Audit Lowe Down – How do we account for the costs incurred when acquiring an asset?

Lowe Lippmann Chartered Accountants

How do we account for the costs incurred when acquiring an asset?

When we acquire an asset such as property, plant and equipment, intangibles or inventory there are often significant other costs incurred as part of the purchase process, including delivery, stamp duty, installation fees.

Whether we capitalise these to the value of the asset or expense them as incurred can make a significant difference to an entity’s reported position or performance.

Since we have accounting standards for specific assets, the treatment can vary depending on the asset and the relevant standard.

A summary of some common expenses and their treatment under four accounting standards has been included below.

The four standards considered are:

AASB 102 Inventories
AASB 116 Property, Plant and Equipment
AASB 138 Intangible Assets
AASB 140 Investment Property.

Cost	AASB 102	AASB 116	AASB 138	AASB 140
Delivery costs	✔	✔	✔	✔
Stamp duty	n/a	✔	✔	✔
Installation fees	n/a	✔	n/a	n/a
Professional fees to bring assets to working condition	n/a	✔	✔	✔
Import duties	✔	✔	✔	n/a
Training costs	X	X	X	n/a
Initial testing costs	✔	✔	✔	n/a
Transport insurance	✔	✔	n/a	n/a
Environmental / safety inspection costs	X	✔	n/a	✔
Marketing and promotional costs	X	X	X	X
Ongoing maintenance	X	X	X	X
Storage	X	X	X	X
Administrative and general overhead costs	X	X	X	X

It is important to consider the costs you incur when purchasing an asset and the accounting standard requirements as we continue to see many entities capitalising all costs which can often result in material errors in the financial statements.

Please do not hesitate to contact your Lowe Lippmann Relationship Partner if you wish to discuss any of these matters further.

Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation

< Older Post

Newer Post >

Tax Alert - High Court decision and ATO statement on Bendel’s Case

July 7, 2026

High Court decision and ATO statement on Bendel’s Case The High Court recently handed down its decision in Bendel’s Case, confirming that an unpaid present entitlement (or UPE) between a discretionary trust and a beneficiary company does not fall within the extended definition of a “loan” for Division 7A purposes. The Australian Taxation Office released a Decision Impact Statement in response to the High Court findings, concluding the High Court's reasoning makes it clear that where a beneficiary company is entitled to a share of trust income that remains unpaid (a UPE) and the company takes no positive actions to call for payment of the entitlement, this will not fall within the expanded definition of a "loan" for Division 7A purposes. This is in contradiction to the ATO’s historical position that treated UPEs as "loans".

Practice Update – July 2026

July 5, 2026

Government's tax reform package The Government has recently legislated several of the tax reform measures announced in the 2026 Federal Budget (and in later media releases). These include, among other things: Replacing the CGT discount with cost base indexation and a 30% minimum tax on gains accruing from 1 July 2027 (including gains on pre-CGT assets); Increasing the small business turnover threshold for the 50% active asset reduction from $2 million to $10 million; Limiting negative gearing for residential property to new residential dwellings from 1 July 2027 (subject to transitional rules); and Introducing the Working Australians Tax Offset from 1 July 2027, and the $1,000 instant tax deduction for work-related expenses from 1 July 2026. After a round of consultation, the Government has also announced further proposed measures, broadly including (among others): A new targeted CGT discount for investors in innovative start-ups; Barring SMSFs from utilising future limited recourse borrowing arrangements ( LRBAs ) to acquire residential property; and Exempting income of discretionary testamentary trusts from the minimum tax proposed for trusts. We recently released a Tax Alert considering the legislation restricting SMSFFs using residential property LRBAs – to read click here . For full details of each of the 2026 Federal Budget announcements, please see our Federal Budget Tax Alert – to read click here .

Tax Alert - Legislation restricting SMSFs using residential property LRBAs has now passed Parliament

June 28, 2026

Legislation restricting SMSFs using residential property LRBAs has now passed Parliament The Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No 1) Bill 2026 ( the Reform No 1 Bill ) was passed by Parliament on Thursday 25 June 2026. Schedule 5 of the Reform No 1 Bill amends section 67A of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 to restrict future limited recourse borrowing arrangements ( LRBAs ) on real property to investments in “business real property” (as defined in section 66 of the SIS Act). Residential property of any kind is excluded from the definition of “business real property” in section 66 of the SIS Act. We note this also excludes newly constructed residential property, which is a distinction at odds with recent exemptions being given to new-builds with other Budget Night tax changes relating to negative gearing and restricting the CGT 50% discount. Super funds are not generally allowed to borrow for investments, but there has been a concession allowing a self-managed super fund ( SMSF ) to borrow money to buy single assets like property, if their loans were set up in line with particular requirements, known as LRBAs. This change means an SMSF will not be able to borrow to buy residential property after the start date of these changes.