Featured documents
R (Greyhound Board of Great Britain Ltd) v Welsh Ministers [2026] EWHC 670 (Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling reinforces the constitutional divide between the courts and the legislature. It explains that the scheme and framework of the Government of Wales Act 2006 (GWA 2006) embody that separation of powers, and that any judicial attempt to recognise and enforce a common law obligation on Welsh Ministers to consult prior to introducing legislation in the Senedd would trespass upon that boundary. This is not a departure from established principle; case law has already upheld comparable rules for lawmakers in Scotland and at Westminster. However, this is the first express confirmation of the position for Welsh lawmakers, and the first time this dimension of the GWA 2006 has been analysed in such depth. The court examined earlier
The solution arrived through the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), a quasi‑judicial body handling mass claims, created under UN Security Council Resolution 687. By addressing environmental harm—most notably via its ‘F4’ claim class—the UNCC set a seminal benchmark shaping how international law and contemporary arbitral panels allocate financial responsibility for wartime ecological devastation. With present-day wars in areas such as Eastern Europe and the Middle East bringing dam breaches, strikes on chemical facilities, and the burning of farmland, the UNCC’s legacy endures as an essential reference point for states, global investors, and companies engaged in post‑conflict arbitration. The F4 claims: Quantifying the unquantifiable Prior to the 1990s, mechanisms in international law for war reparations overwhelmingly favoured property loss, foregone earnings, and bodily injury. The natural world was commonly treated as a mute, non-compensable victim of armed hostilities...
Understanding the farming business as a business Many farms still use long-standing structures that arose by habit, not strategy. Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common. While once effective, such setups can cause major issues around succession, tax planning and involving the next generation. A corporate team can take a fresh, business-led view of the farm, asking: Who owns the land and other critical assets? Who manages daily operations? Who carries the risk and who enjoys the return? What is the enduring plan for succession? From this review, the team can confirm whether the current setup is fit for purpose or if an alternative — for example an updated partnership agreement, a company, a limited liability partnership, or a blended model — would better meet the family’s aims. Tax efficiency through joined-up advice Tax sits at the centre of most
Most recent News
Beard v HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 385 Section 402(1) of the Income Tax ( Trading and Other Income) Act 2005 ( ITTOIA 2005) levies income tax on dividends paid by companies that are not UK resident. Under s 402(4), dividends do not encompass ‘dividends of a capital nature’. Aside from that carve-out, the statute does not define ‘dividend’. The Explanatory Notes to the Bill that became ITTOIA 2005 indicate that identifying a dividend ‘will usually be a matter of referring to the relevant company law’. Case law has clarified the concept of a ‘dividend’ in other settings (for example, Memec v IRC [1996] STC 1336) and the capital versus income character of payments (for example, IRC v Reid’s Trustees [1949] AC 361, In re Duff’s Settlement [1951] Ch 923, Rae v Lazard [1963] 1 WLR 555, Courtaulds v Fleming [1969] 1 WLR 1683,...
Roseline Logistics Ltd v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 427 ( TC) HMRC served the appellant ( Roseline) with a post-clearance demand note in relation to import VAT arising. The demand concerned 32 import declarations submitted by Roseline during a specified period, apparently on behalf of QP Trading Ltd ( QPTL). Roseline lodged those declarations whilst acting, or purporting to act, as QPTL’s customs agent throughout that timeframe. Each declaration used post import VAT accounting ( PIVA), the effect of which is to allow a trader to account for import VAT on its VAT return rather than paying VAT at the point of import, and this method of VAT accounting is very commonly used in practice. However, QPTL was not eligible to use PIVA at that time. Accordingly, PIVA could not properly be applied to those entries......
In this issue: Budgets and Finance Bills Private equity and venture capital Real estate tax Reorganisations, restructuring and insolvency VAT Taxes management and litigation Employment taxes Individuals and income tax International Lex Talk®Tax: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Budgets and Finance Bills Tax update spring 2025 On 28 April 2025, the government set out a suite of technical tax policy proposals to simplify and reform the tax system and strengthen its administration. Styled ‘ Tax update spring 2025: simplification, administration and reform’, this replaced the label used in prior years, ‘ Tax administration and maintenance’. The package featured draft legislation, new consultations, various technical papers and replies to consultations, together with updates on previously announced measures and the...
Key business tax announcements include: draft laws to overhaul UK provisions on transfer pricing, permanent establishments and the diverted profits tax a consultation proposing to extend transfer pricing rules to medium-sized businesses and to impose fresh reporting obligations on multinational groups for cross-border related-party dealings plans to create a working group to streamline and enhance administration of the Corporate Interest Restriction the government’s reply to the consultation on modernising the stamp duty on shares regime, plus a further consultation on elements of the 1.5% higher rate charge on certain overseas transfers of UK securities a consultation exploring reforms to HMRC’s dispute resolution approach, and the government’s response on tackling non-compliance, both within the Tax Administration Framework Review changes aimed at narrowing the range of capital assets captured by the VAT Capital Goods Scheme a 12-month deferral of the move to mandatory payrolling of benefits in kind and...
Data released by HMRC on 24 April 2025 shows that, across the first quarter of the year, the exchequer dealt with 15,000 tax reclaim applications, awarding an average of £2,881 to each individual claimant. Analysts suggest the running total for overtaxation since 2015—when the government brought in pension freedoms—has now exceeded £1.4bn. The regulations enable members of pension plans aged 55 or above to access a lump sum, or take flexible withdrawals, if desired, from their long-term savings......
Refinitiv Ltd v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 415 ( TC) The seven applicant companies were part of the Thomson Reuters Group and were parties to a series of intra‑group transactions with Thomson Reuters Global Resources ( TRGR), an entity that was tax resident in Switzerland. They sought directions from the FTT requiring all enquiries to be closed; in one case, they instead requested a partial closure. HMRC agreed that closure notices ought to be issued in respect of the four companies that were not engaged in judicial review proceedings. The other three companies had applied for judicial review, arguing that HMRC had misinterpreted the effect of an Advance Pricing Agreement and had acted in breach of its public law duties. In November 2024, the Court of Appeal dismissed that application, in R (oao Refinitiv and others) v HMRC [2024] EWCA Civ 1412. The...
Gary Quillan v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 421 ( TC) The taxpayer, sole director of a company placed into creditors’ voluntary liquidation, saw a liquidator appointed. At that point, his director’s loan account with the company was overdrawn by £439,954. The liquidator demanded repayment in full; after stating he lacked the resources to discharge the sum and, following extensive correspondence, the director proposed a settlement of £57,500. That figure was remitted by instalments, and the liquidator’s report confirmed that no further funds were expected to flow into the liquidation in this respect. Only £57,500 was ultimately recovered. Consequently, when the company was finally dissolved, the remaining balance on the loan account was £382,456. HMRC subsequently opened an enquiry into the director’s tax return and assessed him to income tax on the outstanding balance pursuant to ITTOIA 2005, s 415(1). Under that provision, where a close...
Christian Peter Candy v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 416 ( TC) C paid SDLT on the substantial performance of a contract, then later sought a refund on the footing that completion never occurred. In scenarios like this, a repayment is typically pursued by amending the return under section 44(9) of the Finance Act 2003 ( FA 2003). Nevertheless, as outlined in Candy [2022] EWCA Civ 1447, C was unable to obtain repayment by amendment because the change was made more than 12 months after the filing date of the return and was therefore time-barred (see News Analysis: Court of Appeal confirms that the standard 12-month period for amending a return applies to a claim for repayment of SDLT ( Christian Candy v......
Original news Dr N ( CAS-93557- F1X2)—24 December 2024 Summary The Pensions Ombudsman has dismissed a complaint about an incapacity pension application and a claim for compensation for extra tax liabilities, which arose when the pension was backdated following a successful appeal. The element of the complaint concerning the original ill-health application was out of time, and there were no grounds to extend the limitation period. The Scheme acted appropriately to correct initial inaccuracies in the information provided about tax charges, and had already compensated the member for a lifetime allowance charge. As a result, the Pensions Ombudsman declined to award compensation for any further tax liabilities. This outcome underlines that the Pensions Ombudsman generally applies a strict three-year limitation period. What were the facts? Dr N was a member of the NHS Pension Scheme (the Scheme) which was administered by NHS Business Services Authority ( NHS...
WTGIL Ltd v HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 399 The dispute in WTGIL Ltd v HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 399 centred on an insurance intermediary ( ISL). ISL dealt with insurance policies for drivers under 26 and, as part of those arrangements, had to install a device (a black box) in each car. That device captured and sent data on the manner, timing and location of driving; policies using it are often called black box insurance. HMRC contended, among other points, that the input tax on the purchase and installation of the boxes was directly linked to exempt supplies and was consequently irrecoverable and thus not recoverable, according to HMRC......
George Mantides Ltd v HMRC [2025] UKUT 124 ( TCC) M delivered the services at issue to Royal Berkshire Hospital ( RBH) in 2013. In 2019, the First-tier Tax Tribunal ( FTT) determined that those services resulted in deemed earnings under the IR35 regime. The FTT also concluded that M’s work for a separate hospital did not fall within IR35. That latter finding was not appealed because both the FTT and the UT refused HMRC additional time to seek permission to appeal, HMRC having missed the prescribed deadline. The company challenged the FTT’s ruling concerning M’s services to RBH. In 2021, the UT found that the FTT had wrongly constructed the hypothetical contract between M and RBH by inserting terms (1) obliging RBH to......
In this issue: Employment taxes Companies and corporation tax Real estate tax Taxes management and litigation Individuals and income tax Energy and environment Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Employment taxes HMRC issues fresh and revised employer guidance on changes affecting non-domiciled individuals. It has released new materials for employers and refreshed various employment-related guidance pages to align with Finance Act 2025 ( FA 2025) changes for non-domiciled individuals, effective from 6 April 2025......
Patel v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 373 ( TCC) The taxpayer acquired two dwellings that were in the process of being amalgamated into a single five-bedroom residence. At the time of purchase, the site was essentially a construction zone: replacement roofs were being installed and the walls were exposed concrete or brickwork. The planning consent for the conversion imposed a condition barring occupation of the completed house until a separate, nearby scheme of five residential units had been finished and was ready for occupation. The taxpayer’s SDLT return treated the two as residential property and claimed multiple dwellings relief. He later submitted a claim for overpayment relief, contending......
Christopher Purkiss (as liquidator of Ethos Solutions Limited) v Tim Kennedy and others [2025] EWCA Civ 268 Ethos Solutions Limited (the Company) ran a disguised remuneration arrangement under which sums were channelled to an employee benefit trust ( EBT) without withholding income tax or NICs. The EBT’s trustee allocated funds into sub-trusts for the respondents and, when asked, advanced the amounts to them as discretionary loans. On 4 December 2012, HMRC issued determinations, holding the Company liable for income tax and NICs of c.£2m arising from payments made to the EBT in the 2008‑09 and 2009‑10 tax years. On 18 December 2012, the Company entered creditors’ voluntary liquidation, making no remittances to HMRC and taking no steps to appeal. On 9 January 2013, HMRC lodged a proof of debt totalling c.£2m with respect to those same EBT payments, as claimed therein......
In this issue Employment taxes Budgets and Finance Bills VAT International Taxes management and litigation Companies and corporation tax Anti-avoidance Devolution Pensions Lex Talk®Tax: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q& A Useful information Employment taxes Royal Assent for National Insurance Contributions ( Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Act 2025 The National Insurance Contributions ( Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill—bringing in an uplift to 15% for the main rate of employers’ secondary Class 1 National Insurance contributions from 13.8%, and cutting the secondary threshold to £5,000 per annum—was first set out at Autumn Budget 2024 and obtained Royal Assent on 3 April 2025. The provisions apply from 6 April 2025. See: National Insurance Contributions ( Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Act 2025. HMRC publishes Employment Related Securities Bulletin 59 ( March 2025) Private Intermittent Securities and Capital Exchange System ( PISCES)—policy update: HM Treasury will bring forward PISCES, a new venue for...
UT rejects appeal against FTT decision that educational services were not VAT exempt ( St Patrick’s International College Ltd & others v HMRC) St Patrick’s International College Ltd and others v HMRC [2025] UKUT 101 ( TCC). One appellant delivered tuition in English as a foreign language, and it was accepted that this supply fell within the VAT exemption. Even so, VATA 1994, Sch 9 Pt 1, Group 6, Note 2 bars a provider that satisfies the supplier condition in Note 1 solely by reason of offering English as a foreign language from treating its remaining, unrelated educational activities as VAT exempt. It was argued that Note 2 conflicts with the EU measures from which Group 6 in VATA 1994, Sch 9 Pt 1 originates. The Upper Tribunal reviewed the High Court’s ruling in HMRC v Pilgrims Language Courses Ltd [1998] STC 784 and...
HMRC v Bolt Services UK Ltd [2025] UKUT 100 ( TCC) Bolt Services UK Ltd ( Bolt) procured passenger transport from private hire vehicle operators and resold those journeys to its own customers, comprising overseas tourists visiting the UK and UK residents travelling for both personal and business purposes, without prior reservation. The dispute focused on domestic passenger transport within the UK provided on an on-demand basis, rather than through advance booking arrangements made ahead of travel. Travel by private hire vehicle is generally liable to VAT at the standard rate where the provider is registered for VAT purposes, yet many private hire vehicle operators in the UK are not registered and have turnover at a level that does not oblige registration under VAT rules. Bolt contended in this case......
Morgan Lloyd Trustees Ltd v HMRC [2025] UKUT 102 ( TCC) The company acted as trustee to small, self‑administered pension schemes ( SSASs) established by more than 500 employers, who then entered into arrangements with their SSASs aimed at releasing cash. The structures adopted were either loans, secured by charges over various intellectual property ( IP) items—such as domain names, websites and trade marks—or, alternatively, sale and leaseback, or sale and licence‑back, deals concerning comparable IP assets. HMRC took the view that many employers had received unauthorised employer payments and accordingly issued assessments to unauthorised payment charges and surcharges. In addition, HMRC assessed MLT to scheme sanction charges. MLT applied to HMRC for discharge of the charges under FA 2004, s 268; however, HMRC refused certain applications and concluded that others were submitted outside the time limit. MLT and the employers appealed to the FTT, which...
In this issue: Budgets and Finance Bills Employment taxes VAT Business structures International Companies and corporation tax Real estate tax Taxes management and litigation Devolution Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Budgets and Finance Bills Spring Statement 2025 On 26 March 2025, Rachel Reeves MP, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, unveiled the government’s Spring Statement 2025. As anticipated, and in line with the promise made at the Autumn Budget 2024, the Spring Statement 2025 was not treated as a major fiscal event. At the outset, the Chancellor restated the government’s intention to hold only one major fiscal event each year, indicating she plans to present the annual Budget in autumn 2025......
Popular documents
When evaluating a general damages claim, the practitioner ought initially to refer to the Judicial College Guidelines (JCG)...
This Practice Note This Practice Note reviews mechanisms used in settling litigation. A Tomlin order consists of a consent order paired with a schedule. It operates to stay proceedings on terms that have been agreed. The provisions contained in the schedule may remain confidential. This Practice Note describes the scope of confidentiality attaching to the schedule and sets out how it differs from a standard consent order. Sample wording for a Tomlin order is included, alongside links to precedents, as well as guidance on court approval. It also addresses varying, setting aside and enforcing a Tomlin order, including the considerations the court will take into account when handling applications for each. Further guidance is provided on interpreting and applying the relevant provisions of the CPR; however, some courts and divisions impose very specific requirements for both drafting and approval, and for approaching the schedule and confidentiality issues. Accordingly, you must consider the particular rules and court guide provisions in the forum where your claim is proceeding when drawing up the Tomlin order...
Date [ date ] Parties [ name of Landlord ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Landlord) [ name of Tenant ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Tenant) [ [ name of Guarantor ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Guarantor) ] [ [ name of Mortgagee ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Mortgagee) ] Definitions Within this Deed, the terms below shall be interpreted as follows: [ Annual Rent • the annual sum reserved under the Lease; ] [ Insurance Rent • the Tenant’s share of the Landlord’s costs of insuring the Property (as set out in the Lease); ] Lease • the lease of the Property dated [ date ], entered into between (1) [ the Landlord OR [ name ...
I, [ name ], of [ address ], solemnly and sincerely state that: [ Matters to be verified, set out in numbered paragraphs ] I make this solemn statement in good conscience, believing it to be true, and pursuant to the provisions of the Statutory Declarations Act 1835. DECLARED at [ details ] this [ day ] day of [ month and year ] Before me ................................................................................ [ signature of the person before whom the declaration is made ] A [ commissioner for oaths OR [ solicitor OR [ insert other qualification ] ] authorised to administer oaths ]...
Discover more from LexisNexis
