We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 46

Davies, James and Gaines-Cooper Supreme Court found HMRC guidance on residence in booklet IR 20, properly construed, did not mean what the taxpayers contended it meant

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • October 28 2011

It was a majority verdict 4 against 1, the leading speech was delivered by Lord Wilson, Lords Hope, Walker and Clarke supporting and Lord Mance dissenting

Penalty for failure to notify tax avoidance scheme - reliance on counsel's opinion - nil penalty

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • March 18 2009

The Special Commissioner in the case of HMRC v Mercury Tax Group Ltd considered (obiter) the penalty to be applied to a taxpayer for a failure to notify a tax avoidance scheme under Part 7 of the Finance Act 2004

Controlled foreign companies (CFC)

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • September 27 2011

The CFC rules are a complex set of anti-avoidance rules that broadly seek to attribute the income and profits (but not gains) of certain subsidiaries located in tax havens or low tax jurisdictions where that income has been artificially diverted from the UK to the UK parent or holding company

Taxation of non-domiciled individuals

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • September 27 2011

Under current rules, non-UK domiciled individuals are liable to UK tax only on the income and gains which arise in the UK

UK Uncut Legal Action Ltd v HMRC (Goldman Sachs International and Goldman Sachs Services Ltd, interested parties)

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • May 28 2013

This case relates to an administrative law challenge, by a member of the public, to a proposed compromise between HMRC and taxpayers (Goldman Sachs

HMRC v Philips Electronics UK Limited

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • European Union, United Kingdom
  • -
  • September 7 2012

On 6 September 2012 the CJEU delivered a clear ruling in favour of Philips, confirming that the UK provisions which prevent losses of UK branches of non-UK resident companies from being surrendered for group relief (section 107 CTA 2010 condition C, formerly section 403D(1)(c) ICTA 1988) constitute an unjustified restriction of the freedom of establishment under EU law

UK SDRT charge on an issue of ADRs in respect of shares in a UK company breaches EU law

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • April 3 2012

The recent First tier Tribunal decision in HSBC Holdings and Bank of New York Mellon Corporation v The Commissioners for HMRC contains good news for companies located in Europe seeking to raise capital

Denial of input VAT deduction for failure to identify a connection with VAT fraud Court of Appeal in Mobilx rejects HMRC test of knowledge but requires traders to consider the circumstances of each trade or transaction

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • October 18 2010

It was reported on 7 September 2010 that HMRC have identified the first cases of attempted VAT fraud in the wholesale gas and power markets

Securing a tax deduction for the costs of defending a criminal prosecution

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • February 10 2012

The costs of defending a criminal prosecution are capable of being deducted in computing profits of a trade following the House of Lords decision in McKnight v Sheppard but a recent First Tier Tribunal decision in Mr A Raynor (deceased) and Mrs B C Raynor and The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (Income Tax) has departed from that decision, by making a contrary determination of the facts

Legal advice privilege: only for lawyers

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • October 13 2010

The Court of Appeal has today handed down judgment confirming that legal advice privilege does not apply to any professional other than a qualified lawyer, i.e. a solicitor or barrister, or an appropriately qualified foreign lawyer: R (on the application of Prudential PLC & Anor) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax & Anor 2010 EWCA Civ 1094