Tax News
|
The leader of a gang of duty free shoppers, who never even boarded their international flights, was jailed for 15 months on 22 October. He bought cheap air tickets so that the gang members could gain access to lounges at UK airports where they bought thousands of duty free cigarettes and then either left the airport or boarded domestic flights. The cigarettes were later sold on Tyneside evading thousands in excise duty and VAT. Christopher Campbell (39) from Chapel Park in Newcastle upon Tyne bought the air tickets for flights from UK regional airports including Newcastle, Bristol, Liverpool and East Midlands to random destinations in order to gain access to their duty free lounges and shops. The offences came to light when HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) staff at Newcastle International Airport were told that a passenger bound for Geneva had bought 16,000 cigarettes. However the same person was booked on a flight to Heathrow and was arrested. Campbell had booked both tickets. Campbell was convicted on 22 October 2009 of excise evasion offences and money laundering offences thought to total more than £100,000 over a two year period. John Houston, North East Head of Criminal Investigation for HMRC, said: “The motive behind this type of crime is quite simply greed. Campbell used the money to help fund an opulent lifestyle that saw him driving fast cars, buying designer goods and spending time at a members-only gym. “To abuse the UK tax system for personal financial gain is a serious crime but this case highlights that despite the efforts made by criminals to hide their illegitimate profit we have the powers that enable us to get to the bottom of smuggling crime. I would urge anyone with information about smuggling activity to call the Customs Hotline on 0800 59 5000.” Whilst sentencing Campbell yesterday (Thursday 22 October) HHJ Beatrice Bolton at Newcastle Crown Court commented that Campbell was not simply involved in organised crime he was quite simply ‘an organiser’ of crime and made clear that due to the serious nature of the offences there was no alternative but to impose a lengthy custodial sentence. Campbell was sentenced to 15 months in prison for money laundering and received 9 individual prison sentences of 9 months for each count of cigarette smuggling. In total he received a sentence of 96 months. The sentences will run concurrently.
Confiscation proceedings were also started in order
to try and recover the financial proceeds of his
criminal activity. VAT - Liability of property service charges following the European Court of Justice case of RLRE Tellmer (C-572/07) This Revenue & Customs Brief sets out HM Revenue & Customs' (HMRC) view of the judgment of the European Court of Justice ('ECJ') in the case of RLRE Tellmer ('Tellmer') and confirms that the UK's current VAT treatment of service charges is unchanged following this decision. Background The issue was whether the leasing of apartments and the related cleaning of the common parts of the apartment building formed a single exempt supply by the landlord, Tellmer. Tellmer argued this was the case but the Czech authorities argued that the cleaning services amounted to a separate taxable supply. The ECJ agreed that in the circumstances of Tellmer, the cleaning services could be separated from the property rental as a separate taxable supply. In the UK, it is common for property leasing and letting to include the provision of service charges for, amongst other things, cleaning services; to this extent there is some parallel with Tellmer. HMRC's current policy is that where the service charge arises as a condition under a lease and is to be provided by the lessor (or his agent) without the lessee having a choice, then we treat the rent and the service charge as consideration for a single supply - this is the case in most property leasing. This follows the Judgment of the ECJ in the case of Card Protection Plan ('CPP') (C-349/96) where the Court held that there is a single supply where one or more elements are to be regarded as constituting the principal supply, whilst one or more elements are to be regarded, by contrast, as ancillary supplies which share the tax treatment of the principal supply. The ECJ sought to apply the principles established in the case of CPP, and in two more recent ECJ cases, Levob (C-41/04) and Part Service (C-425/06), which also dealt with the issues of single and separate supplies. In reaching its judgment in the present case the ECJ concluded, on the basis of the limited facts available, that two separate supplies were made rather than a single indivisible supply. This must have been because, on the facts of the case, the tenants in the Czech Republic were not required to obtain the cleaning of the common parts from their landlord, but had a real option whether to ask their landlord to perform the cleaning of the common parts for additional consideration or to obtain those services themselves from a third party. Sideways loss relief: Tax-generated losses The Government has today announced action to counter avoidance that relies on using sideways loss relief. The new rules will prevent sideways relief and capital gains relief ('sideways loss relief') from being given for a loss from a trade, profession or vocation where the loss arises from tax avoidance arrangements. Legislation will be included in the Finance Bill 2010 but will be effective from today, 21 October 2009. This measure targets those who enter into arrangements for the purpose of obtaining a reduction in tax liability by means of sideways loss relief. It does not impact on loss-makers who have not entered into avoidance arrangements. Revenue & Customs Brief No 66/09
A man who traded in ivory from endangered species on eBay was sentenced to 10 months in prison today at Luton Crown Court following an international investigation by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC). Elephants’ tusks and whales’ teeth had been carved into billiard balls or used to make corkscrews before being sold on the commercial website. Nicholas Noonan, 46, of Bedfordshire, pleaded guilty on 5 October 2009 to charges relating to illegal trading in African elephant tusks and sperm whale teeth as well as ivory artefacts. The trade of these items is restricted under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Revenue & Customs Brief No 66/09
A record 83,000 scam emails offering fake tax refunds were reported to HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) in September. The online attacks, known as ‘phishing’, have continued this month, with an unprecedented 10,000 reports of the fraud made to HMRC on one day alone. The scam email tells the recipient they are due a tax refund and then asks for bank account or credit card details. Anyone who gives these details to the fraudsters risks their bank accounts being emptied and credit cards maxed to their limit. The victim also risks having their personal details sold on to other criminal gangs. The latest version of this scam originates from various different websites, which operate for 20 minutes before changing their domain name. John Harrison, Head of HMRC Customer Contact Online, said: “We only contact customers who are due a refund in writing by post. We never use emails, telephone calls or external companies in these circumstances. I would strongly encourage anyone receiving such an email not to open it, send it to us for investigation at phishing@hmrc.gsi.gov.uk and then delete it from their computer.” HMRC is taking action to disrupt these attacks and through co-operation with other law enforcement agencies in the UK and overseas a number of scam networks have been shut down.
Employers must file their 2009-10 Employer Annual Returns online New PAYE Regulations introduced on 13 August 2009 mean that virtually all employers are required to file their Employer Annual Return (P35 and P14s) online from the 2009-10 tax year onwards. The 2009-10 Return is due by 19 May 2010. PAYE: 2008-09 Penalties for outstanding P11D(b) returns If you have not yet sent your 2008-09 form P11D(b) Annual Return of Class 1A National Insurance contributions you may receive a penalty. HM Revenue & Customs will start sending penalty notices, from 9 November, where records show that form P11D(b) is still outstanding. This return was due by 6 July 2009.
HMRC prepares for new disclosure opportunity UK taxpayers with undisclosed income from offshore accounts will be invited to reveal their earnings and suffer a limited penalty under HMRC’s New Disclosure Opportunity, which is expected to run from Autumn 2009 until March 2010. HMRC has begun briefing professional bodies on the new scheme, including the Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT), which has welcomed the proposals. Gary Ashford, chairman of the CIOT’s management of taxes sub committee said: “Those people who have not declared offshore income have evaded tax and we do not condone tax evasion in any way. However, it makes every sense to help such people regularise their tax affairs, particularly as many will have fallen foul of the law through mistake or misunderstanding”. Ashford revealed that HMRC will impose a fine equal to 10% of the total unpaid tax owed in line with the previous Offshore Disclosure Facility (ODF) and tax advisers will be able to file online on behalf of clients.
Working Together: Dealing with R40 Cases HMRC’s June issue of Working Together (Issue 35) Includes a useful summary of key points in relation to R40 Claims cases. The treatment of taxpayers who claim refunds but are not within the PAYE or SA systems has been a slightly confused picture, and in response to issues raised through local Working Together HMRC has refined guidance to staff and produced a summary of how cases should be dealt with. HMRC would also be very interested to hear how claims cases are working and whether there are any particular operational issues that might be improved. Working Together Issue 35 published this month lists the following operational reminders. Where you need to lodge a 64-8 for a claims case you should not use CAAT at Longbenton, which continues to service SA and PAYE customers. The form should be sent to HMRC National Claims Office, Saxon House, 1 Causeway Lane, Leicester, LE1 4AA. If a claims case has a one off payment to make, then the claims office reference number and client National Insurance number should be written on the reverse of the cheque. When quoting claims references, the full reference number should be used, as Leicester now handles claims nationally, and the truncated reference sometimes used can be a duplicate. The full reference is unique, and will have the format NNN AA NNNNN, where A is an alphabetic and N a numeric character. It is possible that the final five digits may be only four in some cases. And finally, agents are asked to check the status of the CGT tick box at 1.5 on the R40 when they use software to prepare the form. Some software causes this to default to ticked, indicating that there is a capital gain to report. If this is incorrect it can result in lengthy delays while a CGT form is issued and the matter is then resolved to release the repayment. If the default status cannot be changed, the R40 should be accompanied by a letter asking HMRC to ignore the tick. Green taxes up but tax breaks remain minimal Taxpayers shelled out an additional £1.3bn in green taxes over the last year, but the government increased green tax breaks by just £130m according to research by UHY Hacker Young. The accounting group argues that with the value of all green tax breaks being just 3.4% of all green taxes, government policy is still geared towards punished polluters rather than rewarding environmentally responsible taxpayers. The figures revealed that in 2008-09 the government took a total of £31.9bn in green taxes, but handed back just £1,075m to environmentally friendly taxpayers. In 2007-08 the value of green taxes amounted to £30.7bn while green tax breaks were worth £945m.
It seems no one is immune to the pressures of the taxman, as pop duo the Cheeky Girls discovered recently when they were served with a bankruptcy order. Twins Monica and Gabriela Irimia, who shot to fame on ITV’s Popstars: The Rivals, are being chased for £60,000 in unpaid tax according to recent published reports. Louise Brittain of Baker Tilly is expected to be named as the bankruptcy trustee who will investigate the pair’s song rights. This isn’t the first time the Romanian born stars have got on the wrong side of the taxman; back in 2006 they faced a bankruptcy order over unpaid VAT, but claimed they were left out of pocket to the tune of £2m when their record company Telstar went bust. The sisters are rumoured to be in talks with BBC executives over a potential appearance on the new series of Strictly Come Dancing, which could add substantially to their income.
SME sales up despite recession One in 10 small businesses are enjoying a positive impact on sales in spite of the economic downturn. Hotels and restaurants traditionally see a slump in business during recessions, but a recent study by uSwitchforbusiness.com has revealed that these sectors are seeing the most benefits in the current climate. Researchers put the impact down to Brits holidaying at home combined with an influx of tourists as a result of the Euro's strength against the pounds. In addtion, the trend towards people eating at cheaper restaurants and the widespread availability of discount vouchers was also cited as a reason. Another surprising figure was found among small manufacturers; 22% of which said they were doing well. Despite such pockets of good news however, the majority of respondents reported to finding conditions tough. More than a third had seen a drop in demand, while the same proportion admitted to experiencing cashflow problems.
Lord Mandelson backs The Pitch 2009 The Pitch 2009, BusinessZone.co.uk's search for Britain's most innovative small companies, has been endorsed by business secretary Peter Mandelson. With heats in five UK cities, the competition will crown an overall winner at a special event during Enterprise Week in central London. The lucky entrepreneur will claim a £50,000 package of business support including practical help on PR, marketing and doing business online. Commenting on the contest, Mandelson said: "Entrepreneurs have a vital role to play in the economy. They are innovative, and have the conviction and enthusiasm to make their businesses succeed. "As such, they are uniquely placed to respond to the new opportunities which will arise during the current economic climate and as we look ahead towards recovery. "The Pitch 2009 offers an excellent opportunity for innovative businesses to access the advice and support available from fellow business leaders and other support organisations."
UK Web Icons launch £50m start-up fund Two of the UK's most successful internet entrepreneurs are to launch a new European investment fund aimed at bridging the equity gap suffered by new technology businesses. Brent Hoberman, co-founder of Lastminute.com and Michael Birch, the man behind social network Bebo, are to set up European Founders Capital (EFC) in an effort to increase the availability of early-stage funding in Europe. The Sunday Times reports that the venture is also backed by Rogan Angelini-Hurll, who turned down the chance to co-found Lastminute.com which Hoberman and Martha Lane Fox sold to Travelocity in 2005 for £577m and Peter Dubens, who set up broadband business Pipex before later selling it for £210m. EFC will kick off with £20m of seed funding but it is believed the fund will quickly rise to £50m. "We aren't taking institutional money," Birch told the Sunday Times. "All the money comes from founders – people who have done it before." According to the British Venture Capital Association, member firms managed to raise only £230m in 2008, a drop of £1bn on 2006. Hoberman and Birch claim EFC will help overcome the funding gap which exists between business angels, who typically invest between £50,000 and £100,000, and venture capitalists who back firms that have matured beyond their initial concept with in excess of £1m.
Drug dealer turned entrepreneur helps MP’s manage their expenses Software entrepreneur Duane Jackson, who was once arrested for drug dealing in the US, has launched a new product targeted at politicians who have problems managing their expenses. Following recent revelations about controversial expense claims by the likes of home secretary Jacqui Smith, the boss of accounting software company KashFlow said he has the perfect answer. The entrepreneur, whose chairman is former Conservative trade minister Lord Young, claimed the product known as 'The Ministry of Accounting' will "empower" MPs rather than "weighing them down with cumbersome paperwork". "Because it is online, MPs can access their accounts anywhere, he added, "whether it is a laptop at an airport, constituency office, London home or on the road, and with shared access possible, they are completely transparent. In addition, Jackson said the colour scheme is green and grey so it is reminiscent of the House of Commons. According to a KashFlow spokesperson, 'The Ministry of Accounting' has been successfully trialled with 25 MPs. He also claimed that during a recent Prince's Trust event, chancellor Alistair Darling joked with Jackson that he could do with some 'kashflow' at The Treasury. Earlier this month, it was revealed that Jacqui Smith included in an expense claim the cost of two pay-per-view pornographic movies watched by her husband. Other politicians have already courted controversy over claiming second home expenses for houses which they don't use.
Budget 2008: Darling confirms new CGT reformsAs outlined in draft legislation recently released by HMRC, a flat 18% CGT rate will be introduced from 6 April, with a 10% entrepreneurs' relief applying for the first £1m of asset sales. Ahead of Wednesday's speech, few analysts predicted that Darling would delay implementation of the plans but with its implementation now confirmed, experts were still critical of its potential impact. From 6 April 2008 substantial changes to Capital Gains Tax (CGT) will apply to individuals, trustees and personal representatives, but not for companies. The Finance Act 2008 will introduce the following changes: A main rate of CGT of 18% will apply to all gains other than those covered by the new entrepreneurs tax relief or the CGT annual exemption. A lower rate of 10%* for gains on certain business assets which are covered by the new Entrepreneur relief (see below). Capital gains will not longer be taxed by reference to income tax rates and bands. The following will be abolished: taper relief, indexation allowance (currently frozen at April 1998), and 'halving relief', however, in some cases, indexation will not be lost after 6 April 2008. Rebasing of cost to 31 March 1982 value will be compulsory for assets held at that date. Simplification of the rules for matching certain assets (mostly shares) disposed of with assets acquired. The new Entrepreneur’s relief will be available in respect of gains made on the disposal of certain business assets. * not exactly, slightly higher rates apply if the CGT annual exemption is unused. Entrepreneur's Relief Although not dissimilar to CGT retirement relief which was phased out in 2002/03, Draft Entrepreneurs' relief will not be based on any age or illness conditions and the qualifying holding period will only be one year. The first £1 million of lifetime gains on qualifying business assets will be charged to CGT at an effective rate of 10-ish per cent. Gains in excess of £1 million will be charged at the normal 18 per cent rate. An individual will be able to make claims for relief on more than one occasion, up to a lifetime total of £1 million of gains qualifying for this type of relief.
VAT: Adjustments when builders let before selling HMRC has published an Information Sheet 07/08 which provides guidance, including worked examples, on the VAT implications when house builders decide to temporarily let their dwellings before selling them. It says that it has issued this is in response to recent enquiries from the house building sector and takes account of the High Court decision in the joined cases of Curtis Henderson and Briararch [1992] STC 732 which arose in the early 1990s. if you temporarily let a dwelling before selling it, you may affect the VAT you can recover on your costs as partial exemption rules come into play many house builders who temporarily let a dwelling will not be affected but you need to check this to avoid making VAT mistakes there is an easy way to check if you are affected by applying what we describe here as a ‘simple check for de minimis’ Like any business, a house builder checks for de minimis by applying his partial exemption method. Large builders may already be partly exempt and familiar with operating a partial exemption method, but smaller ones may not. Exceptionally, HMRC will allow a builder that does not currently operate a partial exemption method, to adopt instead a ‘simple check for de minimis’. This simple check is based on the expected time period he will let his building as a proportion of the economic life of that building, which for VAT purposes is ten years. His exempt input tax is determined by applying the proportion to his total input tax. Provided his exempt input tax does not exceed £625 per month on average (up to £7,500 per year), and is not more than half of his total input tax, then his exempt input tax is de minimis and he can recover it in full. Do remember that the ‘de minimis’ test applies to the total input tax incurred including for example any input tax on general overheads such as bookkeeping costs.
Uncertainty about tax system fuels company emigrationBaker Tilly says that 'The timing of recent announcements suggests that the ultimate outcome of the Treasury's review of the taxation of foreign profits is not the decisive factor. If it was, companies might well defer a decision until the widely-expected autumn announcement from the Treasury. The fact that a small but growing number of companies seem prepared to jump ahead of the announcement suggests a belief that any Treasury announcement now will simply not meet their needs.' The apparent exodus is despite the fact that the government announced major changes to its proposals for the reform of the taxation of foreign profits of UK multinationals back in July. These included deferring the introduction of a tax exemption for foreign dividends and the proposed extension of the CFC rules. Baker Tilly blame this on "the continuing uncertainty surrounding the UK tax system may have reached the point where companies are no longer prepared to wait to find out, when other more favourable and already established foreign tax regimes beckon. After so many uncoordinated tax changes in the UK, many dogged by U-turns, poor execution and unintended consequences, this is hardly surprising. The Treasury has painted itself into a corner. Whatever it says and does next, it must display a clear grasp of the commercial issues and a real understanding of the needs of large corporates that have to make business decisions on a timescale far longer than the lifespan of an elected parliament, or risk becoming irrelevant to those decisions. There may well be legitimate concerns about the impact on corporate tax revenues of any significant change. However, one thing is certain: the supply of golden eggs will dry up if continuing prevarication results in many more geese being killed.
Penalties and the standard of proofTaxpayers (and their agents) are often perplexed by the difference between criminal and civil procedures, so too it seems, are some General Commissioners. In the case of HMRC v Khawaja (2008) EWHC 1687 the taxpayer claimed that HMRC should apply the criminal standard of 'proof beyond reasonable doubt' when issuing penalties on the basis of an estimated understatement of income. This is in contrast to the civil standard where proof is decided 'on the balance of probabilities' and despite the fact that tax penalties in the case were being settled under the civil code, as happens in the majority of cases.* HMRC had issued assessments to cover an understatement of Mr Khawaja's income from his restaurant business, and it later served a notice claiming penalties under s 95(1), TMA 1970 for negligently submitting incorrect tax returns. The taxpayer appealed to the General Commissioners who applied the criminal standard and decided it had not been proved beyond reasonable doubt that the taxpayer had been negligent in his returns of earned income. HMRC appealed on the basis that it should have been the civil one, and the High Court decided in HMRC's favour. The case was therefore sent back to the General Commissioners for rehearing using the appropriate standard of proof.
Anti-avoidance: Simplification Review HMRC published an update report on the Anti-Avoidance Simplification Review on 17 July . The objective of the review is to consider how anti-avoidance legislation can best meet the twin aims of simplicity and revenue protection. The update follows on from the earlier progress report published at Budget 2008, and focuses on three areas of the review: Transactions in Securities, Certain rules relating to shares acquired by employees and Greater alignment of the various unallowable purposes’ tests.
New Compliance Checks: Guidance will be subject to consultation HMRC has just announced that it is setting up an implementation team which will be responsible for producing Technical and Operational Guidance together with a comprehensive learning package. In a radical move for the department, it says that all these three elements will be the subject of external consultation. Technical Guidance will be put to external consultation by the end of September. Operational Guidance will be produced in sections and once a section is completed, consultation will be sought. The implementation team say that they wish to work collaboratively with businesses and their representatives and welcome early contact and views ahead of the process outlined above.
Advising on Fee Protection could land you in trouble with the FSA
The ICAEW has
identified an issue for some firms with regard to fee protection
insurance. It says that if your firm invites clients to pay a fixed
amount in advance to cover a possible HMRC investigation, this may
amount to fee protection insurance and you may be undertaking a
regulated activity. The same applies if you simply advise a
client to go with a particular insurer. Simply charging a fee when an investigation occurs is not a regulated activity. Charging a fee now, with the intention of dealing with an investigation (should one arise) in the future, means you are probably acting as an insurer and therefore need FSA authorisation.
An insurance contract
has the following features:
The ICAEW says:
"Advising clients to take out a particular insurance policy is a
regulated activity and you need a designated professional body
licence or FSA authorisation."
Dragonfly Consultancy Ltd specialises in IT testing services, and the Professional Contractors Group (PCG) is funding the appeal by Dragonfly's co-owner, Jon Bessell, against a ruling at the Special Commissioners that he was caught by IR35 and owed £99,000 in extra tax. The PCG say that if this appeal is rejected, the ruling could undermine much of the successful defence against IR35 established by PCG in numerous cases since IR35 came into force, however, a ruling is not expected until mid-summer. The PCG give the facts of this case as follows: Jon Bessell is an IT systems tester. He is sole director and 50% shareholder of Dragonfly Consultancy Ltd. The IR35 case pertains to three contracts on three separate projects, from January 2000 to January 2003,in which the client was the AA and the agency was DPP International Ltd. The amount of tax at stake is £99,000. Under existing case law, one would expect Mr Bessell to be found outside IR35: he was subject to a low level of direction and control; he had a right to substitute, albeit fettered (but not unusually so); and there was no ongoing obligation between him and the client. He was clearly in business on his own account The Commissioner concluded that: the limited right of substitution did not point away from employment; the degree of control pointed towards employment; the intentions of the parties was irrelevant. He found that the following factors pointed “weakly” away from employment: Dragonfly’s provision of Mr Bessell’s equipment Dragonfly’s provision of training for Mr Bessell Mr Bessell’s work for another client The lack of any sick pay or holiday pay for Mr Bessell. The Commissioner stated: “Overall I find nothing which points strongly to the conclusion that Mr Bessell would have been in business on his own account.”
Chancellor Darling has announced major changes to his Pre-Budget proposals for Capital Gains Reform by introducing: A new entrepreneur’s relief, A new lower tax rate (10%) on entrepreneur's gains, and A new £1 million lifetime allowance for gains made by entrepreneurs. In a ministerial statement in the House of Commons today he introduced a £1 million lifetime allowance in respect of any chargeable gains, which forms the basis of a new CGT entrepreneurs relief. Gains which exceed the annual CGT exemption and do not exceed £1 million will be taxed at 10%. Any gains in excess will be taxed at the mainstream CGT rate of 18%. The relief will apply to entrepreneurs who dispose of all or part of a trading business, trading partnership, or shares in a trading company providing that they are a director or employee and hold a stake of at least 5% in the business. It will also apply to disposals of business assets after the cessation of a business. The chancellor said that the measure will also benefit venture capitalists, business angels and all those who take a stake of 5% of more. No changes will be made the to the CGT annual exemption. No changes have been made to EIS, VCT and rollover reliefs. Employee tax advantaged share schemes remain intact such as EMI, etc and employees will pay tax at 18% if their shareholding is less than 5%. He added that anti-avoidance measures are in the pipeline to ensure that income cannot be disguised as capital.
Accountants and Lawyers to join forces in Scotland The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) first called for lawyers and accountants to be allowed to work in partnership six years ago, but despite assurances the Law Society would be given sole responsibility for all parties, its practice rules continue to forbid its members from working in multi-disciplinary parterships (MDPs). However, a new ruling form the OFT has prompted the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland (ICAS) to launch a Scotland-specific campaign backing the proposed “one-stop shop” this week. Pending a super-complaint last year from consumer group which? about restrictions and access in the Scottish legal profession, the OFT has again weighed in on the side of the MDP. “We have long been in favour of the removal of restrictions on the formation of MDPs, which would allow non-lawyers to become partners in legal firms,” the OFT said. It pointed out that examples of Scottish MDPs already existed, to the extent that firms of solicitors often employed accountants but did not permit them to become partners. “We believe that many consumers would welcome a ‘one-stop shop’ in relation to house purchase, for example, where they could receive all of the various professional services required under one roof,” argued the OFT report. “In addition to convenience, this should benefit consumers financially as a result of the cost savings made by the partnership in reduced overheads.”
New CGT Rules could break EU Law European regulations which rule that changes to tax legislation must provide taxpayers with a reasonable period of time to assert their right to claim reliefs means the government's capital gains tax (CGT) reforms could be breaking the law, accountants have claimed. Responding to the chancellor's readjusted CGT changes announced last Thursday, the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland (ICAS) said the reforms go against previous legal decisions which indicate that a transitional period of 90 days, more than the time period proposed by Darling, is insufficient. ICAS' Derek Allen said: "Taxpayers now have less than 10 weeks to rearrange their assets and, if necessary, try to arrange a disposal to protect some of the indexation relief which may have accrued because of inflation between 1982 and 1998. "It is wrong to tax inflationary gains and it would be contrary to European Law to deny taxpayers sufficient transitional time to rearrange their affairs before the new legislation is enacted. "At the very least, the chancellor should defer the implementation of this legislation for up to two years. If this is not possible, he should still allow taxpayers who owned assets at 6 October 2007 a period of up to two years to sell those assets and gain the benefit of indexation allowance."
Tower Mcashback LLP1, Tower Mcashback LLP2 v The Commissioners For
Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs Sp C 619
Guidance on the New Management Expenses Anti-Avoidance Provision
Hutchison 3G UK Ltd & Ors v C & E Commrs v C & E Commrs (Case
C-369/04)
Oriel Support Limited v The Commissioners For HMRC Sp C 615
Taxation of the foreign profits of companies: a discussion document
Standards for
Investment Reporting 5000
- Investment Reporting Standards Applicable To Public Reporting
Engagements On Financial Information Reconciliations: Exposure Draft
Momin & Ors v R & C Commrs [2007] EWHC 1400 (Ch)
Michael Peter Forbes v The Commissioners For Her Majesty's Revenue &
Customs Sp C 613
Limitgood Ltd And Prizedome Limited v The Commissioners For Her
Majesty's Revenue & Customs Sp C 612
DCC Holdings (UK) Limited v The Commissioners For HMRC Sp C 611
Boake Allen Ltd & Ors (including NEC Semi-conductors Ltd) v R & C
Commrs [2007] UKHL 25
Barclays Bank plc v R & C Commrs [2007] EWCA Civ 442
R & C Commrs v Decadt
Allnutt & Anor v Wilding & Ors [2007] EWCA Civ 412
Discussion Paper - Preliminary Views on Insurance Contracts
Discounted Gift Schemes
(DGSs)
David Peter Herman, Barbara Herman v The Commissioners For HMRC Sp C
609
Bank of Ireland Britain Holdings Ltd v R & C Commrs [2007 EWHC 941
(Ch)
R (on the application of R & C Commrs) v General Commissioners of
Income Tax for Berkshire [2007] EWHC 871 (Admin)
Practice Note 24 The Audit Of Friendly Societies In
The United Kingdom (Revised)
Financial Reporting Standard For Smaller Entities (Effective January
2007)
|