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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
Hippodrome Casino Ltd v HMRC [2024] UKUT 27 ( TCC) Under the core partial exemption rules, VAT on overheads that cannot be directly tied to either taxable or exempt outputs must be apportioned to work out the recoverable element. The default apportionment is the standard method, which is essentially based on turnover. At times, this approach will not yield a fair outcome that reflects how the costs are actually consumed. Where the standard method’s result is markedly at odds with a fair, ‘use’-based outcome, the standard method override ( SMO) can be engaged. The taxpayer, Hippodrome, operated an entertainment complex offering a ‘ Las Vegas style experience’. The venue extended over five floors and included spaces for live gaming, gaming machines, bars, a restaurant, lounges, conference areas and a theatre. Hippodrome made a blend of exempt supplies (connected to gaming) and taxable supplies (for...
The Boston Consulting Group UK LLP and others v HMRC [2024] UKFTT 84 ( TC) The appellants were individual partners of a management consulting firm that carried on business in the UK via a UK LLP, together with that LLP. The core question concerned the proper tax characterisation of amounts received by those individuals when disposing of particular interests in the LLP known as ‘ Capital Interests’. These Capital Interests were granted to partners and their value rose or fell in line with the group’s worldwide performance. Under the terms of the limited partnership agreement, in specified events—including retirement—an individual was obliged to transfer their interests to the LLP’s corporate partner ( BCG Ltd). The appellants argued that, as partnership interests, the disposal proceeds should be assessed to capital gains, benefitting from entrepreneurs’ relief. HMRC contended that the sums were chargeable as income. On the...
In this issue: Finance Bill 2024 International Companies and corporation tax Employment taxes Taxes management and litigation VAT Individuals and income tax Lex Talk®Tax: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Dates for your diary Trackers New and updated content Useful information Finance Bill 2024 Government tables amendments to Finance Bill 2024 The government has tabled changes to Finance Bill 2024 affecting R& D tax relief, the creative sector reliefs, and a new investment exemption from the electricity generator levy. These proposals are scheduled for consideration at Report Stage on 5 February 2024. For updates on the Bill’s journey through Parliament, see our Tax— Finance Bill 2024 tracker. See: LNB News 29/01/2024 11. International HMRC publishes new transfer pricing operational guidance HMRC has added operational guidance to the International Manual at...
Exchequer Solutions Ltd v HMRC [2024] UKUT 25 ( TCC) Exchequer Solutions Ltd ( ESL), an umbrella company active in the construction sector, entered into agreements with employment agencies to provide workers to clients, taking on the status of employer. Typically, a worker first approached an employment agency, which then secured a role with a construction firm. The agency would pass the worker to ESL, or to another party on an approved supplier list. ESL would then be the employer for the duration of the assignment. Many of ESL’s staff undertook short-term assignments before moving on to a new site. Workers were engaged by ESL under an overarching contract of employment, an arrangement intended to ensure each location counted as a temporary workplace. Treating each site as temporary meant that travel between home and work qualified as an allowable expense of...
Aesthetic- Doctor.com Ltd v HMRC [2024] UKFTT 48 ( TC) It was common ground that the appellant’s director and shareholder was a suitably qualified healthcare professional, and that the services delivered by the appellant were entirely undertaken, or directly overseen, by qualified medical professionals. On that basis, one of the criteria for VAT exemption in Item 1, Group 7 of Schedule 9 to the Value Added Tax Act 1994 ( VATA 1994) was met. This conclusion applied even though the supplier was a company, because Note 2 to Group 7 extends the medical care exemption to services wholly carried out, or directly supervised, by someone who is registered or enrolled on one of the registers identified in the legislation. The only live issue was whether the additional condition for exemption in Item 1 of Group 7 was also satisfied......
Code of Practice investigations Research by a law firm indicates HMRC initiated 1,091 Code of Practice investigations between April 2022 and March 2023, in addition to 3,300 active cases continuing from previous years. Pinsent Masons tax manager, Sophie Warren, said the volume of serious tax investigations opened by HMRC shows the extent of its clampdown on the most serious tax evasion and avoidance. According to the firm, investigations fall into two categories: COP9 is launched in selected instances where HMRC suspects tax fraud. COP8 focuses on suspected tax avoidance. From April 2022 to March 2023, HMRC commenced 417 COP9 investigations and 674 COP8 civil investigations......
Pitt v HMRC [2024] UKUT 21 ( TCC) Back in 1999, the taxpayer undertook steps to buy and sell loan notes treated as relevant discounted securities, and asserted an income tax loss approaching £700,000 for 1998/99. HMRC commenced an enquiry and moved to refuse that loss. It then served a follower notice, arguing that the principles and reasoning in the First-tier Tax Tribunal decision in Audley v HMRC [2022] UKFTT 222 ( TC), if applied to these arrangements, would eliminate the tax advantage sought. The taxpayer declined to take corrective steps by amending his return to strip out the loss, so HMRC issued a closure notice to the same effect. HMRC also imposed a penalty in relation to the claimed position and the failure to take the specified corrective action as directed......
In this issue: Brexit and tax Companies and corporation tax Employment taxes VAT Taxes management and litigation International Daily and weekly news alerts Dates for your diary Trackers New and updated content Useful information Brexit and tax DBT publishes Retained EU Law ( REUL) parliamentary report The Department for Business and Trade ( DBT) has issued the parliamentary report on Retained EU Law ( REUL) covering June 2023 to December 2023. It outlines the government’s progress in repealing and reshaping REUL, alongside proposals for future revocations and reforms. DBT confirms this is the first in a biannual series to be released until June 2026. The document begins by describing the three pillars of the Smarter Regulation programme and the place of REUL reform within it. These are: cutting regulatory burdens and...
Court of Session refuses judicial review and upholds HMRC’s denial of a late R& D claim ( Bureau Workspace v HMRC) Bureau Workspace Ltd v Advocate General for the Commissioners of HMRC [2024] CSOH 1. The taxpayer’s adviser identified an entitlement to an RDEC claim for a prior accounting period. As the corporation tax return for that period had already been filed, paragraph 83B of Schedule 18 Part IXA to the Finance Act 1998 ( FA 1998) meant the only route to claim RDEC was by amending the return. Under FA 1998, Sch 18 Pt IXA, para 83E, the deadline to amend in this case was 31 December 2021. FA 1998, Sch 18 Pt II, para 15, provides that: Those provisions govern the form, content, and accompanying statements of any such notice given to HMRC officers. a company may amend its company tax return by...
PD and MJ Ltd ( In Members' Voluntary Liquidation) v HMRC [2024] UKFTT 38 ( TC) HMRC issued assessments on Mr Thompson’s PSC totalling £294,306.68 for income tax and National Insurance contributions ( NICs) across four tax years, 2013–14 to 2017–18, asserting that the intermediaries legislation applied to his work on Soccer Saturday. At the time, the question of employment status was determined by the worker’s own PSC under ITEPA 2003, Pt 2, Ch 8, rather than by the hirer; under today’s framework, that decision would ordinarily rest with the hirer ( ITEPA 2003, Pt 2, Ch 10, ss 61K-61X), save for small private sector organisations. Consequently, any additional sums arising from a change in employment status fell on the PSC. By comparison, under the current regime, primary liability would have sat with the hirer, subject to any offset that might be...
Keighley and another v HMRC [2024] UKFTT 30 ( TC) The lead appellant, Keighley, was a shareholder and part of the senior leadership at Primeur Ltd, a trading company that imported doormats. He put sizeable private spending on a corporate credit card, which the company settled in full, yet neither the company’s books nor his self-assessment properly reflected the income tax and National Insurance contributions ( NICs) due. HMRC raised discovery assessments and penalties against Keighley, alleging deliberate conduct, covering every year from 2001 to 2017 inclusive. While HMRC held data on the personal expenditure from the 2013–14 tax year onwards, it instead calculated assessments for earlier years on a presumption of continuity. In parallel, HMRC also issued NICs determinations, penalties and assessments to Primeur during the period. Keighley additionally held shares as a shareholder in Valley Dale Properties Ltd ( VDP) at the time. He and...
Walkers Snack Foods Ltd v HMRC [2024] UKFTT 31 ( TC) Under Group 1 of Schedule 8 to the Value Added Tax Act 1994, food is ordinarily zero‑rated for VAT, yet the legislation lists excepted items that fall within the standard rate rather than the relief. By way of illustration, potato crisps, potato sticks, potato puffs, and comparable goods made from potato, or from potato flour or potato starch, are chargeable at the standard rate where they are packaged for human consumption with no further preparation. At the FTT hearing, the parties accepted that Sensations are packaged for human consumption without any further preparation, matching the description above and consistent with the agreed facts......
A Next Wealth study, commissioned by Aegon UK, reports that 49% of firms have experienced rising demand for guidance on pension tax allowances. As part of the research, 200 financial advisers were surveyed in November 2023. The so‑called lifetime allowance is due to be scrapped on 6 April 2024, lifting the ceiling on the level of tax‑free pension saving that can be put into retirement pots. Nonetheless, two fresh limits will take effect instead from April. On 18 January 2024, Steven Cameron, pensions director at Aegon UK, warned that the details of the lifetime allowance’s abolition, announced only very recently, would heap pressure on advisers as the tax year end nears. Until April 2024, the lifetime allowance stands at a little over £1m. HM Revenue and Customs says this will be superseded by two new limits, which apply to lump sums and death...
In this issue: Budget and Finance Bill International Companies and corporation tax VAT Employment taxes Finance Taxes management and litigation Daily and weekly news alerts Dates for your diary Trackers New and updated content Useful information Budget and Finance Bill Spring Budget 2024 date confirmed HM Treasury has now announced that the Spring Budget 2024 is scheduled to take place on 6 March 2024. Finance Bill 2024 update Finance Bill 2024 passed the House of Commons Committee of the Whole House on 10 January 2024, and the Public Bill Committee on 16 January 2024. The report stage and the third reading will proceed on a date still to be announced. For comprehensive tracking of the progress of Finance Bill 2024, see: Tax— Finance Bill 2024 tracker. CIOT publishes briefings on Finance Bill 2024...
HMRC v Dolphin Drilling Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 1 The taxpayer arranged a lease of the vessel Borgsten from a related entity to fulfil a contract with Total, the operator of the Dunbar oil installation. Under that agreement, the Borgsten was deployed to support operations on the Dunbar platform while the taxpayer’s own crew worked aboard the vessel alongside Total’s personnel... Provision of water, compressed air and various chemicals to the platform Warehousing, heliport facilities and storage services On-board accommodation for approximately 50 members of Total’s workforce engaged on Dunbar HMRC took the stance that the hire cap in section 356N of the Corporation Tax Act 2010 ( CTA 2010) was engaged. The taxpayer, however, maintained that the carve-out in CTA 2010, s 356LA(3) applied, on the basis that it was reasonable to assume the Borgsten’s accommodation function for Total’s staff was ‘unlikely to be more than...
TP v Administration de l’enregistrement des domaines et de la TVA, Case C‑288/22 TP served on the boards of several Luxembourg public limited companies. His remuneration for those functions was calculated by reference to a proportion of the companies’ profits. Article 9 of Directive 2006/112/ EC (the VAT Directive) states, in substance, that a person is a taxable person for VAT only where they pursue an economic activity independently. The Luxembourg tax authority maintained that TP’s board‑level duties amounted to independent economic activities caught by VAT within the meaning of Article 9 of the VAT Directive. TP contended that he was not performing an independent economic activity and that, accordingly, his services did not fall within the scope of VAT......
HMRC v The Taxpayer [2024] UKUT 12 ( TCC) The taxpayer appealed to the FTT against HMRC’s refusal to permit deductions for income tax. The deductions asserted were said to stem from arrangements already contested by HMRC and which were the focus of two other lead cases. He also asked the FTT to have his appeal heard in private and for the judgment to be anonymised. He contended that these steps were required to protect his private life, preserve the confidentiality of sensitive material and prevent prejudice to the interests of justice. The FTT directed that preliminary stages of the appeal would be held in private ( Direction 3) and that, shortly before the substantive hearing, both parties should provide representations on whether the decision from that hearing ought to be published anonymously ( Direction 4). There was some doubt as to whether...
In this issue: Business structures Taxes management and litigation Employment taxes Companies and corporation tax VAT Environment Individuals and income tax Dates for your diary Trackers Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Latest Q& A Useful information Business structures Court of Appeal upholds UT and FTT decisions that incentivisation awards to partners are subject to income tax ( HMRC v Blue Crest Capital Management LP and others and Andrew Dodd and others v HMRC) As noted below, in HMRC v Blue Crest Capital Management LP; and Andrew Dodd v HMRC [2023] EWCA Civ 1481, the Court of Appeal examined the tax position of awards granted to partners under an incentivisation scheme. It affirmed the rulings of the First-tier Tax Tribunal ( FTT) and the Upper Tribunal ( UT) that,...
Realreed Ltd v HMRC [2023] UKFTT 1042 ( TC) Realreed Ltd ( Realreed) owned a building called Chelsea Cloisters. The site comprised 656 self-contained flats. The dispute centred on the VAT position of 235 of those units that were not let on long leases. Under VATA 1994, s 31, a supply of goods or services is exempt where it falls within a description listed in Schedule 9. VATA 1994, Sch 9, Group 1, Item 1 ( Land) covers ‘the grant of any interest in or right over land or of any licence to occupy land, or, in relation to land in Scotland, any personal right to call for or be granted any such interest or right’, subject to specified carve-outs. The carve-out at Item 1(d) relates to ‘the provision in an hotel, inn, boarding house or similar establishment of sleeping...
Bolt Services UK Ltd v HMRC [2023] UKFTT 1043 ( TC) The taxpayer ran an on-demand private hire passenger transport offering. Journeys were requested and paid via a smartphone app by customers. Bolt asked HMRC for a non‑statutory view that the TOMS covered the service, but HMRC determined that it did not. That determination was appealed to the FTT. Through the Bolt smartphone app, users could arrange private hire vehicles to carry them from point A to point B. Bolt would take ride requests and give customers estimated fares and arrival times. Operations were mediated by the platform, which allocated journeys and communicated information. The model relied on separate contractual agreements on each side. Trips were assigned to private hire vehicle drivers. Those drivers acted as independent contractors. Bolt entered into separate contracts with drivers and passengers, and there was no contract between the driver and the...
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
