The revenue appealed against a decision that provisions which did not allow the defendants, as companies with foreign parents, the right to make group income elections which would have allowed them to pay on their profits to their parent companies free of advance corporation tax, were discriminatory.
Held: The discrimination was not on the basis that the capital of the subsidiary was controlled by a foreign resident company. The nature of election allowed by the statute was as to which of two companies would pay the tax. That concept had no meaning when applied to a company which would not pay such a tax. The difference was not improper discrimination.
Lord Hoffmann, Lord Woolf, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Lord Mance, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury
[2007] UKHL 25, Times 24-May-2007, [2007] 1 WLR 1386, [2007] 3 All ER 605
Bailii
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 247
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Boake Allen Ltd and others v HM Revenue and Customs CA 31-Jan-2006
The claimant companies had paid corporation tax under rules which had later been found to be discriminatory. They now sought repayment by virtue of double taxation agreements with the countries in which the parent companies were based.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Corporation Tax
Leading Case
Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.252518
