Evidence for land tax foreign surcharge large developer exemption application
These guidelines detail the evidence and documents you need when applying for the land tax foreign surcharge exemption as a large developer.
Large developers undertaking residential land development may be eligible for an exemption from the land tax foreign surcharge (LTFS) for liability arising on or after 30 June 2026.
A separate exemption is available for landholders undertaking commercial activities that make a significant contribution to Queensland.
The public ruling on the large developer exemption (GEN012) sets out the administrative arrangement, including an explanation of terminology and requirements. The information and examples below are the Commissioner of State Revenue’s guidelines on the general information you need when applying for the exemption.
- These guidelines provide general information and do not override the ruling.
- Each application is considered on a case-by-case basis.
- An incomplete application may cause delays in determining your eligibility for the exemption.
- Where possible, we’ll use the information we have but may request additional information from you.
Eligibility
We will generally consider the facts and circumstances as at the date of liability for LTFS (30 June each year for the following financial year) as well as the 12 months before the liability date of the financial year for which the entity is seeking the exemption. For instance, if the entity is seeking an exemption for the 2026–27 financial year, you need to provide information and evidence regarding the facts and circumstances from 1 July 2025 to 30 June 2026 (i.e. land owned by the entity as of 30 June 2026). There may be exceptions to this, such as when averaging may apply
You need to provide evidence that you have satisfied certain conditions.
You must prove that you meet:
- Australian-based requirements
- Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB) requirements
- regulatory requirements
- large developer requirements
- size and scale of commercial activities.
General requirements
See the public ruling (GEN012) for the full list of defined terms.
An entity is individual or a company registered under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cwlth).
For an LTFS exemption, the entity would be a landowner that is considered a foreign company or a trustee of a foreign trust for land tax purposes.
Where a landowner is a trustee acting in a nominee or custodian capacity for regulatory compliance purposes, the nominee or custodian will be looked through and eligibility for the exemption will be determined by reference to the activities of the next-level trustee.
Corporate group tracing is available for most of the eligibility requirements in the ruling.
For the purposes of corporate group tracing:
- A parent entity is an entity that directly owns at least 90% of the issued shares in and has voting control over another entity.
- A subsidiary entity (first entity) is one in which another entity directly owns at least 90% of issued shares and has voting control over the first entity.
- Voting control means that an entity is in a position to cast, or control the casting of, 90% or more of the maximum votes that can be cast at a general meeting of a company (other than under a debenture or trust deed securing the issue of a debenture).
- All parent and subsidiary entities constitute a corporate group.
- Each entity within the corporate group is a group entity.
The circumstances and activities of a group entity can be taken into account when considering whether relevant requirements are satisfied. Where this happens, the entity is referred to as a relevant group entity.
Supporting documentation to evidence the relevant group entity and relevant corporate group includes:
- a corporate structure diagram of the corporate group confined to entities that are directly connected by at least 90% share-ownership and voting control (including identifying the entity seeking the exemption and the other group entities)
- ASIC records confirming the entity’s connection with the parent entity that directly owns at least 90% of its shares and any other entity being relied on via corporate group tracing, in the 12 months before the liability date.
Example: Corporate group connected by 90% or more shareholding and voting control
SPV A (the Applicant) has applied for an LTFS exemption for land it owns as at 30 June 2026 (the liability date). SPV A does not meet the Australian-based requirements at the liability date, except for having an Australian head office and Australian principal place of business.
However, Subsidiary 2 (Development B) has provided information to confirm that it is connected to SPV A through the other entities in the corporate group by way of 90% or more shareholding and voting control at the liability date. That is, as defined under the ruling:
- SPV A is the subsidiary of Bris Projects Co., which is the parent.
- Bris Projects Co. is also the parent of SPV B, making SPV B another subsidiary.
- SPV B is a parent of Subsidiary 1 (Development B), making it a subsidiary of SPV B.
- Subsidiary 1 (Development B) is a parent of Subsidiary 2 (Development B).
- SPV A, Bris Projects Co., SPV B, Subsidiary 1 (Development B) and Subsidiary 2 (Development B) are a relevant corporate group at the liability date.
Subsidiary 2 (Development B) has also provided information to confirm that it meets the Australian-based requirements as at the liability date.
On this basis, the Australian-based requirements for SPV A’s exemption application are met.
Example: Use of contractors to undertake development activities
SPV A (the Applicant) is the landholding entity and applicant. It is not undertaking any development in its own right, but is holding the land passively. Under the ruling:
- Oz Australia Co. is a parent of Oz Estates Co., making Oz Estates Co. a subsidiary.
- Oz Estates Co. is a parent of Bris Projects Co., making it a subsidiary.
- Bris Projects Co. is a parent of SPV A; which is a subsidiary.
- These entities constitute a relevant corporate group.
- Oz Australia Co. engages Development Pty Ltd to undertake residential development activities on SPV A’s land. Development Pty Ltd expects to build 100 residential lots within 6 months of the liability date.
- Development Pty Ltd is not part of the relevant corporate group. In particular, it is neither a parent or a subsidiary for Oz Australia Co., Oz Estates Co., Bris Projects Co. or SPV A.
Given that Development Pty Ltd is not part of the relevant corporate group, its development activities on SPV A’s land cannot be counted.
Example: Contributions not considered
XYZ Pty Ltd is holding land in Queensland in its capacity as a trustee of a trust. The beneficiaries of the trust are 3 unit holders, each one a corporation that operates independently of each other.
Two of the unit holders have entered into commercial agreements on behalf of all unit holders with a third party, LTF Pty Ltd, to use the land for property development purposes in the relevant period. LTF’s employees oversee the property development activities on the land, including engaging with contractors and suppliers.
As part of its application for a large developer exemption, XYZ submits that LTF’s development activities satisfy the large developer requirements under the ruling.
However, these are not activities of the landholding entity, XYZ. No other entity owns at least 90% of the shares in XYZ and XYZ does not have any subsidiaries. As a result, XYZ cannot rely on any eligible parent or subsidiary to satisfy the large developer requirement. Only the activities of an entity that is directly connected to XYZ by way of at least 90% share-ownership and voting control can be considered.
Once an exemption from LTFS is approved, it applies to all of the entity’s taxable land in Queensland in respect of the financial year for which the exemption is sought. However, the exemption can continue to apply for subsequent financial years without the entity having to lodge a new application each year, provided certain conditions are met. For this to happen, the entity must lodge—at the beginning of each financial year—a statutory declaration confirming that no notifiable events have occurred and that the entity will remain eligible for the exemption.
See the public ruling (GEN012) for definition of ‘notifiable event’.
If the entity has been pre-approved or approved for an exemption and a notifiable event occurs, the entity must give notice of the event to QRO within 28 days after the event happens.
We have used future dates in these examples.
Example: Corporate group changes before liability arises
GFL Pty Ltd received pre-approval on 30 September 2026. Pre-approval was sought on 10 September 2026 for land GFL expects to hold on 30 June 2027.
GFL received pre-approval on the basis that a group entity, JJJ Pty Ltd, had been approved for the LTFS exemption previously. The evidence confirmed that JJJ was GFL’s parent at the time pre-approval was sought, owning 95% of the shares as well as 95% voting control in GFL.
On 1 January 2027, JJJ disposed of all of its shares and voting control in GFL. This means that JJJ is no longer a group entity. Consequently, GFL is required to notify the Commissioner of this change in the approved form. Furthermore, GFL may need to apply for pre-approval on a different basis or apply for the LTFS exemption without pre-approval when the liability for the LTFS arises on 30 June 2027.
Example: Corporate group changes after exemption is received but before development requirements have been satisfied
BBB Pty Ltd received the LTFS exemption for land it owned on 30 June 2027 on the basis that it was a large developer. As part of its application for the exemption, BBB submitted that its group entity, CCC Pty Ltd, would build 30 residential lots on the land between 1 July 2027 and 30 June 2028.
In obtaining the LTFS exemption, it was confirmed that BBB was CCC’s parent in the 12-month period leading up to, and on, 30 June 2027, on the basis that BBB owned 95% of the shares as well as 95% voting control in CCC.
On 1 January 2028, BBB disposed of all of its shares and voting control in CCC, meaning that CCC is no longer a group entity. CCC had only constructed 10 residential lots when this change arose.
Consequently, BBB is required to notify the Commissioner of this change in the approved form. Furthermore, unless any additional developments or other qualifying criteria apply, BBB is likely to need to repay the amount of LTFS exemption received.
Example: Development requirements not met after exemption applied
DDD Pty Ltd received the LTFS exemption for land it owned on 30 June 2027 on the basis that it was a large developer. As part of its application for the exemption, DDD submitted that it would build 25 residential lots on the land between 1 July 2027 and 30 June 2028.
During this period, DDD rearranged its affairs, and limited its development to 15 residential lots. DDD continued to maintain possession of the land.
Consequently, DDD is required to notify the Commissioner of this change in the approved form. Furthermore, unless any additional developments or other qualifying criteria apply, DDD is likely to need to repay the amount of LTFS exemption received.
An entity can apply for pre-approval of the large developer exemption for a financial year if one of the following applies:
- The entity has previously been approved or pre-approved for the large developer exemption or an exemption from additional foreign acquirer duty (AFAD); or for AFAD or LTFS ex gratia relief under the relevant rulings.
- A group entity in a corporate group has been approved for the large developer exemption while a member of the group, and the entity is the parent or a subsidiary of the group entity when the liability for land tax arises.
If pre-approval is given, it will continue to apply until a notifiable event occurs.
A lot includes individual dwellings that are independently habitable by a single family unit and is not limited to the meaning of a lot under the Land Title Act 1994.
Land lease communities (LLCs) may meet the development requirements contemplated under the ruling. For these cases, we will generally look to see whether a requisite number of individual sites (each for a single dwelling) will be produced, rather than a requisite number of separately titled lots. Other examples of a lot may include:
- an independent living unit (ILU) in a retirement village
- a site in a residential park
- a dwelling in a built-to-rent (BTR) development (see section 58D of the Land Tax Act 2010).
- Prior pre-approval or approval. An entity is not eligible for the large developer exemption if it has been pre-approved or approved for the significant contributor exemption.
- Approval of build-to-rent (BTR) concession. An entity is not eligible for the large developer exemption if a concession from LTFS for an eligible BTR development has been applied to its land.
Australian-based requirements
Generally, evidence includes:
- details of a current ACN, ABN, Australian Registered Body Number (ARBN) or ASX listing and public details from other Australian regulators
- prospectus documents
- minutes of meetings
- corporate memoranda
- payroll data
- contracts
- quotes or invoices for Australian contractors and suppliers.
Depending on the specific requirement and facts and circumstances of the particular application, additional information should be provided.
Provide an ASIC historical extract showing the entity’s principal place of business and a copy of the entity’s lease or title documents showing the location of the head office or the principal place of business.
Generally, an accountant, solicitor or agent’s office address as evidence of the entity’s head office or principal place of business is not accepted.
If the address listed on ASIC is leased or owned by another entity, advise of the relationship between the entities.
Corporate group tracing is not available for this requirement.
Example: Entity does not have a principal place of business in Australia
XYZ Pty Ltd is seeking an exemption and has provided evidence by way of ASIC search that its principal place of business is in Australia. The address listed on ASIC is held by another entity who XYZ has stated is its accountant. XYZ has no other head office or principal place of business address for its business in Australia and has not provided any other evidence to prove that it has another address in Australia.
Because of this, XYZ has not established that it satisfies this requirement.
You’ll need to provide evidence of significant Australian management staff and office presence.
Significant management staff
Significant management staff (i.e. directors and managers) in Australia must be employed by the entity, or by a relevant group entity where corporate group tracing applies. The employment arrangements must exist at the time that liability arises.
- Entity directly employs significant management staff—evidence includes:
- a diagram of the entity’s organisational structure outlining the entity’s management staff in Australia
- information outlining how the management staff is engaged and the types of management functions they undertake in relation to the entity’s commercial activities
- evidence that the management staff is Australian-based, such as an ASIC extract or corporate documents
- corporate documents, such as
- any relevant management or service agreements
- prospectus, project documents, brochures or annual reports that outline the entity’s presence in Australia.
- Group entity in a relevant corporate group employs significant management staff—evidence includes:
- the name and ABN of this entity
- the entity’s ASIC historical extract
- a corporate structure diagram of the corporate group confined to group entities (including identifying the entity seeking the exemption and the employing relevant group entity)
- information confirming that these connections and arrangements occurred in the relevant period
- employment details and employment evidence such as examples of contracts, which confirm the arrangements and the periods in which they were entered into and operated for.
Significant office presence
Provide evidence the entity has significant office presence in Australia, including:
- the number of offices located in Australia
- the functions and activities being undertaken in the offices
- how those functions and activities relate to the entity’s commercial activities in Australia.
If the entity’s principal place of business address recorded with ASIC or other offices are leased or owned by another entity, also provide the details of the relationship between the entities.
If the address belongs to the entity’s solicitor or accountant for instance—and the entity does not have any other location for its business—it will likely not be considered to have a significant office presence in Australia unless alternative evidence to this effect can be provided.
Example A: The other entity is not a group entity
XYZ Pty Ltd is seeking an exemption and has only provided general statements that indicate that JFL Pty Ltd is providing management services for XYZ’s commercial activities in Australia. We request evidence supporting the connection between XYZ and JFL. XYZ responds with:
- ASIC records showing that JFL owns 60% of the shares in XYZ’s parent as well as other ASIC records for the relevant corporate group
- copies of a management agreement between XYZ and JFL
- information advising that the entities are part of the same corporate group.
XYZ’s parent directly owns at least 90% of the shares and has voting control in XYZ, but JFL does not directly own at least 90% of the shares in XYZ’s parent and does not have voting control in XYZ.
The management services JFL is providing XYZ cannot be considered when determining if this factor has been met, regardless of the presence of the management agreement.
Example B: The other entity is not a group entity
DOF Pty Ltd is seeking an exemption and only provided general statements about how it meets the significant management staff and office presence in Australia factor.
After an information request, DOF advises:
- It is connected to an entity called RLB Pty Ltd through a common director.
- RLB has engaged an unrelated management services business called YRW Pty Ltd.
- YRW is providing the management services in relation to the commercial activities on DOF’s land.
DOF also confirms that it does not employ directly. Its director—who is not an employee—provides some strategic oversight of DOF’s commercial affairs.
The connection between DOF and RLB is unable to be considered, because they are not group entities. Therefore, RLB’s arrangements—including its engagement with YRW—is unable to be considered towards DOF’s satisfaction of this factor.
Although DOF has a common director that may provide strategic oversight of the commercial activities on its land, it does not employ significant management staff directly, including their director.
Entity as employer—evidence includes:
- payroll data that identifies the total number of employees based in Australia and the number that are Australian citizens or permanent residents
- an employee register showing the residence of the employees and whether they are Australian citizens or permanent residents
- financial statements, such as profit and loss statements, confirming employee expenses
- a sample of employment contracts between the entity and its employees, as well as information confirming that the employees are Australian citizens or permanent residents.
Group entity as employer—evidence includes:
- the name and ABN of the employing entity
- the employing entity’s current ASIC historical extract
- a corporate structure diagram of the relevant corporate group that identifies the entity seeking the exemption and the employing entity
- information confirming that these connections and arrangements occurred in the 12 months prior to, and including, the liability date.
Example: Satisfies this factor with group entity
XYZ Pty Ltd is a property development company and is seeking an exemption for the 2026–27 land tax year. XYZ provides evidence confirming that:
- the employing entity in the relevant corporate group is DEF Pty Ltd
- DEF wholly and directly owns the shares in XYZ between 1 July 2025 and 30 June 2026
- DEF’s employees are Australian citizens.
Because of the information and evidence provided, XYZ would be considered to have satisfied this requirement as DEF can satisfy this requirement.
Entity carries on business in Australia—evidence includes:
- a list of business activities conducted in Australia in the last 5 years and evidence of this business activity
- evidence of expenditure on business activities, such as invoices from third parties relating to the supply of goods or services in the relevant period
- financial or corporate documents, such as
- annual reports
- profit and loss statements
- wage or salary expenditure
- strategic plans
- incurred and forecast expenditure
- other corporate documents outlining the above.
Group entity in a relevant corporate group carries on business in Australia—evidence includes:
- the name and ABN of this entity
- this entity’s current ASIC historical extract
- a corporate structure diagram of the relevant corporate group confined to group entities (including identifying the entity seeking the exemption and the entity carrying on the business)
- ASIC historical extracts of all group entities that traces the entity seeking the exemption to this entity via corporate group tracing
- information confirming that these connections and arrangements occurred in the 12 months before the liability date.
‘Primarily’ means chiefly or principally. Where decisions are made by multiple entities across different jurisdictions, an assessment must be made as to whether those decisions that are made by management or employees in Australia are the primary decisions about the entity’s business and operations in Australia. Generally, where more than 50% of decisions are made by management or employees in Australia, this would prima facie suggest that the requirement is satisfied. However, this is not an absolute rule, and the assessment must ultimately be made on a case-by-case basis, having regard to the nature and circumstances of relevant decisions.
Entity
To prove that the entity’s management or employees in Australia primarily make decisions about the entity’s business and operations in Australia, evidence includes:
- memoranda executed by or on behalf of the entity, stating the powers of the entity’s directors, managers and key personnel in relation to Australian participation
- organisational structure identifying location and responsibilities of staff involved in making strategic or key operational decisions
- copies of minutes from meetings conducted in Australia that show Australian decision making in the 12 months before the liability date. The meeting minutes must confirm the names of the people in attendance and the decisions being made by those people.
Group entity
To prove that the group entity’s management or employees in Australia primarily make decisions about the entity’s business and operations in Australia, evidence includes:
- the name and ABN of this entity
- this entity’s current ASIC historical extract
- a corporate structure diagram of the relevant corporate group confined to group entities (including identifying the entity seeking the exemption and the entity that conducts its commercial activities in Australia and primarily makes decisions about the entity’s business and operations in Australia)
- ASIC historical extracts of all group entities that trace the entity seeking the exemption to the relevant group entity via corporate group tracing
- information confirming that these connections and arrangements occurred in the 12 months prior to, and including, the liability date.
Example: Unlikely to satisfy this factor
XYZ Pty Ltd is seeking an exemption for the 2026–27 land tax year. It has stated that all important operational decisions are made by their chief financial controller, Mr Diamond. XYZ has provided evidence that confirms that Mr Diamond’s authority level to approve decisions is limited to administrative costs of no more than $10,000.
Other information provided by XYZ suggests that it is entering into multiple contracts with unrelated third parties for its retail business that are valued at greater than $5 million in the 2025–26 financial year.
Without further information or evidence, it is likely that Mr Diamond’s authority may not be sufficient for it to be considered that decisions about XYZ’s business and operations in Australia are primarily made by XYZ’s management and employees.
It is recommended that XYZ provide information about other arrangements it may be undertaking to satisfy this factor.
FIRB requirements
Where possible, we will attempt to assess whether Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB) requirements have been met by the information already available to us. If this is not possible, we will request supporting documentation from entities regarding their FIRB status.
You can provide relevant supporting documentation including:
- where approval was required, a copy of the entity’s FIRB approval or no objection document
- where approval was not required, the reasons why and any information from FIRB from the time of acquisition supporting these reasons
- where approval has not yet been received, a copy of the FIRB application (together with supporting documents)
- copies of any other correspondence with FIRB concerning the entity’s compliance
- details regarding how any previous non-compliance issues have been addressed.
Example: Insufficient information to satisfy this factor
In its application for an exemption, XYZ Pty Ltd advises that it does not know if it obtained (or was required to obtain) FIRB approval because the acquisition of the land was historical and internal records are not on file.
We do not have access to relevant documentation confirming XYZ’s FIRB status. We issue an information request to XYZ to provide evidence of either approval from FIRB or a no-objection certificate to the acquisition of the entity or the land.
Because XYZ does not have a copy of the letter or certificate available, it needs to contact FIRB to source a copy of relevant documentation.
Regulatory requirements
You will need to meet general regulatory requirements, including compliance under Queensland revenue laws.
We will assess whether legal and regulatory requirements have been met by the information already available to us. If this is not possible, we will request supporting documentation.
You can provide relevant supporting documentation when lodging your exemption application. Such information may include:
- a written statement confirming whether regulatory requirements in Australia (if applicable) or another relevant jurisdiction (if any) have been complied with
- where the entity or the group entity is listed on a stock exchange
- the stock exchange on which it is listed
- the name it is listed under
- any unique code used to identify the entity on the exchange
- the entity and the group entity’s financial or annual reports required to be lodged with ASIC or equivalent entity for the last 2 years (if the entity or the group entity has been registered for less than 2 years, provide a copy of the entity’s financial report and any other reports lodged)
- if the entity or the group entity is under the control of another entity, consolidated financial reports or annual reports of the controlling entity required to be lodged with ASIC (or equivalent entity) for the last 2 years
- evidence if relief from lodgement of financial reports has been granted by ASIC
- if the entity or the group entity is not registered with ASIC, any other documents (including financial reports or annual reports) for the last 2 years that the entity and the group entity is required to prepare by the law that applies in the entity’s place of origin. If any document is not in English, provide a certified translation of that document into English.
If you (the entity and/or the group entity) have had previous dealings with us, we will consider whether you have been subject to, or are currently dealing with, our audit or collection activity. To help with this process, you should provide any relevant QRO client numbers.
If any revenue laws have not been complied with, provide confirmation that any previous non-compliance issues have been addressed.
We may consider the entity’s and the group entity’s historical and current non-compliance.
If you have entered into a payment arrangement with us, this will not be treated as non-compliance provided you meet your responsibilities under the arrangement.
Example: Unpaid state tax liabilities
XYZ Pty Ltd is applying for an exemption and has advised that it complies with Queensland’s revenue laws, including lodging and paying all liabilities on time.
Records indicate that XYZ has outstanding unpaid state revenue liabilities spanning multiple financial years. A further search shows that it does not have an instalment plan in place to reconcile the outstanding debt.
We may ask XYZ to explain what actions or plans it will put in place to resolve the outstanding amount.
XYZ’s response—in addition to not voluntarily disclosing the outstanding amount or taking steps to reconcile the payment—will be considered when determining if it meets this requirement.
We have used future dates in this example.
Example: Subject of audit activity
ETF Pty Ltd has applied for an exemption for the 2026–27 land tax year. ETF submits that it has been consistently compliant with all Queensland revenue laws since it first registered for land tax on 1 January 2010. It has provided evidence that it has paid its land tax liabilities leading up to and including the 2026–27 land tax year, which was received on 30 April 2029.
Our records show that ETF has been subject to an audit relating to non-compliance for the 2027–28 financial year. This investigation determined that ETF had failed to disclose relevant landholdings for this period, which resulted in an incorrectly reduced land tax assessment. It was also found that ETF was uncooperative throughout the duration of the investigation, which contributed to the imposition of 25% penalty tax and no remission of full unpaid tax interest.
Even though this non-compliance occurred after the relevant period, it can still be considered when determining if ETF meets the regulatory requirement.
Large developer requirements
An entity must demonstrate that it is a large developer, either directly on its own or as part of an eligible corporate group.
If the large developer requirements are not satisfied, the entity may still be eligible for the large developer exemption if the entity or the relevant corporate group is approved as a large developer by the Commissioner.
The entity, or the relevant corporate group of which the entity is a group entity, must be a large developer.
A large developer is taken to be an entity, or a relevant corporate group, that undertakes development or redevelopment of 20 or more residential lots in Queensland in a relevant 12-month period, including the land the subject of the exemption. A relevant 12-month period is one of the years for which an LTFS exemption is sought.
Generally, we are looking to determine whether an entity will be creating the requisite number of lots for the purposes of residential development, and whether that development will occur in the relevant 12-month period. In determining whether 20 or more residential lots have been developed or redeveloped, averaging for up to 5 consecutive financial years is permitted.
Where an entity or the relevant corporate group is awaiting planning approval for land, the land will be taken to be used for development or redevelopment activity for 2 financial years starting from 1 July immediately following the date the entity became the owner of the land. This is provided the entity was exempt from AFAD under paragraph 8 of the ruling for the relevant transaction for the acquisition of the land.
Satisfying the test
You should describe how you are satisfying the test, including:
- where relevant, nominating an averaging period of up to 5 consecutive financial years
- identifying the developments or redevelopments undertaken or to be undertaken in the averaging period
- identifying the date each development or redevelopment is planned to commence and complete in the averaging period
- identifying the number of residential lots already produced, or to be produced, from each development or redevelopment and the date the residential lots were registered, or are expected to be registered, in the averaging period.
You will also need to provide information based on whether the lots will be created before or after the date of the application, including:
- for lots created before the date of application
- evidence identifying the land to be developed and its ownership
- Titles Queensland evidence of lot creation (which may include registered plans of subdivision for the lots or the registration confirmation statement for each lot)
- for lots to be created after the date of application
- evidence identifying the land to be developed and its ownership
- evidence of the total number of residential lots to be created, such as development plans, feasibility studies, council development approvals and the expected date for title registration.
If you propose to rely on developments by a relevant group entity, provide the following:
- the name and ABN of the other entity
- an up-to-date copy of the group entity’s current ASIC historical extract and evidence of voting control
- a corporate structure diagram of the relevant corporate group confined to group entities (including identifying the entity and the relevant group entity)
- information confirming that these connections and arrangements existed at material times, including the date of the liability
- information and evidence confirming the relevant group entity’s developments.
Five-year averaging methodology
The averaging period can only be for a period of up to 5 consecutive financial years and must include the year for which the exemption is sought. If it’s proposed to include previous lot productions as well as future lot productions as part of applying the large developer test, the lot productions must occur within the 5-year averaging period.
Generally, ‘completion’ means the date the lots were created, such as when the plan of subdivision for the land is registered (Titles Queensland evidence will be required). For developments such as LLCs or ILUs, certification as to the satisfaction of the development conditions may be used as an alternative for evidencing lot creation in these circumstances.
We have used future dates in these examples.
Example: Exemption application made before development approval
ASD Pty Ltd is seeking to satisfy the large developer test for land it owns as at 30 June 2026, and is proposing to develop 55 residential lots on it in the 2026–27 financial year. It does not have a development plan for the land or any development approval as yet.
We will require alternative evidence to confirm that the proposed development will proceed, including:
- a feasibility study
- draft development plans
- application documents for council approval and town planning advice.
Example: Land not acquired for development of residential lots
XYZ Pty Ltd has acquired residential land with no proposed development of residential lots planned on the subject land. XYZ is not able to obtain a large developer exemption because it is not developing or redeveloping the subject land into residential lots.
Example: Contributions not considered
ABC Pty Ltd operates as a land-holding entity on behalf of GPT Pty Ltd, a residential property development business that has a 70% ownership in ABC and 70% voting control. The remaining 30% share ownership and voting control is held by UTY Pty Ltd, an investment company. ABC has applied for the large developer exemption for the 2026–27 financial year.
ABC has entered into a developer management agreement with DEF Pty Ltd, a direct and wholly owned subsidiary of GPT that functions as the main operating and development entity for the GPT corporate group.
ABC is unable to demonstrate that it meets the large developer test in its own right. Because GPT does not own at least 90% of the issued shares and does not have at least 90% voting control in ABC, ABC is unable to rely on the development activities of DEF. Therefore, it’s unlikely that ABC will be able to satisfy this requirement.
Example: Connection not in relevant period
TNL Pty Ltd has applied for the LTFS exemption on the basis that it is a large developer for land it owns as at 30 June 2026. This would generally mean that TNL’s activities from 1 July 2025 to 30 June 2026 would be considered for determining eligibility for the exemption, particularly in relation to the entity requirements. However, to determine that the large developer test is met at material times, we would need to consider TNL’s development activities in the year the exemption is being sought for (2026–27 financial year).
TNL does not meet all the entity requirements under the ruling in its own right. Also, TNL did not undertake development or redevelopment activities in the 2026–27 financial year. However, TNL is seeking to rely on its parent, YUI Pty Ltd, for meeting the entity and development requirements under the ruling.
ASIC extracts and other documents provided by TNL confirm that YUI directly and wholly owns the shares, as well as holds the requisite level of voting control in TNL. This verification also shows that YUI acquired this share-ownership and voting control on 1 August 2027.
TNL has also provided information that evidences that YUI was developing 100 residential lots between 1 July 2026 and 30 June 2027. TNL also clarified that averaging is unable to be applied in this case, because neither YUI, nor any other group entity, is developing other residential lots.
Given that the connections between TNL and YUI did not form between 1 July 2025 and 30 June 2026, TNL is unable to rely on YUI to meet the entity requirements. Furthermore, as the connection formed after the 2026–27 financial year, YUI’s development activities are unable to be counted towards the large developer test being met in that year. However, these activities may be relevant for determining eligibility for the 2027–28 financial year.
Example: AFAD, pre-approval, awaiting planning approval and averaging
QWE Pty Ltd acquired land on 29 January 2026 and was granted an exemption from AFAD on 16 February 2026. QWE demonstrated its eligibility for the AFAD exemption on the basis that it will develop 20 or more residential lots on the land.
On 30 June 2026, QWE became liable for land tax, including the LTFS, on the land acquired. In anticipation of this, QWE applied for pre-approval for an LTFS exemption for the 2026–27 financial year on 4 March 2026. The pre-approval application was approved under paragraph 29(a) of the ruling; particularly, QWE has been approved for the AFAD exemption.
On 10 July 2026, QWE submitted an LTFS exemption application. As part of this application, QWE outlines that the proposed development on the land is awaiting planning approval, which is expected to be provided on 1 November 2027 (in the 2027–28 financial year). On this basis, the land is taken to be used for development or redevelopment activity within the period contemplated under paragraph 11 of the ruling. Accordingly, QWE is approved the LTFS exemption for the land tax liability arising on 30 June 2026.
When its land tax liability for land owned on 30 June 2027 arises, QWE is approved for the LTFS exemption again. This is because, on 20 August 2027, QWE had submitted a declaration (as contemplated under paragraph 34 of the ruling) confirming that it continues to be eligible for the LTFS exemption for the 2027–28 financial year, and that planning approval is still expected to be given on 1 November 2027.
The development on the land commenced on 1 November 2027. Five lots are completed in the 2027–28 financial year, and a further 45 lots are completed in the 2028–29 financial year. In this regard, QWE averaged its development across the 2027–28 and 2028–29 financial years (50 lots ÷ 2 = 25 lots a year). Accordingly, QWE met the development requirements contemplated in its original application for the LTFS exemption made on 10 July 2026 for the 2026–27 financial year—particularly, no notifiable events under paragraph 7(j) of the ruling (including under 7(j)(v) or (vi)) are enlivened. It further means that QWE is likely to qualify for the LTFS exemption for the 2028–29 financial year, provided no notifiable event under paragraph 7(j) of the ruling arises for this period too.
Where an entity is undertaking a development or redevelopment of less than 20 lots in a relevant year, the entity may still be eligible for the large developer exemption if the entity or relevant corporate group is approved by the Commissioner as a large developer. The Commissioner will approve an entity or relevant corporate group as a large developer if one of the following applies:
- The development or redevelopment is significant to a non-metropolitan area, having regard to
- the nature of the development and area
- the contribution made to housing stock and infrastructure in the context of population size, demographics and activity in the area
- the economic and social impacts of the development for the area
- whether in the absence of the development by the entity, such outcomes would otherwise be likely for the area
- any other relevant factors.
- The development or redevelopment is in a priority development area under the Economic Development Act 2012.
- The development or redevelopment is part of a declared coordinated project under the State Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971.
One of the eligibility requirements for the large developer exemption is that the large developer test must be satisfied in the year for which the exemption is being sought. By extension, where the Commissioner has approved an entity or relevant corporate group as a large developer, the relevant development activities must be occurring in the year for which the exemption is being sought.
If the application for the exemption is made before the end of the relevant financial year, the entity must provide information as to anticipated activities, including any available evidence.
Passive landholdings
The large developer exemption is only available while residential development or redevelopment activities are being undertaken. Once such activities are completed, the entity—or the corporate group of which the entity is a group entity—will generally be considered to hold the developed land as a passive investor and the land will no longer qualify for the LTFS exemption.
Example: Most of the development is undertaken in a historical period but averaging may apply
ETF Pty Ltd is seeking the exemption for land it owns as at 30 June 2026. To determine that eligibility is met, we would need to consider ETF’s development activities in the year the exemption is being sought for (2026–27 financial year). ETF finalised construction of 35 residential lots between 1 July 2025 and 30 June 2026 on the land, and a further 5 lots in the 2026–27 financial year.
Under the large developer test, averaging is permitted provided certain conditions are met. In this regard, if ETF averages its development across the 2025–26 to the 2026–27 financial year (40 lots ÷ 2 = 20 lots a year), the requirements of the large developer test are met. In particular, one of the years in which the large developer test is satisfied is the year for which the LTFS exemption is being sought (2026–27). On this basis, ETF is likely to qualify for the exemption.
If, hypothetically, ETF only developed 35 lots in the 2025-26 financial year but did not develop any lots in the 2026-27 financial year, it would likely not be entitled to the exemption for the 2026-27 financial year (see paragraph 13 of the ruling).
Size and scale of commercial activities
You need to provide:
- information detailing what proportion of the applicant’s landholdings are being used for commercial activities in the period under consideration
- what role the applicant (or the relevant corporate group) undertakes in the commercial activities on the land
- submissions and evidence confirming that the applicant’s (or relevant corporate group’s) commercial activities is proportionate to the taxable land for which the exemption is sought.
Given that the exemption applies to all taxable land held by an entity, it is important to ensure that it is only available in circumstances where relevant commercial activities are considered commensurate in size and scale having regard to the entirety of the entity’s taxable land.
For example, in circumstances where an entity is a significant landholder and its development activities represent only a small portion of the value of its land, eligibility for the exemption may require further consideration.
Generally, where the value of relevant development activities in a relevant year is equal to or greater than the value of the entity’s taxable land, this would prima facie suggest that the proportionality requirement is satisfied. However, this is not an absolute rule, and the assessment must ultimately be made on a case-by-case basis.
Example: Development activities are not commensurate with the taxable land for which the exemption is sought
XYZ Pty Ltd’s landholdings are valued at $100 million on 30 June 2026, but the development and redevelopment activities contemplated for its application for the LTFS exemption are valued at $20 million. In this case, we would consider that the size of the commercial activities is not proportionate to the value of its landholding.
Also consider…
- Read about build-to-rent (BTR) concessions.
- Learn about the exemption from AFAD.
- See the evidence needed for the LTFS exemption for significant contributors.