Welcome to Matley Communique! This is the home of Matley Financial Services newsletter. Designed to keep you, our clients, up to date on facts that may impact your business.

November 2016 Newsletter

Posted 3 months, 26 days ago by Maggie Waine    0 comments

Hi everyone,

Please see below for Matley's latest newsletter.  The only other major in-house notice is that Matley offices are closed to the public from Wednesday 15th December and re-open in the New Year on Monday January 9th.  

This year has just zoomed by!


Cyber insurance and Business Interruption information from Xero data


 The above link explains the Xero add-on which can then extract data from a business’s accounts to produce the information an insurance broker needs to accurately advise on the necessary levels of cover for Business Interruption insurance. One of the key lessons learnt from the Christchurch earthquake was that many, particularly smaller businesses, did not have Business Interruption insurance. Also even those that did have cover did not have a long enough period of cover. Twelve months is not normally enough and businesses should think about 18 month or 24 month cover periods.

The reason for this is that it is not just the rebuilding of an affected building it is the time needed to get the business up and running at turnover level prior to the event.


 NZI have been developing a Cyber Insurance cover which goes along with a business’s Liability insurances.

There is a huge amount of information on this web site. Coverage encompasses such things as damage to your own computer systems, having your companies computers used as “bot” computers and damaging others, privacy breeches – not just computer related as well as many other benefits including having your computer held to ransom by hackers.

Key thing with this is to speak to your usual insurance broker and ask for a Cyber Insurance cover.



Deductibility of farmhouse expenses- 24 October 2016

On 21 October 2016, Inland Revenue released draft interpretation statement QWB00082: “Income tax — deductibility of farmhouse expenses” for consultation.

The interpretation statement considers the deductibility of expenditure relating to a farmhouse that forms part of a farming business. The interpretation statement is the result of a review of long-standing concessions for the farming industry which permitted some farmers to claim deductions for private expenditure.

The interpretation statement explains that deductions for farmhouse expenses are available only to the extent that they are incurred in carrying on the farming business. This means that the current concession which allows a flat 25% deduction for farmhouse expenses without any evidence, as well as 100% deductions for interest and rates is to be withdrawn. The main consequence of the current concession being withdrawn is that sole traders and partners of partnerships can only claim deductions based on the actual business use of the farmhouse.

However, in situations where any compliance costs of calculating the private use element far outweighs any likely deduction, the interpretation statement allows some sole traders and partners of partnerships to claim an automatic 15% deduction (a more realistic amount) for farmhouse expenses and 100% deductions for interest. These deductions are allowed when the cost of the farmhouse is 20% or less than the total cost of the farm. Other sole traders and partners of partnerships may be able to adopt the measures recently proposed in cl 62 of the Taxation (Business Tax, Exchange of Information, and Remedial Matters) Bill (clause 62 proposes inserting new s DB 18AA to provide a square metre rate method to determine the amount of a deduction for a building that is used partly for business and partly for other purposes).

Any changes from consultation will apply from the start of the 2017–18 year.

The deadline for comment is 22 December 2016


Next steps announced for simpler PAYE - 3 November 2016

On 3 November 2016, the Government released early information on proposals to make the administration of PAYE simpler following feedback on the discussion document, Making tax simpler — better administration of PAYE and GST, released in November 2015.

The document, PAYE reporting — better administration of PAYE, provides early information about proposals likely to be included in a tax Bill for consideration by Parliament in 2017.

The proposals are intended to further integrate tax obligations, such as providing PAYE information to Inland Revenue, into employers’ own systems and processes. Meeting tax obligations will become part of the process of paying employees rather than a separate and additional activity. The proposals are intended to make it easier to get an employee’s pay right and to quickly address issues such as using the wrong tax code. The result will be lower compliance costs for employers and improved accuracy of deductions for employees. A summary of the proposals is as follows:

• Employers and payroll intermediaries would no longer be required to file an employer monthly schedule; instead they would file PAYE information on a payday basis from 1 April 2019.

• Employers using payroll software would be able to file their information directly from their payroll system.

• Employers would not be required to use payroll software but would have to file their PAYE information on a payday basis.

• The smallest employers would still be able to file their PAYE information on paper if they choose to do so. The threshold for electronic filing of PAYE information would reduce from $100,000 a year of PAYE and Employer Superannuation Contribution Tax (ESCT) deductions to $50,000 a year.

• The Government is not proposing to change the dates by which PAYE and related deductions have to be paid to Inland Revenue. However, employers will be able to make these payments on payday if they choose to.

• To improve the workability of the rules minor changes would be made from 1 April 2018 to the PAYE rules for holiday pay paid in advance to align when rate changes come into effect.

• The payroll subsidy, which subsidises employers to outsource their PAYE obligations to listed payroll intermediaries, would cease from 1 April 2018.

A summary of feedback received on the original proposals outlined in the November 2015 discussion document is available at www.taxpolicy.ird.govt.nz.

Further background information about the proposals can also be found in the Minister of Revenue’s speech on 3 November 2016 to the NZ Payroll Practitioners Conference which is also available at www.taxpolicy.ird.govt.nz.

Source: www.taxpolicy.ird.govt.nz

ED0190 released — Retrospective adjustments to salaries paid to shareholder-employees, 03 November 2016

Inland Revenue has released draft standard practice statement ED0190 — Retrospective adjustments to salaries paid to shareholder-employees. Unless specified otherwise, all legislative references in this SPS are to the Tax Administration Act 1994 (“the TAA”).

The item notes that “… SPS 16/01 sets out in detail the process that the Commissioner will use to consider section 113 requests. Because of the recent release of SPS 16/01, this statement sets out the criteria for considering whether the circumstances are appropriate for the Commissioner to agree to retrospectively alter an amount of shareholder’s salary. This consideration takes into account the process used in exercising the section 113 discretion. This statement considers requests to either increase or decrease an amount of a shareholder’s salary …”

This statement replaces SPS 05/05 — Retrospective adjustments to salaries paid to shareholder-employees and should be read with SPS 16/01 — Requests to amend assessments (or any subsequent statement issued in replacement).

The deadline for comment in response is 27 January 2017.

Refer to ED0190 — Retrospective adjustments to salaries paid to shareholder-employees for further information.

Source: www.ird.govt.nz 



 Flexible payment options for 15 January provisional tax with TAX MANAGEMENT NZ

 With many clients due to pay provisional tax on 15 January, we thought we would mention an option you might useful if this payment is going to be difficult to make payment on time or in full.

 Tax Management NZ (TMNZ) provides an Inland Revenue-approved service that gives you greater control over your income tax obligations by letting you choose how and when you make these payments.

You can put an arrangement in place to defer an upcoming provisional tax payment to a time in the future that suits you, without incurring late payment penalties and interest of 8.27 percent from IRD.

 The arrangement does not affect existing lines of credit. Approval is guaranteed.

 TMNZ also allows provisional tax to be paid off in flexible instalments. You can pay what you can, when you can for up to 75 days past your terminal tax date.

 This method eliminates IRD late payment penalties and reduces IRD interest costs.

 Please contact us if you wish to find out more about these payment methods and how they can help you manage your provisional tax payments.

Special Announcement at Matley Financial Services

Posted 5 months, 16 days ago by Maggie Waine    0 comments

Dear Valued Client,

 As fellow business owners, you will understand that businesses go through change cycles and an enduring business will recognise those changes and adjust accordingly.

 After 10 years in operation, Matley Financial Services has successfully grown beyond a size that is manageable by David alone.  For that reason, Neisha Comins was employed by the company in April 2016 as Practice Manager.  This position has created positive change within the company and allowed David to step back from the organisational side of the company and focus on the supporting of clients in their business (his passion).

 As of 1st October 2016, Neisha purchased a portion of the business as an extension of her vested interest in seeing Matley Financial Services strengthen and continue to provide quality service and advice to clients.  David is also working with local based parties in Auckland, Tauranga and Christchurch to look at opening offices in these locations to support our clients based in these cities. 

 As clients, your accounting experiences should only improve and some of the new changes we are looking to implement in the new year will only enhance the “Matley” experience.

 All staff and operations will continue as normal -  David is still the face of the company and fully available but on a day to day basis you may have more interaction with the staff than you have historically experienced. 

July Update from Matley

Posted 8 months, 3 days ago by Maggie Waine    0 comments

We hope that all our clients are well and happy and warm!

This month's newsletter has the following articles featured:




But first, here is a cute picture of a baby!

Grace Waine born 4 June 2016 8lb8oz



- Wolters Kluwer Intelliconnect Tax Tracker Email 27-06-2016

On 27 June 2016, the Minister of Finance, the Hon Bill English, and the Minister of Revenue, the Hon Michael Woodhouse, released tax expert John Shewan’s independent inquiry into Foreign Trust Disclosure Rules, and the steps the Government is taking to strengthen the tax rules as part of its work with the OECD to clamp down on base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS).

The Inquiry was announced by the Ministers on 11 April 2016 in response to the release of the “Panama Papers” the previous week. The Ministers considered that in light of the Panama Papers it was appropriate to look at whether the disclosure rules were fit for purpose and whether practical improvements could be made.

Mr Shewan’s inquiry was required to examine New Zealand’s foreign trust disclosure rules and to report on whether the rules, and the enforcement of them, were sufficient to ensure New Zealand’s reputation was maintained when considered alongside the country’s commitment to various OECD and other international agreements.

The Inquiry noted that foreign trusts, like domestic trusts, were a legitimate vehicle used primarily to manage family wealth and that New Zealand’s tax treatment of foreign trusts was appropriate. The Inquiry concluded, however, that the existing foreign trust disclosure rules were inadequate and should be strengthened. The Inquiry considered that strengthened disclosure requirements should act as a deterrent to offshore parties looking to use New Zealand foreign trusts for illicit purposes.

A brief summary of the Inquiry’s recommendations is as follows:

Registration process

• Foreign trusts be required to register on establishment using an expanded version of the current disclosure form, IR 607.

• A register of foreign trusts, searchable only by regulatory agencies, be maintained.

• The registration document include a signed declaration that the person establishing the foreign trust, the settlor(s) and the trustees have been advised of and have agreed to provide the information to comply with the record keeping requirements in the Tax Administration Act 1994, the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act and Regulations, and the Automatic Exchange of Information /Common Reporting Standard requirements (once enacted).

• The registration requirement apply to all trusts formed after enactment of the enabling legislation.

• A transitional rule that requires existing foreign trusts to register, and to supply the information required, be implemented by 30 June 2017.

• The registration process to be the responsibility of the IRD initially.

Strengthened disclosure on registration

• The information required to be disclosed to the IRD when a foreign trust registers be expanded from the current IR 607 disclosures to include the name, email address, foreign residential address, country of tax residence and Tax Identification Number of the settlor or settlers, the protector (if there is any), non resident trustees, any other natural person who has effective control of the trust (including through a chain of control of ownership), and beneficiaries of fixed trusts, including the underlying beneficiary where a named beneficiary is a nominee.

• For discretionary trusts, any class of beneficiary not listed in the trust deed be listed on the registration form.

• The trust deed be required to be filed with the registration form.

Ongoing tax obligations

• The exemption from New Zealand tax on foreign source income apply only to a foreign trust that has registered and fulfilled the associated disclosure obligations at that time.

• Foreign trusts be required to file an annual return with IRD that includes:

— any changes to the information provided at registration

— the trust’s annual financial statements, and

— the amount of any distributions paid or credited and the names, foreign address, Tax Identification Number and country of tax residence of the recipient beneficiaries.

• The annual return requirement to apply to foreign trusts formed after the enactment date and to all foreign trusts from the income year commencing 1 April 2017.

• The basis for foreign trusts that have a qualifying resident foreign trustee being exposed to lesser sanctions than other foreign trusts be reviewed to determine whether it should remain.

The Inquiry also recommended that:

• foreign trusts be required to pay a registration and annual filing fee

• the expansion and scope and application of the Anti-Money Laundering rules

• the legislation or regulations that govern suspicious transaction reporting to the Financial Intelligence Unit of the New Zealand Police be revised, and

• a review be undertaken of the current legislative arrangements for the sharing of information between the three agencies (IRD, FIU and DIA) with supervisory responsibility for disclosures by foreign trusts and other entities.

The Minister of Revenue noted that a lot of work had already gone into strengthening New Zealand’s tax rules but that there was always room to improve. He said that the Government has already strengthened New Zealand’s controlled foreign company rules, thin capitalisation rules, bank minimum equity rules, and, more recently, legislation has been introduced to improve non-resident withholding tax rules.

The Minister said that the next steps included stronger rules preventing excessive payments from a New Zealand company to its foreign parent, greater disclosure requirements for multi-nationals, and further sharing of tax data with foreign authorities.

The Shewan Inquiry into Foreign Trust Disclosure Rules can be found at www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/reviews-consultation/foreign-trust-disclosure-rules.




Kiwisaver is an integral and important aspect of the average New Zealanders investment plans for future retirement. 

With the employer contributions and tax credits, there is a greater return on investment in Kiwisaver than if an individual invested directly.  But how active are we at actually monitoring the amount of our Kiwisaver and where those contributions has come from?

For some of us, the Kiwisaver in the next 30 years may become a more significant investment than our family home (based on the time value of money and compounding effect of investment returns), but how much analysis do we give to our Kiwisaver?  There is a website that assists with monitoring this – www.kiwisaver.govt.nz

Just log in, create a user name, and take control.



As you will be aware Matley Financial Services has been moving into a Fixed Pricing Agreement system in terms of its accounting fees to ensure your compliance with the Inland Revenue and also where you want value added services that don't come at a significant cost.

We have a client of ours who has a property management company based in Auckland although they do represent a number of landlords throughout the country and they have come into an option of fixing management service which could give rental property clients certainty in respect to their management fees.  

The fee is 12% plus GST per rental in comparison to the usual 6-8%, however the additional services that you achieve which is noted below show that you get a significant amount of benefit for the 12% that is being paid.

If you would like to look at the options further, please feel free to contact Trevor Higginson from Angel Property Managment directly and their details are email admin@angelpm.nz and phone 09 281 3547.


Angel Property Managers Bio


Posted 9 months, 0 days ago by Maggie Waine    0 comments

Hi everyone,

This is an urgent update for all our clients as there have been a number of you affected by the latest scam targeting tax payers from phishers claiming to be from the Inland Revenue.

The following email has been sent to us directly from our Community Compliance Officer at the Inland Revenue Department for us to circulate to our clients.


There is currently a large-scale phone scam running regarding “unpaid taxes”. These calls are not legitimate and are not coming from Inland Revenue. We are working with the relevant authorities to have the phone numbers disconnected; however, new phone numbers continue to be established.
Please help us to stop them by:
-    Not responding, or hanging up on those phone numbers (see table below)
-   Contacting your phone provider (for example 2degrees, Spark, Vodafone etc.) and asking them to block the callers
-    Continuing to report phone numbers (if not noted below) to phishing@ird.govt.nz


Current malicious phone numbers

04 830 2441

04 830 2448

04 830 2447

04 830 3454

04 830 3495

09 974 9629

09 974 9581

09 974 9628

06 824 1124

09 950 8821

09 950 8826

09 950 8850

09 950 8824


If you have any concerns, please contact the office.


Mid Year Already! June Update.

Posted 9 months, 10 days ago by Maggie Waine    0 comments

Hello everyone!  Happy middle of 2016!

We are moving to monthly newsletters as there is more information that is coming about which we want you as our valued clients to be kept abreast of.

This month's newsletter covers:

- Changes to Use of Money Interest

- AIM (Accounting Income Method)

- The latest Company's Office Scam letter making the rounds

- Paying yourself from your business


Firstly however, David and Maggie are delighted to announce the safe arrival of their baby.  Grace Waine was born on 4 June 2016 8lb8oz - by "eviction" as she was 8 days overdue and Mum and Dad had things to do!  Both are doing well. 




From 1 April 2018 UOMI will change as follows:

  • Safe Harbour for individuals goes up to $60,000 = income of $209,333.
  • Safe Harbour for trusts and compies up from $2,500 to $60,000 = income of $181,815
  • No UOMI on P1 and P2
  • UOMI is to be retained for P3 because IRD thinks the bigger earners have more sophisticated accounting systems and will be able to work out their tax liability by P3.
  • If you switch from standard to estimation, UOMI will apply from P1
  • Taxpayers who under pay their provisional tax (calculated on the safe harbour basis) will be liable for both UOMI and penalties
  • Where provisional tax has been over paid, the taxpayer may switch to estimation so UOMI can be claimed from P1.  However, this must be done before P2 is due.
  • Where there is a re-assessment, UOMI on short paid tax will run from P3 until payment is made.
  • Where there is a re-assessment and the taxpayer qualifies for safe harbour, UOMI will run from the terminal tax date because that is when the balance of tax would have been due.
  • Companies could be allowed to pay tax for both themselves and their shareholder/employees.  Election required by P1.  If the tax allocated to the shareholder is insufficient, UOMI could apply.
  • Some cloud based accounting software can produce accurate accounts for caluclating provisional tax  Taxpayers using approved systems like Xero will not be liable to UOMI.  They will pay provisional tax with GST.  There will be more freedom to chose balance dates.
  • Related parties, will not be abble to choose which uses the standard method and which estimates provisional tax.  They will all have to use the same.  This is to stop people dodging provisional tax.




IRD proposes allowing businesses to pay income tax on the basis of income derived each GST period.  When you pay GST you pay income tax.  How do you calculate the taxable income?  It will be based on a blend of the current year's figures and adjustments made last year.  For example, you may use last year's figures for adjusting the claim for use of your home for business.  IRD thinks it may be possible to get acceptably accurate accounts for calculating provisional tax, without too much work every GST period.  Payments and IRD forms will be generated by the software.

The AIM method is initially proposed for businesses having up to $5 million turnover but may be able to be extended to bigger businesses.

AIM users will pay income tax at least 6 time a year.

Some businesses have seasonal income.  If their biggest income occurs early in the year, they could have losses in later periods resulting in tax refunds.

AIM could be used manually but minmum accounting requirements would be needed.

Shareholder salaries could only be claimed as a deduction in any period where the payments are made.




  • Salary payments made within 63 of the year end for service provided in the previous year should be accrued as an expense in the earlier year.  This requirement is to become optional.
  • No longer needed to renew resident withholding tax exemption certificates every year.
  • Annual FBT returns will be available where PAYE/ESCT deductions are less than $1m - up from $500k.
  • Use of home - IRD will set a rate for utilities per square meter.  Taxpayer will add an adjustment for rent, rate and interest.  Taxpayers may opt out of the IRD calculation.  A requirement for there to be a separately identifiable part of the house used primarily for business is proposed.
  • The 5000km limit on claiming car expenses for sole traders using the mileage basis is to be improved.  Mileage in excess of 5000 will be claimable at a reduced rate.  eg 74 cents up to 5000 km and 20 cents per km over 5000km.  There may be a restriction to prevent taxpayers from switching from actual to mileage and vice versa too often.  Taxpayers may use a 3 months test period as a basis for calculating the mileage. 
  • Minor error threshold for self-correction is to increase from $500 of tax to $1,000 of tax.
  • Details of serious tax debt to be supplied to credit reporting agencies.



We have had a client hand a letter to us purporting to be from the Companies Office and asking you to submit a form disclosing personal information.

The covering letter of this document has statements used in an odd manner (which sparked our concern) and the return address is in Hamburg.  It also infers that this is connected with the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, when it is not.

Please ensure that any documents you receive that purport to state they are from a NEW ZEALAND Government Agency have at least a New Zealand return address.  Below is a sample of the wording that was included with this letter - it had all the clients company details (which is easily obtainable from the Companies Office by anyone anyway) which gave the aura of authenticity.

Dear Sir/Madam,

In order to avoid the removal of your incomplete company details, please revise and approve your information promptly

Should the information provided not be correct or be incomplete, you have the opportunity to correct your information as a basic data entry (Name, Trade, City - Postcode, Interest Address) in www.portal-nz.org; Menu item: Update.  You will not be charged for this!

If you require the publication of further company details which exceed the scope of the basic data entry, please make sue of the attached form and return it to us.  As our company is not affiliated with a public authority or any official entity, this entry is subject to a charge.  In this case, please ensure that all information is signed by the entrepreneur of by an authorised signatory.  The application for an entry in the Corporate Portal is targeted at companies, self- employed person, intstitutions and authoirties - and not at private persons.

If you have received an document that sparks your concern, please do not hesitate to contact our office so that we can validate its authenticity before you hand out any personal information or credit card details.




Inland Revenue has released information on "Paying yourself from your business" to assist people in business who pay themselves to meet personal living costs.  How this is done depends on the business structure a person is operating under.

Sole Trader

As a sole trader, a business does not exist as a separate entity.  All business income and expenses are included in the Individual income tax return (IR3) at the end of the tax year.

Regular cash drawings can be taken from business profits for personal use, such as day-to-day living costs.

The following are key points about drawings:

  • Drawings are still included in overall profits and income tax must be paid on them at the end of the year.  Do not include drawings as a deductible business expense.
  • It is easier to reconcile accounts if regular cash drawings are taken weekly, fortnightly or monthly (like a regular salary or wage).
  • Drawings should be recorded in a cash book or using accounting software to see what has been taken for personal use.
  • Ensure there is enough money in the business to cover any bills owing after drawings have been taken.


To pay yourself out of a partnership, regular drawings can be taken from the business profits just like a sole trader.  However, these drawings cannot be included as a deductible expense in the end-of-year partnership return.  The split of profits to the partners at the end of the year does not take into account any drawings taken from the profits.

A partner who works for the partnership can be paid a salary or wage if there is a written contract of service.  The salary or wage would have PAYE deducte like a regular employee.  This salary or wage would then be claimed as a deductible expense in the partnership's end-of-year tax return.


A company is a business that is a legal entity in its own right, separate from its shareholders.  In a company structure shareholder-employees can:

  • periodically draw money from the company during the year.  The amounts taken out are recorded i the shareholder current account as a loan to them.  At the end of the tax year, the company credits the current account with a salary amount calculated from the company profits which the shareholder will have to pay income tax on.  This salary is declared on their Individual income tax return (IR3), and is not a deductible expense for the company.
  • be paid a regular salary (at least monthly) with PAYE deducted like a regular employee if an individual employment contract exists between the shareholder and the company.  This salary or wage can be claimed as a deductible expense in the company's end-of-year return, and
  • receive dividends from the company profits, once the tax on those profits has been paid.

Directors and management fees are also paid from the company profits.  These can generally be included as a deductible expense in the company's end-of-year tax return.

Record keeping

To prove deductions are legitimate, all records must be kept for at least seven years and they must be in English (unless the Commissioner has approved otherwise).  Although not an exhaustive list, the following records must be kept:

  • all income received (copies of invoices issued, etc)
  • all tax invoices and receipts for purchases, insurance, power, phone and all other costs incurred
  • credit and debt notes
  • bank statements
  • cash books or computerised accounting records
  • wage records for any employees
  • interest and dividend payments
  • a list of business assets and liabilities
  • depreciation schedules
  • statements of year end trading stock, and stocktake records
  • motor-vehicle log books
  • details of entertainment expenses for clients, staff or suppliers, and
  • final profit and loss statements and balance sheets

Current income tax rates for the 2016 income year


0 - $14,000 10.5%

$14,001 - $48,000 17.5%

$48,001 - $70,000 30%

$70,001 or more 33%

Other entities

Companies 28%

Complying trusts 33%

Resident Withholding Tax

  • The RWT rate on dividends is 33%
  • The company RWT rate on interest is 28%
  • Individuals can elect to have RWT on interest deducted at 10.5%, 17.5%, 30% or 33%
  • The non-declaration rate is 33%

Source www.ird.govt.nz

Matley May Update

Posted 10 months, 16 days ago by Maggie Waine    0 comments

Hi everyone!  It's been 2 months since our last newsletter, so thought we had better bug you again! :-)

This month's newsletter covers:

- The hazards of not paying PAYE

- Reverse mortgages

- Simplifying tax 

- Introducing our new Practice Manager

- Davids opinion on Foreign Trusts.

First up however, you may remember that David and Maggie are gearing up to add to their family.  This is due to happen this month so when making appointments with David, please bear in mind that your time may need to be flexible in case he has to dash away unexpectedly.  Maggie is still in the background working in and around her pregnancy (as you may have realised from emails etc) - so hopefully the interruptions to clients will be minimalistic.





An entrepreneur started a business involving employing a number of workers.  He deducted PAYE from wages but never remitted the money to the Inland Revenue.  The total amount came to $120,055.  He tried makin an arrangement to pay the tax but couldn't honour it.  His business failed.  IRD prosecuted.  The judge sentenced him to 14 months in jail, even though he pleaded guilty.  Why so severe?  Because the judge thought it would help deter others.  The taxpayer appealed.  Fortunately the High Court substituted 4 months home detention and 300 hours community service.  Clients who get into trouble with their business don't realise the seriousness of failing to pay PAYE.





Family Loans Limited has come up with an improvement to the common option recommended to avoid reverse mortgages.

Intra-family loans are generally seen as the better alternative but they can often have pitfalls if not managed correctly.

  • disputes between family members
  • people can lose their home
  • wills can be contested, and
  • family relationships can become strained

The solution is getting the loans documented so all members of the family, who have an interest in a family loan, can see what the position is at any time.

Family Loans Limited has created a register.  It will provide:

  • standard loan documentation that complies with the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) code of standards;
  • registration of the security for the protection of all parties,
  • monitoring the loans until settlement, and
  • online loan statements for the borrower and lenders and their respective accountants and lawyers.

For more information go to www.familyloans.co.nz





An officials' issues paper, "Making tax simpler - Better business tax", has been released on the 16 measures proposed by the Government.  One of the proposals, the Accounting Income Method (AIM), is the subject of a more detailed discussion through an online forum.  The 16 measures are as follows:

  • increasing the current $50,000 residual income tax limit for use of money interest (UOMI) to $60,000 for individuals and non-individuals
  • removing UOMI interest for the first two provisional tax payments for all taxpyers who use the uplift method
  • allowing businesses to us the Accounting Income Method (AIM) to pay provisional tax through their accounting software (applies from 1 April 2016)
  • allowing companies to pay tax on behalf of shareholders (applied from 1 April 2016)
  • allowing contractors to elect their own withholding rate
  • permitting voluntary withholding agreements
  • extending withholding tax to labour-hire firms.
  • no longer imposing incremental late payment penalties on future GST, provisional tax, income tax and Working for Families Tax Credits (WfFTC) debt
  • sharing tax information with the Companies Office about serious offences
  • simplifying FBT for close companies
  • simplifying deduction calculations for dual use vehicles and premises
  • increasing thresholds for adjustments in subsequent returns
  • removing the requirement to renew RWT exemption certificates annually
  • increasing the threshold for annual FBT returns from $500k to $1m of PAYE/ESCT, and
  • modifying the 63-day rule on employee remuneration.




Further to our announcement in the January newsletter, we welcomed Neisha Comins to Matley Financial Services in April.  Neisha is a Chartered Accountant with Senior accounting experience in Public Practice. 

 Neisha is our Practice Manager and the objective of her role is to improve our  Operations system to support and compliment David’s current relationships and interactions with clients.  The end result is to exceed client expectations of communication and delivery of service.  If you have any feedback or suggestions, we encourage you to contact Neisha on 0800-MATLEY or via email, Neisha@matley.co.nz.  



FOREIGN TRUSTS – are they all that bad?

There has been a lot of media discussion around the use of Foreign Trusts in New Zealand and the stigma that they are all bad and that New Zealand is going to be tarnished with being a tax haven.  Well are they all that bad?  Remember no one has said they are illegal, its just rich people should pay tax, so sayith our egalitarian culture.

Let’s say for example that you were born in the United Kingdom and move to New Zealand.  Your parents, to assist you in your new venture to the antipodes, purchases a house for you to live in.  Let’s face it, with current exchange rates it only costs half the price in pounds as it does in NZ dollars!  To ensure that any new partner you find does not capitalize on the increase in property values your parents decide to put the property into Trust with you as the beneficiary and their NZ appointed lawyer firm as the Trustee.  This is now a Foreign Trust.

Further, you now met your significant other and they move in.  Your parent’s feel that rent should be paid.  Yes the trust is still a foreign trust, but now the Trust must pay tax on the earnings generated in New Zealand.  This is a good thing – but remember Foreign trusts are bad!

Another scenario – I leave on my OE and go to South America (perhaps keeping away from Panama for the purpose of this exercise) and meet a nice Brazilian girl.  She comes from a family that have invested wisely over the years and have significant resources.  We marry (yes it is still very much a good Catholic country) and return to New Zealand.  We have children.  My (now) Brazilian wife’s family send money over to help pay for the grandchildren’s education and perhaps buy a house for them to come and live at when they visit.  They decide to put these assets into trust and name my wife as the Trustee.  Yes that is a foreign trust, how terrible!

There are cases where Foreign trusts will be abused, but there are also cases where they are legitimately and genuinely used for family and commercial arrangements that benefit the New Zealand economies.  Foreign trusts must pay tax on income generated in New Zealand.  And even if New Zealand is seen as a tax haven, is that such a bad thing?

Some well known tax havens are Monaco, Switzerland & Luxembourg (there are around several Island’s throughout the Caribbean).  Monaco has a population of less than 40,000 people, has a GDP of $78,700 per person and the average life expectancy of 90 and is focused on banking services and tourism (Monte Carlo).  Switzerland has a population of 8million, a GDP of $59,150 per person and major economic base is manufacturing and head quarters of major corporations.  Luxembourg has a population of 563,000 a GDP of $100,991 per person and banking and finance is it’s focus (it is the second largest investment fund service after the US).

By contrast New Zealand has 4.7 million people, a GDP of $36,950 and an economy that focuses on primary production.  Political commentary has been made about New Zealand getting economic parity with Australia (GDP is $47,318).  Perhaps there is a case to suggest based on the tax haven scenarios, that we should foster this status to become a banking, finance and service centre.  After all no one is baying for the blood of Monaco, Switzerland & Luxembourg.  Perhaps that is because they ignore everyone and just carry on doing what they do and don’t worry about the little storms in the teacup??? 

March Newsletter

Posted 1 year ago by Maggie Waine    0 comments

Wow - we are approaching the end of Financial Year for 2016 already! I'm sure that I was only just recovering from the New Year and Christmas rush last week....

This newsletter covers the following topics:

- Fixed Pricing Agreements with Matley Financial Services

- Explaining the TPP - without the use of sex toys.

- Proposed tax legislation changes for the 2018 year.



 Last year in June we gave an opportunity to clients to have their accounting fees paid under a fixed pricing agreement (FPA).  The Fixed Pricing Agreement is an averaging out of the last three years paid for compliance accounting and is set as being the fee and is paid off over a 12 month period.  Under a FPA the pricing to complete the compliance of your business requirements is set at the agreed fee with a 5% adjustment each year to reflect the rising costs of business.

 What this means is that you know for certain what your compliance costs are going to be and allows for better cash flow with paying it over a 12 month period.

 As we move into the 1 April being the beginning of the new financial year for a number of clients, we are making this opportunity available to those clients who did not take up the FPA option last year.  If you are interested in this, please notify the office and on the 1 April 2016 we will enter into a FPA for you for the 2016/2017 financial year.

 Please contact the office if you are interest in taking up this opportunity.


THE TPPA EXPLAINED - (the sex toy absent version.....)

- source Institute of Directors


Tariffs on New Zealand exports to TPP countries will be eliminated, apart from beef exports to Japan (which will reduce from 38.5% to 9%) and a number of dairy exports to the US, Japan, Mexico and Canada.

Once fully implemented the TPP is expected to save $259 million a year in tariffs for New Zealan exporters.


The Government says consumers will no pay more for subsidised medicines as a result of TPP.

The PHARMAC medican-buying model has been preserved by with some administrative changes, eg setting a timeframe for considering funding applications and establishing a review process for funding applications declined by PHARMAC.

Intellectual Property

The TPP harmonises intellectual property rules across the member countries.  New Zealand has a 50-year copyright period but half the TPP countries (and almost all OECD countries) have a 70-year period.  Under the TPP New Zealand will have to move to a 70-year period - but can do this gradually over 20 years.  Over the long term the change is expected to cost New Zealand around $55 million a year.

Overseas Investment

The TPP includes protections for New Zealand parties investing offshore and for foreign investors in New Zealand.

It increases the threshold for approval from $100 million to $200 million in relation to the business experience and good character test for foreign investors investing in significant business assets.

Carve outs include continued screening of foreign purchases of sensitive land, including farmland through the Overseas Investment Office and require that these meet a 'benefit to New Zealand' test.

Investment Disputes

It contains provisions to protect private investor rights in member countries so they are not violated by state action.  It allows private parties to go to arbitration and seek compensation for a breach of a TPP investment obligation.  MFAT says this is a high hurdle and unlikely to be breached if governments act in good faith, for legitimate public policy reasons, follow a proper process and don't discriminate on the basis of natiionality.

New Zealand has similar provisions in other international agreements, including the China FTA.  To date, no cases of arbitration have been taken pursuant to these agreements.

The reason behind the throwing of inappropriate objects.....

As a trading nation supporters of the agreement say New Zealand cannot simply afford to be 'outside the tent' in such a deal.  Opponents claim it will restrict our sovereignty and ability to look after our environment and other areas of public interest as some provisions are seen as restricting New Zealand's ability to take decisions in the national interest.

The implications for Maori interests have been a concern about the TPP.  According to MFAT, nothing in TPP will prevent the Crown from taking measure that it deems necessary to meet its obligations to Maori, including under the Treaty of Waitangi.



Thankfully the IRD have imposed some common sense when they have put out an official issues paper recently.  It proposes that from the 2018 tax year (1 April 2017 to 31 March 2018) there will be changes in the legislation that allows for:

  • Shareholders that can be paid both provisional tax and PAYE salaries.  Up to about 4 years ago there was a view that the PAYE deducted shareholding could represent two thirds as a minimum of the total income.  Therefore if you received $40,000 on PAYE the top up under shareholder salary would need to be at least one third of that - ie $20,000 or greater.  The rule changed that if you were on PAYE deducted salary you were not able to do any further shareholder salaries that would make you subject to the provisional tax regime.  It appears that IRD have now seen sense and recognised that for a lot of clients, putting working shareholders on PAYE is to allow for the calculation of tax on an even basis and with the odd top up depending on the profitability of the company during that financial year.  However we should note that the way that Kiwisaver is written that any additional salaries would likely result in a further 3% Kiwisaver payment to be made.


  • One of the difficulties when we are dealing with companies is that if any income is retained it is taxed at 28%.  However dividends are required to have imputation credits of 33% on them which means that there has been a 5% dividend withholding payment.  There is an option in the discussion paper to remove the DWT when interest and dividends are paid to shareholders.  What this means is that if you have a $100,000 profit for the company, and pay tax of $28,000 a dividend can be paid to the taxpayers with the imputation credits at 28% removing the necessity and put the extra $5,000 DWT on the dividend.  This will reduce down the compliance moving forward of small to medium sized companies where there is a requirement to pay DWT on individual dividends as it is effectively the owners receiving that income.


  • The third amendment to the issues paper is the deduct DWT on fully imputed dividends between companies.  This is in effect passing the dividend from company A to company B which is involved with a holding company then there is no DWT required in that transaction.

Welcome to the New Year!

Posted 1 year, 2 months ago by Maggie Waine    0 comments

Happy New Year everyone!  We hope that you had a safe and happy Christmas and New Year and are ready to launch into 2016.

There are a few important changes and updates that are going on in this newsletter, so please take a look through.


If you have a Limited liability company which we administer for you, you will be aware that these costs are direct debited from your account as we are invoiced directly from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.  This year is no different.  Prior to any payment being taken from your account, we will establish the places of birth and birth dates for all Directors of the company, find out if there are any address changes and/or share changes and then file the return for another year.  The cost remains the same at $100 +GST per company.  This covers our cost to obtain the information and draw up current minutes to ensure that your company is compliant as per NZ law.

If you do not wish to pay by direct debit, you are more than welcome to file your annual return through the website of the Companies Office at www.business.govt.nz/companies.  This is only $45 which you pay at the time of completing the return.  You just need to ensure that you have minutes on file for that year.


There are a few staffing changes that will be happening with Matley Financial Services as mentioned last year.  The first major one which will positively impact client service and contact is that we are employing a new Practice Manager.  Currently Maggie has this job description, however she is more involved with the administration side of the business (added to that she will be on maternity leave from the end of May so will be preoccupied elsewhere).  This new staff member that we are taking on has senior accounting experience and will be the key support person to David.  Our new staff member will be starting with Matley in April 2016 and will be taking a leading role in helping to guide the company forward and improve and extend our services that we currently offer to clients.  We will be able to provide more information on our new team addition once they start with us.

Maggie’s new job description will change to Practice Administrator and she will continue with her current work in the administration, payroll and accounts receivable side of things.


- IntelliConnect Tracker November 16, 2015

The introduction of the Taxation (Residential Land Withholding Tax GST on Online Services and Student Loans) Bill (93-1) proposes a new tax named residential land withholding tax (RLWT).  The objective of the RLWT is to act as a collection mechanism for the new bright-line test, which would require income tax to be paid on any gains from the disposal of residential land that is acquired and disposed of within two years, subject to some exemptions.

Proposals for the RLWT were consulted on in an officials' issues paper, "Residential land withholding tax", released in August 2015.

It is proposed that RLWT is payable from 1 July 2016, in the same circumstances as bright-line residential land income, except there is no "main home" exemption.  Because the focus of RLWT is on New Zealand residential land sold by offshore persons, a main home exemption is a compliance cost of marginal use.  There will be an exemption for disposals of inherited property, as well as relief for relationship property.

An "offshore person" includes all non-New Zealand Citizens and non-permanent residents.  It also includes a New Zealand citizen who is living overseas if they have been overseas for the last three years.  A holder of a New Zealand residence class visa may be an offshore person if they are outside New Zealand and have not been in New Zealand within the last 12 months.  New Zealand trusts and companies may also be "offshore persons" if there are significant offshore interests in them.

The obligation to pay RLWT will primarily be the vendor's conveyancing agent.  A conveyancing agent provides conveyancing services as defined in the Lawyers and Conveyancers At 2006. If the vendor does not have a conveyancing agent, the obligation to pay RLWT will be on the purchaser's conveyancing agent.  In the absense of either, the obligation to pay RLWT will be on the purchaser themselves.  If the vendor and purchaser are associated persons, the purchaser will be the person who is primarily liable for the payment of RLWT.

The amount of RLWT required to be withheld will be the lower of:

  • 33% (28% if the vendor is a company) x (current purchase price - vendor's acquisition cost), and
  • 10% x the current purchase price

RLWT will be paid before other disbursements are made at the time of settlement.  If the vendor's conveyancing agent is required to pay RLWT, this will be paid after the amount required to discharge the vendor's mortgage obligation with a New Zealand registered bank or non-bank deposit take licensed under the Non-bank Deposit Takers Act 2013.  If this would result in insufficient funds being available to pay RLWT, the amount of RLWT payable will be restricted to the difference between the current purchase price and the amount required to discharge the New Zealand mortgage.

The person required to withhold must pay the required amount to the Commissioner of Inland Revenue.

The proposed RLWT is not a final withholding tax.  The vendor will be able to claim a tax credit for the amount of RLWT withheld and paid to the Commissioner against their final income tax liability in relation to the sale of the residential property.  In some cases, this may result in a tax refund.



The amendments proposed in the Bill apply GST to cross-border "remote" services and intangibles supplied by offshore suppliers (including e-books, music, videos and software purchased from offshore websites) to New Zealand-resident consumers, by requiring the offshore supplier to register and return GST on these supplies.  The proposed amendments follow proposals outlined in the discussion document, "GST: Cross-border services, intangibles, and goods" released in August 2015.

Currently, GST is not collected on cross-border services and intangibles that are purchased from offshore suppliers.

The amendments are intended to maintain the broad base of New Zealand's GST system and create a level playing field between domestic and offshore suppliers of services and intangibles.

GST is also not collected on low-value imported goods that are below the "de minimis" threshold (typically goods below the value of NZ$400).  The Bill does not impact the collection of GST on these goods.  Instead the measures in the Bill are intended to be the first step in the process of collecting GST on overseas purchases.

Although this is an important issue for New Zealand retailers, the Government is not willing to move unreasonable cost or inconvenience on to consumers.  For this reason, Customs has been asked to work through a number of logistical issues with stakeholders and is expected to release a consultation document in April 2016 that will seek public feedback on the practical implications of options to streamline the collection of duty, including GST, on low-value imported goods.

The main features of the proposals are as follows:

  • Offshore suppliers of services would be required to register and return GST on remote services purchased by New Zealand-resident consumers.
  • To ensure compliance costs are minimised, offshore suppliers will not be required to return GST on supplies to New Zealand GST-registered businesses, nor will they be required to provide tax invoices.
  • Offshore suppliers would be required to register and return GST if their supplies of services to New Zealand residents exceed NZ$60,000 in a 12-month period.
  • A broad definition of "remote" services is proposed, which includes both digital services (such as video, music and software downloads) and more traditional services (such as legal and accounting services received remotely).
  • In some situations, an electronic marketplace may be required to register instead of the principal offshore supplier.

The proposed rules will come into force on 1 October 2016.

The proposed amendments are consistent with the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) International VAT/GST Guidelines, and broadly follow the rules that apply in other jurisdictions, such as Member States of the European Union, Norway, South Korea, Japan, Switzerland and South Africa.  Australia has announced plans to introduce similar rules that will apply from 1 July 2017.

Source: www.taxpolicy.ird.govt.nz



- IntelliConnect Tracker 22 September 2015

Trustees’ failure to act in good faith leads to removal and liability despite exemption clause, 22 September 2015

The recent case of Lee v Torrey [2015] NZHC 2135 considers the obligations of trustees of a discretionary trust. Both of the trustees (one of whom was a beneficiary) of the PD Lee Trust (the Trust) failed to act in good faith and displayed no moral concern to provide for other beneficiaries of the trust which resulted in depletion of the Trust account funds. The exemption clause in the Trust deed did not protect the trustees from liability. The trustees were removed, replaced by the Public Trust and ordered to make good the loss to the Trust.


The Trust was originally settled by the late Ms Pamela Dawn Lee (Ms Lee), who died on 2 June 2007. The first plaintiff (Matthew Lee) is one of two of her sons both of whom lived for a significant period of their lives with their maternal grandmother. The evidence suggests that the deceased’s relationship was not good with her own mother or her other son, Brennan.

The original trustees of the Trust (settled on 16 June 2005), were the deceased herself and the first defendant, Ms Donna Torrey (now Ms Donna Folwell). On 20 June 2005, Ms Lee made her last will and named Ms Folwell together with Dianne Franich as the executors and trustees of the estate. In addition, the will gave Ms Folwell the power to appoint a new trustee or trustees to the PD Lee Trust.

On 16 January 2006, Ms Folwell retired as trustee of the Trust. This was done by way of a deed signed by Ms Folwell, the deceased and the proposed new corporate trustee, PAG Trustee Ltd, whose sole director and shareholder was the deceased’s solicitor. As noted by Faire J:

“Of some significance in this case is that upon Ms Folwell retiring as trustee, the deceased made no change to her will … the will gave Ms Folwell the power to appoint a new trustee or trustees to the PD Lee Trust. The resulting position was that at the time of the deceased’s death, Ms Folwell was not a trustee of the PD Lee Trust (and had not been for approximately 18 months) but had the power to appoint herself and anyone else as a trustee, as well as the power to remove any existing trustees [12].”

Apart from a vehicle and personal chattels, the estate had a value of $43,427.01. On 4 November 2007, Ms Folwell advised that she intended to retire the solicitors’ trustee company as a trustee of the Trust and appoint herself and the second defendant (William Folwell), her husband, as replacement trustees. In proceeding with this, she was exercising a power of appointment given to her under the deceased’s will. In evidence, one of the trustees of the estate, Ms Franich, said that she retired as an executrix and trustee of the estate on 7 December 2007. The balance then standing in the Trust’s bank account was $169,312.35 which by 2 January 2008 had increased to $171,082.28. It was accruing interest of approximately $860 per month.

By March 2008, the balance in the Trust account had been reduced to $533.89 due to a number of distributions the trustees had made to themselves, other beneficiaries and an investment in an Internet scam. In evidence, the defendants admitted that they did not keep accounts or make tax returns for the trust. They also did not keep a record of the distributions they made to themselves or how that money was spent.

In the course of the proceedings, the Trustees acknowledged that they should be replaced, that the investment in the Internet scam was inappropriate and accepted that their performance as trustees was poor (particularly in relation to record keeping and accounts). In their defence they argued that there had been no direction by the settlor as to how they should exercise their discretion in making distributions under the Trust and that they were entitled to an exemption from liability pursuant to the exemption clause in the trust deed.

High Court

The High Court noted that:

“In this case, the deed of trust gives the trustees absolute power of discretion. It identifies three discretionary beneficiaries, and does not provide any guidance on how the trustees should exercise their power of discretion. As established above, the Court must not intervene to direct the trustees how they should exercise their discretion. This of course stems from the fact that a discretionary beneficiary only has a mere expectation but not actual interest in the trust’s property. Any intervention must be limited to an examination of the trustees’ actions. The first plaintiff, as an aggrieved discretionary beneficiary, must show that the trustees did not act honestly or in good faith … [106].”

In light of the above, the High Court examined the defendants distributions from the Trust, namely, the withdrawal of $80,433 for their personal use and the $26,120 of the trust’s money they spent on the Internet scam and concluded that the defendants acted in bad faith in relation to these two major distributions from the trust [108],[110]. Further, the High Court found that the nature of these breaches of trust was the breach by the defendants of the rule against self-dealing [123],[124].

Faire J also held that the trustees could not rely on the liability exclusion provision in the trust deed and said:

“Where the trustees have breached a duty that is fundamental to the concept of trust, they cannot rely on a liability exclusion provision in the trust deed [127] and … it has already been found that the defendants breached their duty to act in good faith. As a result, they cannot rely on cl 16.1 to avoid their liability to the trust. [127],[129].”

The High Court ordered that the defendants make good the loss their actions caused to the Trust, removed them as trustees and replaced them with the Public Trust.




Xero Price Changes



- IntelliConnect Tracker, 22 October 2015

Taxation Bright-line Bill reported back, 22 October 2015

On 20 October 2015, the Finance and Expenditure Committee reported back to Parliament on the Taxation (Bright-line Test for Residential Land) Bill (59-2). The Bill was introduced to Parliament on 24 August 2015.

The Bill proposes amendments to the Income Tax Act 2007 and the Tax Administration Act 1994. It introduces a “bright-line” test, requiring income tax to be paid on any gains from the sale of residential land that is bought and sold within two years, with some exceptions. (A bright-line test is a term used in law for a clearly-defined rule or standard, using objective factors, which is designed to produce predictable and consistent results.)

A person’s main home would generally be exempt. There would also be exemptions for inherited property, and for property transferred under a relationship property agreement. Under some circumstances, trusts would qualify for the main home exemption. In relation to the exemption for trusts the Bill as reported from the Finance and Expenditure Committee notes and recommends as follows:

Exemption for trusts

Clause 6 provides that a trustee of a trust could generally use the main home exclusion from the bright-line rule if the property was the main home of a trust beneficiary.

They could not do so in some situations, for example if the principal settlor of the trust (that is, the person who had put the most money into the trust) owned a different main home.

We recommend some amendments in clause 6 (new section CB 16A(1)(b) and (3)) and clause 15(11B) to clarify aspects of this ‘principal settlor’ rule.”

The bright-line test would apply only to residential land. Farmland and business premises would remain subject to existing land sale rules, which make gains from sale taxable in certain circumstances. The bright-line test would supplement the existing “intention” test in s CB 6 of the Income Tax Act 2007, which makes gains from the sale of land taxable if the land was bought with an intention to resell.

The new test will apply to sales of property acquired on or after 1 October 2015.

The Bill is the second in a three-part package of reforms to the rules for taxation of residential land. The reforms are designed to ensure that those who buy residential property with the intention of selling for capital gain, including overseas speculators, pay their fair share of tax.

Royal assent has recently been given to the first part of these reforms: the Land Transfer Amendment Act 2015 and the Tax Administration Amendment Act 2015.

Public consultation has taken place on proposals for a potential third Bill, which would impose a withholding tax on sellers of New Zealand residential property who live overseas (see the officials’ issues paper, “Residential land withholding tax” at www.taxpolicy.ird.govt.nz).

Source: www.taxpolicy.ird.govt.nz 




SPCA donations



- 7 December 2015

"We’re continuing to focus on compliance in the construction industry, and I wanted to let you know that some of your clients in the construction industry may soon receive a letter or email from us regarding their obligations to declare all cash jobs in their GST and income tax returns.

 While you may not have any clients in the construction industry it is worth noting that the messages apply to anyone that does jobs for cash.

 You also have an important role to play with helping your clients meet their obligations."

If you have any questions about this, please contact us at the office and we can assist you.

More Recent Posts

Merry Christmas

November Update - Last one for 2015!

September Newsletter

July Update

May Machinations

A Personal Message from David and Maggie

Please Be Patient

March Madness

New Year, New Start, New Resolutions to break......

End of year already!

Please read this - Matley email problem

New Arrival

November/December - Have you fulfilled your 2013 New Year Resolutions?

For Banklink Clients Only

Direct Debit Facility Now Available!

Matley Update - July 2013

March - End of Financial Year :-)

Far Out, its February!

Noteworthy November!

New Hamilton Office

Hamilton Office Move

August Update

June Update

March Madness!!