Central funds meaning

Original News Anderson v HMRC [2016] UKFTT 0565 (TC) What was the case about? In his tax return, Mr Anderson sought £3m of relief under sections 64 and 72 ITA 2007, claiming losses from trading activities labelled ‘football development’. He had put funds into the Bafana soccer academy in South Africa, created to cultivate emerging football talent and generate income through the profitable transfer of successful players. HMRC issued a discovery assessment, asserting the losses did not stem from a trade conducted on a commercial basis with a view to profit, and that the predominant purpose of the activity was to secure a tax advantage. Why did the appellant dispute the validity of the discovery assessment? The appellant’s central challenge was that there had been no ‘discovery’. At the point the assessment was raised, HMRC, he said, lacked reasonable grounds to believe Mr Anderson had been under-assessed, as it did not possess adequate information to support such a conclusion at the relevant time. In particular, the...

In this issue: Brexit headlines Brexit SIs Post-Brexit transition guidance Constitutional and administrative law Judicial review Equality and human rights Public Procurement Subsidy control and State aid Information law Other Public Law news LexTalk®Public Law: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Brexit headlines The Foreign Affairs Committee urges a White Paper on the UK-EU reset and the publication of the Dynamic Alignment Bill. Its Third Report of Session 2024–26, From a Common Understanding to Common Ground: Building a UK EU Strategic Partnership fit for the future, assesses the government’s approach and progress on reconfiguring UK-EU relations. Aimed at shaping parliamentary scrutiny of the next phase of UK-EU engagement, it lands while discussions with the EU and internal cross-government efforts continue. The Committee concludes that, although the Lancaster House summit in May 2025 created a platform...

In this issue: Spring Budget 2024 The Pensions Regulator Pensions taxation The Pension Protection Fund Investment Scheme governance Daily and weekly news alerts Dates for your diary Trackers Spring Budget 2024 Key pensions announcements and views from the market In the Spring Budget 2024, delivered on 6 March 2024, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, outlined the government’s central objective: to stimulate growth by funnelling more capital into UK equity markets, improving the UK’s standing as a listing venue, and building on the Mansion House reforms announced in the Autumn Statement 2023. Key pensions measures include: expanding the regulatory remit of the Pensions Regulator (TPR) and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) to enable the closure or winding-up of poorly performing defined contribution (DC) schemes, aligned with the reformed Value for Money (VFM) framework requiring DC funds to publish, by 2027, a public breakdown of...

This Practice Note examines the rules governing systematic internalisers (SIs) within the recast Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (Directive 2014/65/EU) (MiFID II), as updated by Directive (EU) 2024/790 (the MiFID II Review), and the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (Regulation (EU) 600/2014) (MiFIR), as revised by Regulation (EU) 2024/791 (the MiFIR Review), collectively referred to as the MiFID II framework. For further detail on trading venues under the MiFID II framework—regulated markets (RMs), multilateral trading facilities (MTFs) and organised trading facilities (OTFs)—see Practice Note: MiFID II: EU trading venues. What are systematic internalisers and why are they regulated? Funds, insurers and other major investors typically choose between two routes when trading securities. They may transact on a trading venue where many participants interact, or deal directly with an investment firm that settles by dealing on its own account. In the latter scenario, the securities traded are drawn from, or placed into, the firm’s proprietary holdings; put differently, the firm executes the trade ‘internally’...

Defendants' costs orders The framework for obtaining a defendant’s costs order (DCO) is set by the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 (POA 1985). Any sums due under a DCO are paid from central funds. Practitioners should consult the Costs Practice Direction (Costs in Criminal Proceedings) 2015, which sets out guidance on the principles and processes for granting costs to acquitted defendants in criminal cases. See also Practice Note: Criminal Practice Directions. The scope of the court’s authority to issue a DCO is identified below in detail...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. During the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak, the UK government brought in a range of measures to assist individuals and businesses negatively affected by the pandemic. Several measures involved funds paid directly by central or local government with no requirement to repay, ie grants rather than loans. For further details on these schemes, see Practice Note: Coronavirus (COVID-19)—tax implications [Archived]. Guidance on these schemes stated that recipients should recognise such grants as taxable income, as they effectively substituted business income that would otherwise have been earned. On 29 May 2020, the government released draft legislation, a tax information and impact note, and explanatory notes for consultation. This was ultimately enacted as section 106 and Schedule 16 to the Finance Act 2020 (FA 2020). The legislation’s purposes were: to treat COVID-19 support payments as income where the business fell within the scope of income tax or corporation tax to empower HMRC to claw back payments to which...

1 Introduction 1.1 Bribery and corruption persist as significant problems in global commerce, notwithstanding numerous targeted initiatives to deter them. They inflict serious harm on communities where they arise. They: 1.1.1 divert funds and other assets away from those most in need; 1.1.2 impede economic and social progress; 1.1.3 harm enterprise, notably by pushing up the price of goods and services. 1.2 Our statutory duties are chiefly set by the Bribery Act 2010 (BA 2010). BA 2010 applies to us as a UK organisation if bribery happens anywhere within our operations. 1.3 We conduct our business [ es ] with integrity, and in a frank and principled way. Each of us must act to ensure [ insert organisation’s name ] stays free from bribery or corruption. 1.4 This policy is central to that aim. It is fully endorsed by the [ insert, eg Board ]. It explains the measures everyone must follow to stop bribery and corruption in our...

This Precedent This Precedent is intended to help you comply with Regulation 19(1) of the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (MLR 2017), SI 2017/692, as amended. The requirement is to regularly review and update your policies, controls and procedures, and to keep a written note of any amendments made, along with the steps taken to communicate those policies and any revisions within your business... Store it in a central place, eg on your intranet, so all staff can access it. If plans and policies are held electronically, consider making the document names hyperlinks to the actual files for ease of use. Alternatively, you may prefer a central register capturing all policies, plans and procedures, not only those relating to AML and CTF. For more information see Precedent: Register of policies, plans and procedures. Click to download this register in Excel. Please note that this register has been prepared in Excel and it...

1 Introduction 1.1 Despite concerted attempts to stamp it out, tax evasion continues to be a significant problem across global commerce. 1.2 Where it happens, it harms societies profoundly, channelling funds and resources away from those in greatest need and stalling economic and social progress. 1.3 As a UK organisation, we are impacted when criminal facilitation of tax evasion occurs anywhere within our business [ es ]. 1.4 We conduct our business [ es ] with integrity, acting honestly and ethically. Everyone must collaborate so that [ it OR they ] remain [ s ] free from any facilitation of tax evasion. 1.5 This policy is central to that commitment and is fully endorsed by the [ insert senior management body, eg Board ]. It explains the actions we must all take to stop the facilitation of tax evasion in our business [ es ] and to meet the requirements of applicable law. It is not incorporated into any employee’s contract of employment,...