A new era of thin capitalisation rules. On 29 May 2025, the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) released Draft PCG 2025/D2 - a practical compliance guideline that reshapes how inbound, cross-border related-party financing arrangements are assessed under Australia’s thin capitalisation and transfer pricing rules.
This follows the Treasury Laws Amendment (Making Multinationals Pay Their Fair Share — Integrity and Transparency) Act 2024, which significantly tightens the rules around how much debt a multinational can allocate to its Australian operations.
What the draft guideline covers
The guideline provides a risk-based framework to help taxpayers determine whether their related-party debt levels are consistent with arm’s length conditions. It introduces:
- Risk zones (White, Green, Blue, Red) to classify financing arrangements.
- A focus on debt quantum, not just interest rates.
- A requirement to justify the commercial rationale for the level of related-party debt.
- Emphasis on documentation, including group policies, funding alternatives, and serviceability metrics.
What this means for Australian taxpayers
1. More scrutiny, more substance
Taxpayers can no longer rely solely on pricing benchmarks. The ATO now expects a holistic justification for the amount of debt, including:
- Why the debt is needed
- Whether equity or internal funds were viable alternatives
- How the debt aligns with group-wide policies
2. Arm’s length capital structure is key
The ATO will assess whether your capital structure—not just your interest rate—is consistent with what an independent party would agree to. This shifts the burden to taxpayers to model and defend their debt levels.
3. Risk zones drive audit focus
The color-coded risk zones help taxpayers self-assess their exposure. Falling into the Red Zone could trigger audits or adjustments. Staying in the Green or White Zones may reduce compliance risk.
4. Documentation is no longer optional
Robust, contemporaneous documentation is essential. This includes:
- Financial models
- Board papers
- Internal funding policies
- Evidence of third-party comparables
Comparison: Old Safe Harbour rules vs. PCG 2025/D2
Feature | Old Safe Harbour rules | New PCG 2025/D2 |
Debt limit | 60% of assets Safe Harbour) | No fixed ratio – must justify debt quantum |
Focus | Interest rate and debt level | Commercial rationale for amount of debt |
Arm's length debt amount | Discretionary use of Arm’s Length Debt Test | Thin Capitalisation Rules apply broader arm’s length conditions |
Risk zones | Not applicable | Yes – White (low), Green, Blue, Red (high) |
Documentation | Minimal under Safe Harbour | Extensive – models, policies, board papers |
Audit risk | Low if within 60% threshold | High if in Red Zone or poorly documented |
Strategic takeaways for CFO s and business leaders
1. Reassess capital structure
Evaluate your current financing arrangements, especially if they involve related-party debt, to ensure they align with evolving compliance expectations.
2. Substance over form
Go beyond interest rates. Clearly articulate the commercial rationale for borrowing, including why debt was chosen over equity or internal funding.
3. Scenario planning
Develop and document alternative funding models to demonstrate that your capital structure reflects arm’s length conditions.
4. Proactive advisory engagement
Collaborate early with tax, legal, and financial advisors to prepare for the finalisation of PCG 2025/D2 and potential ATO scrutiny.
5. Documentation discipline
Maintain robust, contemporaneous documentation including board papers, financial models, and group funding policies to support your position.
6. Risk zone self-assessment
Use the ATO’s risk zone framework (White, Green, Blue, Red) to evaluate your exposure and take corrective action where needed.
Next steps
The draft is open for public comment until 30 June 2025. Taxpayers should consider submitting feedback, especially if the guidance creates uncertainty or compliance burdens.