header-logo header-logo

23 October 2014 / Peter Vaines
Issue: 7627 / Categories: Features , Tax , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Taxing matters

vaines

In his latest update on the world of tax Peter Vaines has mixed opinions on new guidance from HMRC

Over 2,600 lawyers in 44 offices located in 21 countries on five continents.

The new rules for accelerated payments and follower notices are now in force so that anybody who has participated in a disclosure of tax avoidance scheme, or in due course has an arrangement which is given the thumbs down by the GAAR Advisory Panel, is likely to have to pay the disputed tax up front.

Actually, there does not need to be any tax in dispute. Indeed, it seems clear that in many cases there will be no dispute. But you still have to pay the tax until such time as HMRC decide (if they do) that it is not disputed.

The same applies to a follower notice where HMRC is of the opinion that there is a final judicial ruling in another case which if applied to your case, would deny the tax advantage. HMRC can then ask you to pay the tax. You do not have to, but you

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