Category: Income Tax

HM Revenue and Customs v PA Holdings Ltd: CA 30 Nov 2011

The company made available to certain employees discretionary annual bonuses which were paid instead by way of shares and received dividends. It now appealed against findings that the payments were taxable subject to Schedule F rates and were liable also to National Insurance.
Held: Applying White, The court should not be seduced by the form in which the payments reached employees, but rather should focus upon the character of the receipt in the hands of the recpient.

Judges:

Maurice Kay, Arden, Moses LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 1414, [2011] BTC 705, [2011] STI 3268, [2012] STC 582

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – White v Franklin CA 1965
The share owners placed half of the issued shares in the company in trust for the taxpayer, in order to persuade him to continue his involvement in the family company as an active director. The trust provided that the income from the shares should . .
At SCIT – PA Holdings Ltd v Revenue and Customs SCIT 29-Aug-2008
SCIT The Revenue issued separate decisions that certain sums paid to employees of Holdings in the three years to April 2003 were emoluments liable to income tax under PAYE and earnings on which Holdings is liable . .
At FTTTx – PA Holdings Ltd and Another v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 7-May-2009
FTTTx Income tax – other – whether sums paid to individuals by a company as a dividend financed from a capital contribution to the company from employee benefits funds derived from the individuals’ employing . .
At UTTC – P A Holdings UTTC 7-Jul-2010
UTTC Income Tax – Tax avoidance scheme – Dividend from new company instead of bonus: whether Ramsay jurispudence applies – Schedule E and meaning of emoluments from employment – Schedule F and meaning of dividend . .

Cited by:

Cited – Morgan v Department for Employment and Learning NIIT 24-Jan-2014
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Taxes – Other, Income Tax

Updated: 28 September 2022; Ref: scu.449042

HM Inspector of Taxes v CBL Cable Contractors Ltd: ChD 23 Jun 2005

Judges:

Laddie J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 1294 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Shaw (Inspector of Taxes) v Vicky Construction Ltd ChD 6-Dec-2002
The General Commissioner had held that an inspector’s refusal to renew a certificate allowing the taxpayer construction company to pay its sub-contractors without deducting income tax, infringed that company’s rights. The inspector appealed.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Income Tax

Updated: 27 September 2022; Ref: scu.227944

Blackrock Holdco 5 Llc v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 3 Nov 2020

INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX – Acquisition of Barclays Global Investors – Loan notes issued to parent company to finance investment – Whether loans would have been on the same terms and in the same amounts if between independent enterprises – If not, would independent enterprises have entered into the loans – Whether ‘main purpose’ of loan relationship was to secure a tax advantage – If so, what was the amount of any debit attributable to such a purpose – Appeal allowed

Citations:

[2020] UKFTT 443 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 27 September 2022; Ref: scu.656836

Agassi v Robinson (Inspector of Taxes): CA 19 Nov 2004

Judges:

Lord Justice Buxton Lord Justice Sedlay Lord Justice Jacob

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 1518, [2005] 1 WLR 1090

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Agassi v S Robinson (HM Inspector of Taxes) ChD 17-Mar-2004
The non-resident tennis player taxpayer appealed a charge to tax in respect of payments made for his sporting activities within the UK, made by overseas companies to other overseas companies owned by the taxpayer.
Held: The Act provided that . .

Cited by:

See Also – Andre Agassi v S Robinson (H M Inspector of Taxes) (No 2) CA 2-Dec-2005
The taxpayer had been represented in proceedings throughout by tax law experts, Tenon Media, who were not legally admitted, but had a right to conduct litigation under the 1990 Act. The Inspector objected to paying costs as if the representatives . .
Appeal From – Agassi v Her Majesty’s Inspector of Taxes HL 17-May-2006
The tax payer played tennis and was paid sums for when he played in England. The sums were paid to his overseas based company.
Held: The revenue’s appeal succeeded. The ‘legislative intendment in relation to sections 555 and 556, and their . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.219524

Nestupova v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 16 Oct 2020

INCOME TAX – Schedule 55 Finance Act 2009 – fixed and daily penalties for failure to file a self-assessment return on time – validity of notice to file – whether taxpayer had a reasonable excuse for her default – appeal allowed in part. HMRC v Goldsmith followed.

Citations:

[2020] UKFTT 411 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.655343

Commission v Estonia: ECJ 24 Nov 2011

ECJ Opinion – Failure to fulfill obligations – Objection of inadmissibility – Interveners – Freedom of movement for workers – Article 45 TFEU – Article 28 of the EEA Agreement – Tax legislation – Income tax – Pensions – Exemption for low income amount – Discrimination between resident and non-resident taxpayers

Judges:

Mr Niilo Jaaskinen AG

Citations:

C-39/10, [2011] EUECJ C-39/10

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

See Also – Commission v Estonia ECJ 4-Jun-2010
Order – Interventions . .

Cited by:

Opinion – Commission v Estonia ECH 10-May-2012
ECJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Freedom of movement for workers – Income tax – Allowance – Retirement pensions – Effect on small pensions – Discrimination between resident and non-resident . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.449356

McDonald v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 8 Jul 2011

FTTTx Income Tax – Schedule E – Employment – Emoluments – Payment in lieu of notice – Payment made under provision in contract of employment – Whether receipt was emoluments or termination payment – Section 7 and Section 63 Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 – Appeal refused.

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 456 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 63

Income Tax

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.443177

Primary Path Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 6 Jul 2011

FTTTx NATIONAL INSURANCE CONTRIBUTIONS – INCOME TAX (PAYE) – worker supplied through intermediaries – ‘IR 35’ – whether worker would be employee if there were a contract between the worker and the client – no -Regulation 6, Social Security Contributions (Intermediaries) Regulations 2000 – s 48 Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 – appeal allowed.

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 454 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 48, Social Security Contributions (Intermediaries) Regulations 2000 6

Taxes – Other, Income Tax

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.443183

Atkins, The Executors of v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 13 Jul 2011

Income Tax – Costs application by Appellant in a discovery assessment where the Respondents had withdrawn their assessment shortly before the date of the hearing – whether the assessment was likely to have been sustained had the appeal proceeded

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 468 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.443157

Pike v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 4 May 2011

FTTTx Income tax – whether a security was a relevant discounted security – security paying on redemption a sum calculated as 7.25% per annum accruing daily – whether ‘interest’ includes sums not paid periodically – yes – appeal dismissed

Judges:

Mrs B Mosedale TJ

Citations:

[2011] STI 1990, [2011] SFTD 830, [2011] UKFTT 289 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Pike v HM Revenue and Customs UTTC 10-May-2013
UTTC INCOME TAX – claim for loss on disposal of loan stock – whether loan stock a ‘relevant discounted security’ – FA 1996, Sch 13, para 3 – whether additional payment on redemption of loan stock was interest – . .
At FTTTx – Pike v HM Revenue and Customs CA 20-Jun-2014
The taxpayer challenged rejection of his claim for a loss relief arising from a ‘relevant discounted security’ within the meaning of Schedule 13 to the Finance Act 1996.
Held: It would only be such if, taking the security as at the time of its . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.443070

Industrial Contracting Services Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 4 May 2011

Construction Industry Scheme – Cancellation of registration for gross payment (Finance Act 2004 s.66) – Whether there was a ‘reasonable excuse’ (Finance Act 2004 Sch 11 para 4(4)(a)) – Proportionality – Appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 290 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax, Construction

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.443050

Syed v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 12 May 2011

FTTTx Assessment/self-assessment
Notes: Income tax – computation of profits – closure notice and amendments – s29 TMA discovery assessments – onus of proof on taxpayer in relation to amounts assessed – ‘presumption of continuity’: meaning and effect Income Tax -penalties for negligent conduct s 95 TMA 1970. FIRST-TIER

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 315 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Taxes Management Act 1970 95

Income Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.443075

Scofield v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 24 Mar 2011

FTTTx Construction industry scheme — withdrawal of gross payment status — Finance Act 2004 – whether HMRC have discretion to withdraw gross payment status – whether discretion exercised – jurisdiction of Tribunal to review HMRC decision – appeal allowed

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 199 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Income Tax

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442946

Rogers v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 11 Mar 2011

FTTTx Income tax – employment income – whether receipt of shares was an emolument from employment within section 19 Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 – whether an obligation to deduct PAYE under sections 203F or 203B Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988

Judges:

Brannan TJ

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 167 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442944

Wald v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 17 Mar 2011

FTTT INCOME TAX – Penalty for negligently delivering an incorrect tax return (Taxes Management Act 1970 s.95) – Whether omission from the tax return of relocation expenses paid by employer was negligent – Whether the penalty imposed was excessive – Appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 183 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Taxes Management Act 1970 95

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442954

Blanche v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 8 Mar 2011

FTTTx INCOME TAX – PAYE – whether direction notice given to Appellant under reg. 72(5) Income Tax (Pay As You Earn) Regulations 2003 requiring him to pay tax which employer failed to deduct and pay should be set aside – no – on facts employer’s failure to deduct genuine mistake – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 164 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Tax (Pay As You Earn) Regulations 2003 72(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442911

Hanlin v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 28 Mar 2011

FTTTx Income tax – self-employed construction worker – taxpayer living in Midlands, working in Kent – living away during the week – travel, food and accommodation expenses – whether incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the trade – no – desire to live at home was at least part of the reason for the travel – location of base of operation in Kent, not at home – private element of purpose of travel could not be regarded as incidental to predominant business purpose – allowability of food and accommodation expenses followed that of travel expenses – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 213 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Income Tax

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442925

Howell v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 16 Mar 2011

FTTTx Self Assessment – discovery assessments-S 29 TMA 1970-whether statutory requirements satisfied-no -nature of receipts, income or capital, -retrospective ‘pro rata’ imputation of income to prior years where the enquiry window has closed – S 33 A TMA 1970 – Error or Mistake Relief claim.

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 179 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442927

Farrell v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 17 Mar 2011

FTTTx Income tax – interest taxed at source – whether interest should be taken into account in computing taxpayer’s liability to income tax at the upper dividend rate – yes – whether that conclusion affected by allegedly discriminatory rules concerning liability of a director taxpayer to submit a self-assessment tax return – no discrimination found – appeal dismissed

Judges:

Poole TJ

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 182 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442922

Fresh Sandwich Bar v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 23 Mar 2011

FTTTx Income Tax: PAYE Regulations 2003: Employee (PAYE) Assessment to Best Judgment – Decision One – Assessment to Best Judgment – Decision Two – Sum Due to Be Recalculated as Directed – Decision Three – Adjourned for Recalculation and Settlement.

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 198 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442923

Begbie JR (T/A Ready Steady Labourers) v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 17 Mar 2011

FTTTx Income Tax – Gross Construction Industry Status – whether status should be withdrawn – whether reasonable excuse for failing to meet obligations under section 66(1)(c) Finance Act 2004 – Appeal dismissed.

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 184 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Finance Act 2004 66(1)(c)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442910

Mcmillin v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 19 Jan 2011

Income Tax – Capital Allowances-furnished ‘eco’ holiday lettings -whether whole site can be plant – no -are specific items plant and machinery-stone floor – windows- paint and decorating-earth bund- no- appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 65 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442820

Grace v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 5 Jan 2011

INCOME TAX – Appellant a British Airways pilot who was present for part of year in UK for purpose of his employment – Appellant owned and occupied two properties one in the UK and one in South Africa – whether Appellant resident and ordinarily resident in the UK

Judges:

Barbara Mosedale TJ

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 36 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Income Tax

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442806

Deutsche Bank Group Services (UK) Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 19 Jan 2011

Regulation 80, PAYE Regulations – Section 8, Social Security Contributions (Transfer of Functions, etc) Act 1999 – whether sums paid into a share scheme were earnings of the staff for whom they were paid – whether the shares purchased as part of the scheme were restricted securities within the meaning of Chapter 2 of Part 7 of the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 – whether the share scheme was within the scope of that Chapter

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 66 (TC), [2011] STI 1583, [2011] SFTD 406

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Contributions (Transfer of Functions, etc) Act 1999, Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

At FTTTX – DB Group Services (UK) Ltd v Revenue and Customs CA 16-Apr-2014
The two companies had established schemes designed to minimise tax on payments to employees, using a purpose made company to take advantage of exemptions under section 423. In oe cse the Revenue appealed against rejection of its challenge,nd in the . .
At FTTTx – UBS Ag and Another v Revenue and Customs SC 9-Mar-2016
UBS AG devised an employee bonus scheme to take advantage of the provisions of Chapter 2 of the 2003 Act, with the sole purpose other than tax avoidance, and such consequential advantages as would flow from tax avoidance. Several pre-ordained steps . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442798

Pike v HM Revenue and Customs: UTTC 10 May 2013

UTTC INCOME TAX – claim for loss on disposal of loan stock – whether loan stock a ‘relevant discounted security’ – FA 1996, Sch 13, para 3 – whether additional payment on redemption of loan stock was interest – yes – appeal dismissed.

Judges:

Norris J

Citations:

[2013] UKUT 225 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Pike v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 4-May-2011
FTTTx Income tax – whether a security was a relevant discounted security – security paying on redemption a sum calculated as 7.25% per annum accruing daily – whether ‘interest’ includes sums not paid periodically . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Pike v HM Revenue and Customs CA 20-Jun-2014
The taxpayer challenged rejection of his claim for a loss relief arising from a ‘relevant discounted security’ within the meaning of Schedule 13 to the Finance Act 1996.
Held: It would only be such if, taking the security as at the time of its . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.510301

Cook (Inspector of Taxes) v Billings and Related Appeals: ChD 8 Jun 1999

Members of a partnership between them holding shares in a limited company, were not disqualified from claiming relief from tax under appropriate circumstances under the Business Expansion Scheme. Their separate interests were not to be aggregated because of the partnership.

Citations:

Times 08-Jun-1999, Gazette 09-Jun-1999

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 291 (1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 14 September 2022; Ref: scu.79475

HMRC v First Nationwide: UTTC 18 Apr 2011

Stocklending agreement – deduction for management expenses in respect of manufactured dividends – para 1(1), Sch 23A ICTA – Income Tax (Manufactured Overseas Dividends) Regulations 1993 – whether dividends paid by a Cayman Islands company out of share premium account are ‘dividends’ and ‘overseas dividends’ – yes – ss 737A and 730A ICTA – whether a sale of preference shares and a subscription for preference shares is a sale and repurchase of securities – no – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2011] UKUT 174 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440820

Tuczka v HM Revenue and Customs: UTTC 16 Mar 2011

Ordinary residence – whether this requires an intention to reside permanently or indefinitely – whether intention to stay for only 2.5 years precludes finding of ordinary residence – role of appellate tribunal where First-tier Tribunal finds ordinary residence

Citations:

[2011] UKUT 113 (TCC), [2011] BTC 1706, [2011] STI 1340, [2011] WTLR 1099, [2011] STC 1438

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440816

Smith v HMRC: UTTC 10 May 2011

Income Tax – Schedule D – computation of profits – section 42 FA 1998 – whether accounts prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice – sections 29, 34, 36 TMA 1970 – whether negligent conduct if accounts not prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice – whether HMRC discovered tax loss

Citations:

[2011] UKUT B16 (TCC), [2011] STC 1724, [2011] UKUT 270, [2011] STI 2172, [2011] BTC 1742

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440826

Finn and Others v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 9 May 2014

Income Tax – Forfeiture of relief in relation to Enterprise Investment Scheme (‘EIS’) – Acquisition of the company in which the Appellants and many others held shares, the subscription for which had qualified for EIS relief, by another company – Whether that acquisition had occasioned a fatal ‘change of control’ and a ‘disposal’ of the relevant shares, or whether the rollover provision of section 247 Income Tax Act 2007 eliminated those two results – Whether the acquiring company’s only issued shares at the time of the acquisition were ‘subscriber shares’ – Appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2014] UKFTT 426 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.526814

Ferguson v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 9 May 2014

Income tax – tax avoidance scheme involving ‘gifts to charity’ relief – s 587B ICTA – pre-existing option arrangements, secured by charges, for securities in question to be acquired from charity for 1% of value following charity’s receipt of them – whether Appellant had disposed of whole of the beneficial interest in the securities to the charity – held no – effect of composite transaction was that the disposal was, as to 99% of the value, to the Appellant’s own family trust – additionally, any disposal to the charity was ‘by way of a bargain made at arm’s length’ – s587B(1) therefore not satisfied – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2014] UKFTT 433 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 12 September 2022; Ref: scu.526813

Challenge Corporation Ltd v Commissioner of Inland Revenue: PC 1987

(New Zealand)

Citations:

[1987] AC 155

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – O’Neil, O’Neil, McDougall, and McDougall v Commissioner of Inland Revenue PC 10-Apr-2001
PC (New Zealand) An accountant arranged a scheme which purported to return the applicants’ entire income without deduction of tax as a return of capital. The revenue sought to treat it as tax avoidance.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, Commonwealth

Updated: 11 September 2022; Ref: scu.192036

Harmel v Wright: ChD 1973

The taxpayer was domiciled in South Africa but resident in England. Before he came to England he arranged for the incorporation of two companies, Artemis Ltd and Lodestar Ltd. Artemis was controlled by the taxpayer but Lodestar, in which he had no interest, was controlled by his business associates. The taxpayer arranged for his foreign emoluments to be applied in the subscription of shares in Artemis, the subscription moneys were lent by Artemis to Lodestar which lent them to the taxpayer in England. The taxpayer was assessed on the amounts of the loans from Lodestar under Case III of Schedule E. The assessment was upheld by the Special Commissioners. They found that all the transactions were parts of a pre-ordained plan and that the taxpayer had received foreign emoluments in the United Kingdom to the extent of the loans from Lodestar.
Held: The decision was upheld. First, as the sums lent by Lodestar to the taxpayer were traceable to the taxpayer’s foreign emoluments the latter were received by him in the United Kingdom and, second, the emoluments were used, enjoyed in and transmitted to the United Kingdom within the meaning of the predecessor of s.132(5) so as to constitute receipt.

Judges:

Templeman J

Citations:

(1973) 49 TC 149

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Thomson v Moyse HL 1958
A British subject resident in England but domiciled in the United States was the life tenant of trusts administered in accordance with the law of the State of New York. The income of the trusts was paid in US$ into the beneficiary’s bank account . .

Cited by:

Cited – Grimm v Newman Chantry Vellacott DFK CA 7-Nov-2002
Accountants appealed a finding of professional negligence. They had advised an american resident in Britain that he could transfer assets to his wife here without adverse tax consequences. At the trial the judge had considered an alternative scheme . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 10 September 2022; Ref: scu.183431

Revenue and Customs v Cotter: ChD 14 Apr 2011

The taxpayer’s accountants had submitted a tax return amending the taxpayer’s own return adding claims for losses. The accountant acknowledged the contentious nature of the claim and invited a review. The Revenue sought now to recover the tax due under the initial return.
Held: The County Court had jurisdiction to determine in collection proceedings whether the taxpayer was entitled to rely on the claim for relief as a defence to a demand by the Revenue for immediate payment and (b) Cotter was not entitled to rely on his claim for loss relief as a defence to the Revenue’s demand for payment of the tax due in respect of 2007/08.
HMRC were correct in their submission that Mr Cotter’s claim for loss relief related to the 2008/09 year of assessment and so could not be included in his return for 2007/08.

Judges:

David Richards J VC

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 896 (Ch), [2011] STI 1522, [2011] BTC 282

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Tax Act 2007 128

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Blackburn (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Keeling CA 21-Aug-2003
The tax payer sought to have reflected in his PAYE coding, his substantial trading losses arising from his activities as a Name /underwriter at Lloyds in 2003.
Held: The underwriting year 2003 ends in the year of assessment 2003/4, and . .
Cited – Autologic Holdings Plc and others v Commissioners of Inland Revenue HL 28-Jul-2005
Taxpayer companies challenged the way that the revenue restricted claims for group Corporation Tax relief for subsidiary companies in Europe. The issue was awaiting a decision of the European Court. The Revenue said that the claims now being made by . .

Cited by:

At ChD – Cotter v Revenue and Customs SC 6-Nov-2013
This appeal asked as to the boundary between the jurisdiction of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) and that of the county court or the High Court, and the legality of the approach which the Revenue took to entries which Mr Cotter, had made in a . .
Appeal From – HM Revenue and Customs v Cotter CA 8-Feb-2012
Mr Cotter’s accountants had submitted a second tax return adding claims to loss relief in the following year. The claims were contentious, but he invited a review by the Revenue asserting that the losses wiped out any liability to tax. The Revenue . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, Capital Gains Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 08 September 2022; Ref: scu.434886

An Employee v Revenue and Customs: SCIT 19 Mar 2008

SCIT SHARE OPTIONS – unapproved scheme – gains by employee – whether charge to income tax arises when options exercised but shares not sold – yes – ICTA 1988 s 135(1).
ASSESSMENT – power to raise assessment – whether loss of tax attributable to negligent conduct on the part of the Appellant or the person acting on his behalf – yes – whether at the relevant time the Revenue could not have been reasonably expected to be aware of the loss of tax – yes – appeal dismissed – TMA 1970 s 29 (4) and (5).

Citations:

[2008] UKSPC SPC00673

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Taxes Management Act 1979 29(4) 29(5), Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 135(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.267758

Revenue and Customs v Goldsmith: UTTC 4 Nov 2019

INCOME TAX – penalty charged under paras 1 and 3, Schedule 55 Finance Act 2009 – whether taxpayer liable to a penalty for failure to submit a tax return under s.8(1) Taxes Management Act 1970 (‘TMA’) – appeal allowed by First-tier Tribunal on basis that penalties were invalid because the decision to require a return did not fall within the power in s.8(1)TMA – whether Tribunal had jurisdiction to consider that argument – whether Tribunal entitled to reduce penalty because of special circumstances.

Citations:

[2019] UKUT 325 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.643799

Christa Ackroyd Media Ltd v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 25 Oct 2019

INCOME TAX AND NATIONAL INSURANCE – intermediaries legislation – IR35 – personal service company – whether sufficient control existed to mean that contract of employment would arise if services supplied direct to client – yes – appeal dismissed.

Citations:

[2019] UKUT 326 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes – Other, Income Tax

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.643792

Revenue and Customs v Hargreaves Lansdown Asset Management Ltd: UTTC 9 Aug 2019

INCOME TAX – payment of ‘loyalty bonus’ by platform service provider to investors-whether liability to deduct tax from payments-whether payments annual payments-whether payments possessed the quality of recurrence-whether payments represented pure income profit-s 683 ITTOIA 2005.

Citations:

[2019] UKUT 246 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.643788

Ingenious Games Llp and Others v Revenue and Customs:: UTTC 26 Jul 2019

INCOME TAX AND CORPORATION TAX — LLPs established to carry on activities relating to the production of films and games – individual members of the LLPs making capital contributions for membership – funding also coming from commissioning distributor – Whether activities carried on by the LLPs constituted a trade – Whether activities of the LLPs carried on with a view to profit – Whether expenditure incurred by the LLPs equal to 100% of production budget of film or game – Whether expenditure incurred wholly or exclusively for purposes of LLPs trade – Whether LLPs accounts compiled in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice – Whether LLPs expenditure on film and games rights was capital expenditure for tax purposes – Income Tax (Trading and Other Income) Act 2005, ss 25, 26, 33, 34, 863 – Corporation Tax Act 2009 ss 46, 47, 53, 54, 1262, 1273.

Citations:

[2019] UKUT 226 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.643784

Keyl v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 15 Jul 2015

UTTC INCOME TAX – section 38A Capital Allowances Act 2001 – annual investment allowance – exclusion where expenditure incurred in chargeable period in which trade permanently discontinued – whether trade discontinued at end of period was discontinued in that period – yes – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2015] UKUT 383 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Capital Allowances Act 2001 38A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.553189

Degorce v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 24 Aug 2015

UTTC INCOME TAX – whether taxpayer carried on a trade – if so whether trade commercial – whether carried on with a view to profit – whether GAAP correctly applied – whether expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for purposes of trade – First-tier Tribunal deciding all issues against taxpayer – whether findings should be upheld – yes – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2015] UKUT 447 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.553194

Island Contract Management (UK) Ltd v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 28 Aug 2015

UTTC Construction Industry Scheme – notices of determination – whether UK contractor obliged to make deductions under the scheme in respect of payments made to its Isle of Man parent company – FA 2004 Sections 57 to 67 – Income Tax (Construction Industry Scheme) Regulations 2005 – appeals dismissed

Citations:

[2015] UKUT 472 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Construction, Income Tax

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.553195

D T E Financial Services Ltd v Wilson (Inspector of Taxes): ChD 9 Nov 1999

A scheme involving the use of offshore discretionary trusts resulting in the payment of funds to the directors of the company from which the payments originated was not effective to exclude such payments from liability to tax. Overall the scheme had the characteristics of artificiality allowing all but one steps to be disregarded. Nevertheless the payment had been made by, in effect, a trustee for the company as an intermediary, and the payment was taxable.

Citations:

Gazette 17-Nov-1999, Times 09-Nov-1999

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 203B

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.79770

Bayfine UK v HM Revenue and Customs: CA 23 Mar 2011

The revenue appealed against the confirmation of the grant of double taxation relief to the taxpayer company. The Court was asked whether the UK company was entitled under article 23(2)(a) to a credit, to set against UK tax on its profits, in respect of the US tax which had been paid by its US parent on the same profits. The Commissioners submitted that domestic law did not apply to ‘source’ for the purpose of article 23, because article 23 contained its own comprehensive clause for defining ‘source’: it was a free-standing treaty concept which applied for all the purposes of that article. Held; The court accepted the submission.
Arden LJ said that ‘article 23(3) contains its own rule as to how source [is] to be determined, save where tax has been imposed on the basis of citizenship’.

Judges:

Arden, Pitchford, Tomlinson LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 304, [2012] Bus LR 796, [2011] STI 1208, 13 ITL Rep 747, [2012] 1 WLR 1630, [2011] STC 717, [2011] BTC 242

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Bayfine UK v Revenue and Customs ChD 23-Mar-2010
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Anson v Revenue and Customs SC 1-Jul-2015
Interpretation of Double Taxation Agreements
This appeal is concerned with the interpretation and application of a double taxation agreement between the United Kingdom and the United States of America. A had been a member of an LLP in Delaware, and he was resident within the UK, but not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, International

Updated: 04 September 2022; Ref: scu.430825

HM Revenue and Customs v The Trustees of the Peter Clay Discretionary Trust: ChD 15 Nov 2007

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 2661 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Peter Clay Discretionary Trust v Revenue and Customs SCIT 27-Feb-2007
SCIT DISCRETIONARY TRUST – whether single fee for expenses of management that relate partly to income and partly to capital can be attributed partly to each for s 686(2AA) Taxes Act 1988 – yes – attribution . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – HM Revenue and Customs v Trustees of the Peter Clay Discretionary Trust CA 19-Dec-2008
The court was asked whether the Commissioners had been correct to disallow in a closure notice, the attribution in part to income in the year 2000-01 of expenses incurred by the trustees of a United Kingdom resident discretionary trust. The expenses . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, Trusts

Updated: 04 September 2022; Ref: scu.261461

Rowe and Others v Revenue and Customs: Admn 31 Jul 2015

Claims for judicial review seek to challenge the legality of partner payment notices (‘PPNs’) given by the Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs to the claimants in exercise of new powers under the Finance Act 2014%

Judges:

Simler DBE J

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 2293 (Admin), [2015] WLR(D) 369, [2015] BTC 27

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Finance Act 2014

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.550952

DJ Windsor and Co v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 19 Aug 2011

FTTTx Income tax – PAYE – employer’s end of year return – penalty for late submission – whether attempted electronic submission successful – on facts, no – whether reasonable excuse – no – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 558 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.449486