-
1 month ago | 
taxjournal.com | David Whiscombe |Chris Mortimer |Philip Ridgway |Elena Rowlands
Adequacy of reasons given by FTT: In H Rafferty v HMRC [2025] UKUT 63 (TCC) (19 February) the taxpayer was given limited permission to appeal to the UT against closure notices assessments and penalties. The decision of the UT in rejecting the appeal is largely fact specific but paras 40 onwards are worth reading for their discussion of the consequences of an FTT not giving adequate reasons for its decision.
-
1 month ago | 
taxjournal.com | David Whiscombe |Chris Mortimer |Philip Ridgway |Elena Rowlands
In Chelsea Cloisters Management Ltd v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 205 (TC) (12 February) the FTT concluded that it had no jurisdiction in respect of a disputed application of an extra-statutory concession. The FTT however opined that if it did have jurisdiction it would have found in favour of the taxpayer. Chelsea Cloisters Management Ltd (CCML) is a management company for a property in London known as Chelsea Cloisters.
-
1 month ago | 
taxjournal.com | Philip Ridgway |David Whiscombe |Chris Mortimer |Elena Rowlands
When did we let this happen? And more fundamentally, why do we let this happen? HMRC have gone back on their decision on how to tax limited partners. In effect, a year ago they changed the law to impose tax, and now they’ve changed it back again (see Tax Journal, 14 February 2025). Hurrah for common sense. But all this was done without spilling a single drop of legislative ink. Even in the mess that is the US, an elected person makes an executive order which can be challenged quickly in the courts.
-
1 month ago | 
taxjournal.com | Elena Rowlands |Tom Margesson |Helen Buchanan |Jeremy Mindell
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
Username *
Password *
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this article in full.
-
1 month ago | 
taxjournal.com | Chris Mortimer |David Whiscombe |Elena Rowlands |Tom Margesson
We are aware of several private equity (PE) fund managers receiving ‘nudge’ letters from HMRC concerning VAT compliance. This follows a similar campaign commenced by HMRC in summer 2024 focusing on retail fund managers and other financial services businesses. For retail fund managers, the nudge letters were followed by proposed changes in HMRC policy, which are currently the subject of vigorous debate between industry representatives and HMRC.
-
1 month ago | 
taxjournal.com | David Whiscombe |Elena Rowlands |Tom Margesson |Helen Buchanan
What do tax lawyers talk about at lunch? In my case, it’s been the UK Supreme Court’s majority decision (4:1) in Royal Bank of Canada [2025] UKSC 2. It seems so unusual these days to have a split Supreme Court decision that it is worth delving deeper into Lord Briggs’ dissent in that case – not least because it’s on the scope of something that has become a fundamental tenet of tax law, the Ramsay principle of statutory construction. What was Lord Briggs’ dissenting judgment about?
-
1 month ago | 
taxjournal.com | David Whiscombe |Chris Mortimer |Philip Ridgway |Elena Rowlands
HMRC have published the GAAR Advisory Panel’s opinion on arrangements involving transfers of amounts into employee trusts (IHTA 1984 s 28) which sought to reduce or eliminate IHT. The deceased had put around £1m into a company she had set up. The company established an employee trust and separately allocated shares to the deceased which were then gifted into the trust. The aim was that IHT on the deceased’s estate would be significantly reduced because of the effect of s 28.
-
1 month ago | 
taxjournal.com | Dominic Robertson |Elena Rowlands
Pillar Two. Partnership taxation (especially the salaried members rules). Tax disputes in the UK and elsewhere, especially on transfer pricing and double tax relief. Pensions tax issues from using DB surplus (a nice problem to have after years of advising on pension deficits). And several M&A transactions, of course. I would repeal Diverted Profits Tax (DPT). DPT achieved its political purpose long ago, in helping the Conservatives win re-election in 2015.
-
1 month ago | 
taxjournal.com | David Whiscombe |Chris Mortimer |Philip Ridgway |Elena Rowlands
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
Username *
Password *
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this article in full.
-
1 month ago | 
taxjournal.com | David Whiscombe |Chris Mortimer |Philip Ridgway |Elena Rowlands
In HMRC v Asset House Piccadilly Ltd [2025] UKFTT 206 (TC) (12 February) the FTT allowed HMRC’s application and made an order that the arrangements put in place by the respondent AHP were notifiable arrangements within the disclosure of tax avoidance schemes (DOTAS) rules. The FTT rejected AHP’s argument that it was not a ‘promoter’ of the arrangements.
