Deemed buy-back meaning

In this issue: Competition and state aid Corporate Data protection and cybersecurity Free movement, employment and immigration Financial services Insurance and reinsurance IP Life sciences Regulatory TMT International trade Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Trackers and horizon scanners Competition and state aid State aid—Commission reviews State aid rules for banks in difficulty The European Commission has launched a call for evidence to update the State aid regime for banks in difficulty. The current framework consists of six distinct communications, last revised in 2013. See News Analysis: EU Competition law—daily round-up (17/03/2026). State aid—Commission adopts new State aid rules to boost the use of more sustainable ways of transport The Commission has approved new State aid Land and Multimodal Transport Guidelines (LMT Guidelines) and a Transport Block Exemption Regulation (TBER), refreshing the EU State aid framework to encourage more sustainable passenger and freight transport,...

See Q&A: What constitutes consideration for money or money’s worth within the meaning of IHTA 1984, s 142(3) which would prevent the ‘reading back’ of a variation of a Will or intestacy made under IHTA 1984, s 142(1)? Section 142 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (IHTA 1984) sets out a particular approach for inheritance tax where a legatee named in a Will redirects some or all of their legacy. In these circumstances, provided the conditions in IHTA 1984, s 142 are satisfied, the Will is deemed to have made the legacy—or an increased legacy, as appropriate—directly to the person who receives the redirected gift, and to have made a correspondingly smaller legacy to the original beneficiary. In effect, for inheritance tax purposes, the arrangement is treated as though the Will itself had conferred the adjusted entitlement from the outset, with the recipient taking the enlarged share and the original legatee’s entitlement reduced by an equivalent sum...

Hugh Osmond and another v HMRC [2024] UKFTT 378 (TC) The taxpayers were individuals resident in the UK and entrepreneurs, being serial entrepreneurs. They subscribed for shares qualifying under the EIS in a company named Xercise Ltd. The company had originally run a loss-making sports club operation, which was disposed of by sale. The taxpayers kept their stakes and retained the company, repurposing it as a corporate holding vehicle to back another business venture. When that venture was subsequently sold, they inserted a new parent company (Xercise2 Ltd), intended to inherit the EIS status, and Xercise Ltd was then wound up thereafter. In March 2015, the taxpayers and Xercise2 Ltd made share buy-backs, and the taxpayers contended that the sums they received were a capital return, fully relieved from CGT under EIS disposal relief, so no chargeable gain arose. HMRC...

ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note, which reviews the tax measures introduced by the government in response to the coronavirus pandemic and other tax steps of particular relevance, is not updated and is provided for background information only The government introduced a series of measures in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis, either specific to the UK tax regime or administered by HMRC. HMRC also published a business support finder tool to help businesses and the self-employed swiftly identify what financial assistance was available. See: Find coronavirus support for your business. For ease of use, this Practice Note is divided into: EMPLOYMENT SELF-EMPLOYMENT TRADING LOSSES VAT STAMP TAXES INTERNATIONAL TAXES MANAGEMENT AND LITIGATION INCENTIVISED INVESTMENT EMPLOYMENT Coronavirus job retention scheme (CJRS)—CLOSED The coronavirus job retention scheme (CJRS) offered support to employers with a UK payroll by way of a grant to help meet salary costs for ‘furloughed’ employees during the pandemic. The initial iteration...

The derivative contracts rules The derivative contracts regime determines how a company’s profits and losses arising from its derivative arrangements are taxed. The core provisions are contained in Part 7 of the Corporation Tax Act 2009 (CTA 2009), which this Practice Note refers to simply as Part 7. Relevant secondary legislation also applies, in particular the regulations commonly called the ‘Disregard Regs’ (the Loan Relationships and Derivative Contracts (Disregard and Bringing into Account of Profits and Losses) Regulations 2004, SI 2004/3256). This Practice Note considers the entities involved, together with the categories of instruments and transactions that fall within the ambit of the derivative contracts regime. For rules on computation—covering how profits and losses on derivative contracts are calculated and brought into account for corporation tax—see Practice Note: Taxation of derivatives—the main rules...

In some situations, borrowers can step away from agreements covered by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA 1974) within 14 days. This Practice Note sets out when that withdrawal right arises and how to use it in practice. It clarifies availability and the steps to take in detail. It also looks at parallel provisions for P2P agreements contained in the Consumer Credit sourcebook (CONC) too. Introduction The withdrawal right for regulated agreements is anchored in CCA 1974, s 66A, which transposed the EU Consumer Credit Directive (2008/48/EC). Two preliminary points deserve emphasis at the outset. First, the substance of this right has remained largely unchanged since responsibility for consumer credit was assumed by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in April 2014, following the transfer of functions. Nevertheless, alterations to the framework are anticipated, so readers should stay alert to legal developments (see: Consumer credit—essentials—Reform of the FCA consumer credit regime). Second, withdrawal is distinct from cancellation. Although each appears to let a consumer ‘back out’ after signing a...