Search results
619 results ordered by
Tribunal confirms that certain studies and project management costs relating to offshore windfarms qualify in part for capital allowances
The First-tier Tribunal has confirmed that certain studies and project management costs relating to offshore windfarms qualify in part for capital allowances.
Read moreNo tax due on transfer of business to connected company
The First-tier Tribunal in Conran and another v HMRC [2022] UKFTT 39 (TC), concluded that the transfer of a business between connected parties resulted in no capital gains tax liability for the seller, having reduced the stated £8.25m valuation of the business to £1 for tax purposes.
Read moreMatchmaking services were subject to special place of supply rule for B2C consultancy services
In Gray & Farrar International LLP v HMRC [2021] UKUT 293 (TCC), the Upper Tribunal (UT) decided that matchmaking services supplied to clients outside the EU fell within Article 59(c) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (the Principal Directive) and were therefore outside the scope of VAT.
Read morePayments to employees were "relevant motoring expenditure" and should be disregarded for the purposes of NICs
In Willmott Dixon Holdings Ltd v HMRC [2022] UKFTT 6 (TC) the First-tier Tribunal (FTT), held that payments to employees were "relevant motoring expenditure" (RME) and could be disregarded for the purposes of Class 1 National Insurance Contributions (NICs).
Read moreHMRC misses penalty
HMRC penalty for EBT use successfully appealed as no deliberate or careless conduct leading to inaccuracy in tax return
Read moreNo power for HMRC to issue partial closure notice without assessment of tax due
The Court of Appeal has confirmed that HMRC cannot issue a partial closure notice without assessment of tax due.
Read moreExpenses incurred in defending partners against criminal charges were incurred "wholly and exclusively" for the business and were deductible
In TR, SP and SR Rogers v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 0458 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) decided that expenses incurred defending two of the partners of a partnership against criminal charges were incurred wholly and exclusively for the business of the partnership and the expenses were therefore deductible.
Read moreTribunal reduces scope of Schedule 36 Information Notices
HMRC bears the burden of proof that the information requested to check a taxpayer's tax position, as set out in Schedule 36 information notices, is reasonably required and that records requested are statutory records.
Read moreEntrepreneurs' relief applied to disposal of business premises
Entrepreneurs' relief (now Business Asset Disposal Relief) applies to disposal of premises as part of long-term sale of business
Read moreQuinn – Taxpayer entitled to claim enhanced research and development relief
In Quinn (London) Ltd v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 0437 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) allowed the taxpayer's appeal against HMRC's decision to refuse its claims for enhanced research and development relief (enhanced R&D relief), on the basis that the claimed expenditure was “subsidised” within the meaning of section 1138(1)(c), Corporation Tax Act 2009 (CTA 2009).
Read moreMinstrell Recruitment – HMRC not required to disclose the names of its officers involved in a Gross Payment Status revocation decision
In Minstrell Recruitment Ltd v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 0344 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) held that HMRC need not disclose the names of the HMRC officers involved in making a gross payment status (GPS) revocation decision where that decision had been successfully appealed, for the purpose of determining whether HMRC had acted unreasonably in the conduct of that appeal.
Read moreJTC - Escrow agreement set aside on basis of mistake
Rescission granted of pension arrangements with tax impact due to incorrect advice for temporary UK non-resident moving to UAE.
Read moreKishore – Court of Appeal rejects HMRC's strike out application
In HMRC v Dhalomal Kishore [2021] EWCA Civ 1565, the Court of Appeal rejected HMRC's application to strike out the taxpayer's grounds of appeal against penalties for inaccuracies in VAT returns, as the application was an abuse of process.
Read moreQuarterly Contentious Tax Review – Winter 2021
HMRC has extensive powers to require information and documentation from taxpayers. These powers were bolstered in the last Finance Act to include financial institution notices. Failure to comply with information notices can attract penalties. The most severe penalties are those imposed by the Upper Tribunal (UT). We examine, below, HMRC's increasing use of these powers, together with HMRC's penchant for 'nudge' letters and recent developments in the application of the transfer of assets abroad (TOAA) provisions.
Read moreThe Medical Defence Union – insurance premium rebates not taxable receipts
Insurance premium rebate does not count as a taxable receipt, but instead is merely a (non-taxable) refund to the mutual fund for the benefit of its members.
Read moreGB Fleet Hire - Upper Tribunal allows appeal against First-tier Tribunal strike out decision
In a rare move, the Upper Tribunal overturned the decision of the First-tier Tribunal to strike out an appeal on the grounds that the tribunal's decision was irrational.
Read moreVitol Aviation – Tribunal directs HMRC to issue closure notices where diverted profits tax review periods are ongoing
In Vitol Aviation UK Ltd and others v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 0353 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) granted the Applicants' application for closure notices in respect of corporation tax enquiries, notwithstanding that the review periods for diverted profits tax (DPT) notices were ongoing in respect of the same accounting periods.
Read moreCrippin – ancillary dwelling qualified for principal private residence relief
Ancillary property qualifies for principle private residence relief despite being informally rented to friends.
Read moreShinelock Ltd – payment not deductible as a loan relationship debit
In Shinelock Ltd v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 320 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) decided that a payment made by a company to its former shareholder was not deductible as a loan relationship debit and accordingly there was no non-trading loan relationship deficit (NTLRD) to offset the chargeable gain realised on the disposal of a property.
Read moreFashion on the Block – taxpayer successful with substance over form argument
Erroneous EIS form submitted, SEIS1 required in its place; HMRC alerted to the mistake and told to allow rectification.
Read moreGC Field & Sons Ltd – SDLT discovery assessments held to be invalid
Discovery underlying discovery assessment for SDLT planning valid despite change of underlying reasoning, but taxpayer not negligent so appeal upheld.
Read moreHMRC targets enablers of tax evasion
HMRC and the OECD are looking to tackle the rise of the professional enabler of tax evasion, but what is an enabler? And what does that mean for professionals?
Read moreVermilion Holdings – Court of Session confirms that the grant of a share option by an employer was not an employment related securities option
In Vermilion Holdings Ltd v HMRC [2021] CSIH 45, the Court of Session overturned the decision of the Upper Tribunal (UT) and confirmed that an option granted by a company as part of a refinancing exercise was not an employment related securities option, for the purposes of section 471, Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 (ITEPA).
Read moreQuarterly Contentious Tax Review
The Tax Law Review Committee (TLRC) has published an in-depth review of the First-tier Tribunal (FTT), how it operates and why. In some respects, it is not working as well as it could for certain users. The review makes a number of positive recommendations, which we discuss below, together with two important developments concerning (1) the requirement for HMRC to initiate a formal enquiry and (2) HMRC's strategy on settling disputes relating to the use of historic tax avoidance arrangements.
Read moreProfessional Game Match Officials - Court of Appeal sends football referees case back to the Tax Tribunal
In HMRC v Professional Game Match Officials Limited [2021] EWCA Civ 1370, the Court of Appeal (CoA) held that the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) and Upper Tribunal (UT) both erred in law in their approaches to the question of 'mutuality of obligation' and upheld the UT's decision that the FTT had erred in its approach to the issue of control. The case has been sent back to the FTT to reconsider whether there was sufficient mutuality of obligation and control in the individual contracts for them to be contracts of employment.
Read moreDNAe Group Holdings – Higher R&D relief claims available
In DNAe Group Holdings Ltd v HMRC [2021] TC/201804348, the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) held that 125% research and development (R&D) tax credits for an SME was available, despite the company being the strategic investment vehicle of a larger group.
Read moreKSM Henryk Zeman - Tribunal can consider 'legitimate expectation' arguments in VAT appeal
Taxpayer can bring legitimate expectation/judicial review arguments in appeal against HMRC decision on VAT in First-tier Tribunal – a new step in tax litigation.
Read moreTinkler – Supreme Court decides taxpayer is estopped from denying validity of HMRC enquiry
In Tinkler v HMRC [2021] UKSC 39, the Supreme Court held that, due to the conduct of the taxpayer's advisers, the taxpayer was estopped by convention from denying that HMRC had opened a valid enquiry under section 9A, Taxes Management Act 1970 (TMA), when it had sent the notice of enquiry to the wrong address.
Read moreJRO Griffiths – storage facility is plant for capital allowances purposes
In JRO Griffiths Ltd v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 257 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) held that a facility used to store potatoes was a plant, and that it met other conditions allowing it to qualify for capital allowances.
Read moreEclipse film partnerships settlement opportunity announced by HMRC
HMRC announced on 6 September 2021 a settlement opportunity for current and former members of the Eclipse Film Partners (numbers 1 to 40) limited liability partnerships (the Eclipse LLPs), under which HMRC will agree not to seek to impose a 'dry tax' charge in exchange for members settling historic tax liabilities (with interest) and abandoning litigation against HMRC in relation to the Eclipse LLPs. If accepted by each taxpayer, approximately £1.6 billion of 'dry tax' will not be pursued by HMRC.
Read moreHaworth - Supreme Court upholds decision to quash follower notice
Follower Notice judicial review upheld by Supreme Court even in tax avoidance context; restrictive requirements imposed for issue of follower notices.
Read moreContentious tax quarterly review
We consider the Supreme Court's decision in Tooth, concerning discovery assessments; and examine the contentious issue of when a taxpayer can rely upon a PAYE credit. We also review the increased focus by HMRC on cryptoassets and the challenges that might create for taxpayers.
Read moreWilkes – HMRC's discovery assessments were invalidly issued
In HMRC v Jason Wilkes [2021] UKUT 150 (TCC), the Upper Tribunal (UT) dismissed HMRC's appeal against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) which held that discovery assessments issued by HMRC to assess the high income child benefit charge (HICBC), were invalid.
Read moreKelly – Tax tribunal confirms re-discovery not permissible for the purposes of section 29 TMA
In Sean Kelly v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 162, the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) confirmed the principle that a discovery can only be made once and HMRC cannot raise a new discovery assessment under section 29,Taxes Management Act 1970 (TMA), in respect of the same discovery.
Read moreWalewski - Mixed partnership rules mean profit can be reallocated for whole period of account
Corporate member tax planning ineffective as profits allocated to partner in partnership for period during which it was a partner under mixed partnership rules.
Read moreAvonside Roofing – Tax Tribunal sets aside Schedule 36 information notice
In Avonside Roofing Ltd v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 158 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) set aside an information notice issued under paragraph 1, Schedule 36, Finance Act 2008 (the Notice), on the basis that the information and documents requested by HMRC were not reasonably required for the purpose of checking the recipient's tax position.
Read moreSiddiqui - No proper ground for setting aside summons in private prosecution
Private prosecution not to be quashed due to failure to disclose settlement agreement.
Read moreGolamreza – HMRC assessments and the burden of proof
In Golamreza Qolaminejite (aka A Cooper) v HMRC [2021] UKUT 118 (TCC), the Upper Tribunal (UT) allowed the taxpayer's appeal in part on the basis that the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) had erred in law in failing to take all of the taxpayer's case into account in arriving at its decision.
Read morePerring – Burden of proof for establishing that documents are 'reasonably required' in taxpayer information notice appeal is on HMRC
In Perring v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 110, the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) held that the burden of proof for establishing that documents are "reasonably required" under a taxpayer notice issued under Schedule 36, Finance Act 2008 (FA 2008) lies with HMRC.
Read moreAozora - Unilateral credit for US withholding tax allowed even where no treaty relief available
US UK double tax treaty and associated UK legislation interpreted to give unilateral credit for withholding tax suffered on interest income.
Read moreRediscovering ADR
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), in the form of mediation, remains an important part of the tax dispute resolution process. In light of the backlog of cases caused by Covid-19, and the practice statement issued by the Tribunal last year, we expect that taxpayers and HMRC will begin to re-examine and embrace ADR which can be an effective method of resolving disputes with HMRC.
Read moreTooth – Supreme Court rejects the concept of 'staleness' and confirms the meaning of 'deliberate'
In HMRC v Tooth [2021] UKSC 17, the Supreme Court, in dismissing HMRC's appeal, confirmed that a discovery assessment issued under section 20, Taxes Management Act 1970 (TMA) will not be invalid because a large period of time had elapsed between the discovery being made and the assessment being issued by HMRC and that for a taxpayer to bring about a loss of tax as a result of a deliberate inaccuracy in a document there must be an intention to mislead HMRC.
Read moreHargreaves - Burden of proof on HMRC in taxpayer information notice appeals
In Hargreaves and others v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 80 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) confirmed that the burden of proof in an appeal against an information notice issued under paragraph 1, Schedule 36, Finance Act 2008 (FA 2008), is on HMRC.
Read moreDaarasp – Loss claims denied as closure notices were valid
In Daarasp LLP & Betex LLP v HMRC [2021] UKUT 0087, the Upper Tribunal (UT) upheld the First-tier Tribunal's (FTT) decision and dismissed the taxpayers' claims for losses as the conclusions in HMRC's closure notices were not inconsistent with the losses being reduced to zero in the taxpayers' returns.
Read moreComtek – Counteraction steps taken after Follower Notice deadline can reduce penalty
Follower notice penalty for SDLT scheme follower notice reinstated but reduced by Upper Tribunal, and guidance given as to meaning of 'counteraction' in APN / accelerated payment notice context.
Read moreEuromoney – Tribunal considers 'main purpose' test
In Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 0061 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) upheld the appellant's appeal, finding that the avoidance of liability to tax was a purpose, but not the main purpose, or one of the main purposes, of the relevant arrangements, for the purposes of section 137(1), Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 (TCGA).
Read moreMehrban – Discovery assessments invalid due to staleness
In Kashif Mehrban v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 53 (TC) the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) held that a three-year delay in issuing a 'discovery' assessment issued pursuant to section 29,Taxes Management Act 1970 (TMA), resulted in the discovery becoming 'stale', even though the delay had not been the result of HMRC inaction.
Read moreInmarsat Global – Upper Tribunal confirms successor company not entitled to capital allowances incurred by its predecessor on satellite launch costs
In Inmarsat Global Ltd v HMRC [2021] UKUT 59 (TCC), the Upper Tribunal (UT) upheld the First-tier Tribunal's (FTT) decision that a company was not eligible for capital allowances in relation to expenditure incurred by its predecessor on launching satellites into space.
Read moreCaught in the act
The furlough scheme has become ‘a magnet for fraudsters’. Adam Craggs and Alice Kemp outline the extensive powers HMRC can muster to investigate ‘high risk’ claims and to claw back any undue payments.
Read moreContentious tax quarterly review
Rise in alternative dispute resolution Until relatively recently, HMRC imposed strict conditions on the timing of when an application for alternative dispute resolution (ADR) could be made, refusing to consider any application which was made after it had formally set out its position in its ‘statement of case’.
Read moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here