and non-acceptance by the
affected NRI community and it did receive strong opposition and criticism for
the same. Hence, after considering all aspects and repercussions of the
proposed clause (1A), the final legislation passed with an important add-on
being "…an Indian citizen having a total income, other than the income
from foreign sources, exceeding fifteen lakh rupees during the previous
year…". This one extra line made a huge difference on the impact that the
section 6 amendment shall have on the interested parties. Presently, any Indian
citizen shall become a deemed resident if the following two conditions are
satisfied, namely:
- The individual is a 'stateless person', meaning
he does not have any income liable to tax in any foreign tax jurisdiction other
than India; and
- The Indian citizen has a total India sourced
income exceeding INR 15 lacs.
IV. Summary of amendments to section 6(6)
Residency
on account of Stay – Section 6(6)(c ) |
Deemed
Residency – Section 6(6)(d) |
-
Indian citizen or PIO -
Visiting India - Stay
in India between 120 to 181 days -
Having total India sourced income of INR 15 lacs |
-
Indian citizen -
Having total income sourced from India of INR 15 lacs - Not
liable to tax in any foreign tax jurisdiction |
V. Amendments to NOR provisions Section 6(6) of the
Income Tax Act, 1962
The erstwhile provision as envisaged in section
6(6) is as follows: A person is said to be "not ordinary resident" in
India in any previous year if such person is: - An individual who has been a
non-resident in India in 9 out of 10 previous years preceding that year; or -
Has during the 7 previous years preceding that year been in India for an
aggregate period of 729 days or less.
NOR Amendment – as proposed in Finance Bill, 2020
A person is said to be "not ordinarily
resident" in India in any previous if such person is:
(a) An individual who has been a non-resident in
India in seven out of the ten previous years preceding that year;
Amendments to NOR provisions - as legislated in
Finance Act, 2020
A person is said to be “not ordinarily resident” in
India in any previous year if such person is:
a) An individual who has been a non-resident in
India in 9 out of 10 previous years preceding that year or has during 7 years
preceding that year been in India for an aggregate period of 729 days or less;
or
b) *** or
c) A citizen of India, or a PIO, having a total
income, other than the income from foreign sources, exceeding fifteen lakh
rupees during the previous year, as referred to in clause (b) of Explanation 1
to clause (1), who has been in India for a period or periods amounting in all
to 120 days or more but less than 182 days; or
d) A citizen of India who is deemed to be resident
in India under clause (1A).
As per the above amendments to section 6(6), both
the types of individuals who are become India tax residents, based on number or
stay4 as well as deemed residents5 (as per the amended provisions) shall be
subject to tax in India as a NOR. As per Indian tax laws, a taxable person
having a status of a NOR shall not be liable to Indian tax on his foreign
income (unless such foreign income is derived from a business controlled or
professional set up in India) and will not be liable to disclose his foreign
assets & incomes in India.
With this important change in the provisions of
section 6(6), the Indian Government has not only nullified the effect of
amendments in section 6(1) but has provided additional relaxation to those
covered under the definition of Deemed Residents (a benefit which was not in
existence before the introduction of the concept of 'Deemed Resident' based on
citizenship). Under the amended provisions, while the Non-resident may be
treated as an Indian Resident under S. 6(1A), he will also be treated as NOR
and hence he will not be liable to Indian tax on his foreign income.
Under the un-amended Indian tax law provisions
also, all non-residents were liable to pay Indian tax only on their Indian
sourced incomes. So the Finance Act 2020 amendment achieves almost nothing. On
the contrary, the entire Anti-avoidance premise on which the amendments in tax
residency rules is made in the Finance Act of 2020, has been watered down in
one go with the insertion of sub-clause (c ) and (d) in section 6(6). VI.
Section 6 Amendments - Tax Treaty Perspective
Under Article 1 of a tax treaty, the applicability
of the DTAA on a person is determined if the person is a resident of at least
one of the Contracting States. Accordingly, tax treaty benefits are not
available to a person who is not resident of 4 Explanation 1(b) to section 6(1)
5 Section 6(1A) of Income Tax Act, 1962 either of the Contracting States.
Further, the DTAAs also provide the tests for determining the residential
status of a person.
Under the provisions of Model Double Taxation
Avoidance Agreement, a 'resident of a Contracting State' is a person who, under
the laws of that state is liable to tax therein because of:
- Domicile (the place where a man has his true,
fixed and permanent home and the principal establishment and to which whenever
he is absent he has the intention of returning); - Residence;
- Place of management
- Or any other criterion of similar nature;
- And (Under UN Model only) place of incorporation.
As per Section 90(2) of the Act, DTAAs
overrule domestic tax laws in India. Accordingly, NRIs can reduce their
instance of paying double tax on the same income.
Most countries have the condition of stay for 182
days or more for determining residency. However, under the amended provisions,
a person may become a resident in India in some cases even if he stays for less
than 182 days in India. Such a situation could give rise to 'dual residency'.
Most DTAAs have a tie-breaker Article which provides that in case of dual
residency, such person will become resident of only one country as per the
'Tiebreaker rule' of such DTAA.
In cases of Dual-residency, the 'Tiebreaker test'
is applied in the case of a person that is found to be a resident of both the
Contracting States. To avoid double taxation of the same income twice under the
taxing statutes of the two Contracting States, Article 4(2) of the DTAAs
provide for Tie Breaking provisions. Article 4(2) provides several tests for
determining the country of residence of a taxpayer. Each test is to be
considered in the chronological order in which it is enlisted in Article 4(2).
Now the issue is that most of the DTAAs do not have
citizenship as a test for determining residency. However, under the amended
Indian section 6 provisions, an Indian citizen who stays outside India becomes
'deemed resident' in India if he has an India sourced income of INR 15 lacs and
is not liable to tax in any other country. In such a situation, where even the'
Tiebreaker rule' does not provide a solution to the problem of dual residency
because most DTAAs do not contain 'citizenship' as a criterion for determining
residency. Though, certain DTAAs with India provide for a resolution mechanism
through Mutual Agreement Procedure.
Conclusion
Since new clause 1(a) specifically overrules clause
(1) of section 6, accordingly, an Indian citizen having Indian income of 15
lakhs and if such individual is not liable to pay tax in any other country,
then post FY 2020-21, such person shall be "deemed resident" under
the provisions of section 6(1A) of the Act irrespective of his number of stay
in India. Accordingly, under section 6(6)(d), such deemed residents will always
be NOR, implying that the foreign sources income of such individual shall not
be taxable in India unless it is sourced from India, i.e. only such part of
foreign income that is derived from a business controlled or profession set up
in India shall be subject to tax in India.
This is yet another example where the legislature
had to give in to the demands of the mighty NRI lobby and diffuse its
anti-avoidance laws to make room for the unhindered flow of investments from
outside into the Indian economy. As an aftermath, the so-called anti-avoidance
law has enhanced complexity and provided extra loop-holes for allowing tax
planning, making the entire amendments the opposite of anti-tax-avoidance law
in itself, without serving its purpose for which the amendments were initially
brought into existence
No comments:
Post a Comment