header-logo header-logo

28 July 2011 / Peter Vaines
Categories: Features , Tax , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Taxing matters

Peter Vaines explains why it’s all about residence…

The case of Mr Gaines-Cooper reached the Supreme Court this month. In case you have been away for a while on Voyager, the issue here is whether Mr Gaines-Cooper should properly be regarded as not resident on the grounds that he satisfied the terms of the long standing Inland Revenue practice set out in their booklet IR20.

Mr Gaines-Cooper left the UK in 1976 to live abroad. He wrote to HMRC and after four years they wrote to him enquiring about the number of days he had spent in the UK. He gave them the details which showed he was comfortably below the 91 day limit for these years. He thought nothing more about it because as everybody knew, that was the practice in establishing non-residence. You leave the UK and do not return for more than 90 days each year and under the HMRC practice you were treated as non-resident.

Twenty years later HMRC decided to tax Mr Gaines-Cooper on the basis that he was UK resident. They explained to everybody that we had completely misunderstood

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll