Ahhh Mike. Yes that's a good example of an area requiring advice before touching it with a barge pole. It doesn't seemingly fail the sole purpose test and can often be passive income. Maybe not a business on the face of it. Maybe inhouse, maybe not. However the complication can be the non-arms length income concern which is not a super issue at all. The law that concerns this is income tax. (s295-550 ITAA97)
The issue with all SMSF / Super issues is that the ITAA97 is a defacto set of tax penalties. ie non-complying, non-arms length etc...
That's why I always suggests don't touch business income in a SMSF without specific tax advice. Too often too many assume "maybe" means its all OK for them. My rule is never do it until you get advice. Nobody should get the view wrong. Its blunt sure. Its sometimes wrong but until someone gets advice from you, me or another adviser its a great rule to follow.
The issue with all SMSF / Super issues is that the ITAA97 is a defacto set of tax penalties. ie non-complying, non-arms length etc...
That's why I always suggests don't touch business income in a SMSF without specific tax advice. Too often too many assume "maybe" means its all OK for them. My rule is never do it until you get advice. Nobody should get the view wrong. Its blunt sure. Its sometimes wrong but until someone gets advice from you, me or another adviser its a great rule to follow.