DOCSLIB.ORG

Finance Act Issue 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

British Tax Review Issue 3 2019 Table of Contents Current Notes The Draft Non-Contentious Probate (Fees) Order 2018 Laura Kermally 237 The April 2019 Loan Charge Michael Blackwell 240 UK accelerated depreciation policy in an international context Andrew Harper and Li Liu 257 Finance Act 2019 Notes Editorial: Finance Act 2019—just a side show? Gary Richards 265 Section 13: disposals by non-UK residents; and Schedule 1: chargeable gains accruing to non-residents Giles Clarke 268 Section 13: disposals by non-UK residents; and Schedule 1, paragraph 21: Schedule 5AAA to the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992—UK property rich collective investment vehicles Sarah Squires 278 Section 15 and Schedule 3: offshore receipts in respect of intangible property Anne Fairpo 298 Section 16 and Schedule 4: avoidance involving profit fragmentation arrangements Philip Baker 300 Section 18 and Schedule 6: diverted profits tax Dan Neidle 302 Section 19: hybrid and other mismatches: scope of Chapter 8 and “financial instrument” Barbara Onuonga 304 Section 21: permanent establishments: preparatory or auxiliary activities Philip Baker 310 Section 22 and Schedule 7: payment of CGT exit charges; Section 23 and Schedule 8: corporation tax exit charges Timothy Lyons 313 Section 24: group relief: meaning of “UK related” company Gary Richards 323 Section 25 and Schedule 9: intangible fixed assets: restrictions on goodwill and certain other assets Anne Fairpo 324 Section 26: intangible fixed assets: exceptions to degrouping charges Gary Richards 326 Section 27 and Schedule 10: corporation tax relief for carried-forward losses Ashley Greenbank 328 Section 32 and Schedule 13: temporary increase in annual investment allowance Andrew Harper and Li Liu 331 Sections 30–35: capital allowances Glen Loutzenhiser 331 Section 36 and Schedule 14: leases: changes to accounting standards etc Michael Everett 335 Section 39 and Schedule 16: entrepreneurs’ relief Peter Rayney 339 Sections 42–46: stamp duty land tax Susan Ball 346 Section 47: stamp duty: transfers of listed securities and connected persons; Section 48: SDRT: listed securities and connected persons Nigel Popplewell 350 Section 52 and Schedule 17: VAT treatment of vouchers Dilpreet K. Dhanoa 354 Section 53 and Schedule 18: VAT groups: eligibility Philippe Gamito and Karen Killington 360 Section 66: residence nil-rate band Richard Wallington 369 Section 83: resolution of double taxation disputes Philip Baker 372 Section 84: international tax enforcement: disclosable arrangements Philip Baker 373 Section 87: voluntary returns Sandra Eden 374 Section 90: minor amendments in consequence of EU withdrawal Timothy Lyons 376 Case Notes Praesto Consulting UK Ltd v HMRC: input tax credit—a focus on substance and reality Rebecca Sheldon 378 Ball UK Holdings Ltd v HMRC (FTT and UT): tax law and accounting standards Edward Walker-Arnott and Michael Hunt 383 Article The Relevant Economic Activity Test and its Impact on the International Corporate Tax Policy Framework Vikram Chand and Benjamin Malek 394 Book Reviews Tax Design and Administration in a Post-BEPS Era (Birmingham: Fiscal Publications, 2019), by K. Sadiq, A. Sawyer and B. McCredie (eds) Glen Loutzenhiser 425 Nexus Requirements for Taxation of Non-Residents’ Business Income (the Netherlands: IBFD, 2019), by S. Gadžo Christiana HJI Panayi 426 Introduction to Transfer Pricing (the Netherlands: Wolters Kluwer, 2015), by J. Monsenego Christiana HJI Panayi 428 Landmark Cases in Revenue Law (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2019), by J. Snape and D. de Cogan (eds) Adrian Sawyer 429 This journal should be cited as [2019] BTR (followed by the page number). Where possible, when citing page numbers from this journal, please cite the Bound Volume which supersedes pagination of articles, case notes and current notes published during the course of the year. British Tax Review is published by Thomson Reuters, trading as Sweet & Maxwell. Thomson Reuters is registered in England & Wales, Company No.1679046. Registered Office and address for service: 5 Canada Square, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5AQ. For further information on our products and services, visit http://www.sweetandmaxwell.co.uk. Computerset by Sweet & Maxwell. Printed and bound in Great Britain by Hobbs the Printers Ltd, Totton, Hampshire. No natural forests were destroyed to make this product: only farmed timber was used and replanted. ISSN 0007-1870 Each article and case commentary in this issue has been allocated keywords from the Legal Taxonomy utilised by Sweet & Maxwell to provide a standardised way of describing legal concepts. These keywords are identical to those used in Westlaw UK and have been used for many years in other publications such as Legal Journals Index. The keywords provide a means of identifying similar concepts in other Sweet & Maxwell publications and online services to which keywords from the Legal Taxonomy have been applied. Keywords follow the Taxonomy Logo at the end of each item. The index has also been prepared using Sweet & Maxwell’s Legal Taxonomy. Main index entries conform to keywords provided by the Legal Taxonomy except where references to specific documents or non-standard terms (denoted by quotation marks) have been included. Readers may find some minor differences between terms used in the text and those which appear in the index. Please send any suggestions to [email protected]. For orders, go to: http://www.tr.com/uki-legal-contact; Tel: 0345 600 9355. Copies of articles from British Tax Review, and other articles, cases and related materials, can be obtained from DocDel at Thomson Reuters Yorkshire office. Current rates are: £7.50 + copyright charge + VAT per item for orders by post and email (CLA account number must be supplied for email delivery). Fax delivery is an additional £1.25 per page (£2.35 per page outside the UK). For full details, and how to order, please contact DocDel on Tel: 01422 888 019. Fax: 01422 888 001. Email: [email protected]. Go to: http://www.sweetandmaxwell.co.uk/our-businesses/docdel.aspx. Please note that all other enquiries should be directed to Customer Support (Go to: http://www.tr.com/uki-legal-contact; Tel: 0345 600 9355). Material is contained in this publication for which publishing permission has been sought and for which copyright is acknowledged. Permission to reproduce such material cannot be granted by the publishers and application must be made to the original copyright-holder. Whilst every care has been taken to establish and acknowledge copyright, and contact the copyright-owners, the publishers tender their apologies for any accidental infringement. They would be pleased to come to a suitable arrangement with the rightful owners in each case. Crown copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, or transmitted in any form, or by any means, or stored in any retrieval system of any nature, without prior written permission, except for permitted fair dealing under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or in accordance with the terms of a licence issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency in respect of photocopying and/or reprographic reproduction. Application for permission for other use of copyright material, including permission to reproduce extracts in other published works, should be made to the publishers. Full acknowledgement of the author, publisher and source must be given. EU material in this publication is acknowledged as © European Union, 1998–2019. Only EU legislation published in the electronic version of the Official Journal of the European Union is deemed authentic. Extracts from judgments and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights: judgments and decisions originally published to the HUDOC Database (http://www.echr.coe.int/ECHR/EN/Header/Case-Law/Decisions+and+judgments/HUDOC+database/). Extracts from judgments and decisions of the European Patent Office: judgments and decisions originally published to the European Patent Office Website (http://www.epo.org/). Thomson Reuters, the Thomson Reuters Logo and Sweet & Maxwell ® are trademarks of Thomson Reuters. © 2019 Thomson Reuters and Contributors Current Notes The Draft Non-Contentious Probate (Fees) Order 2018 For a second time in recent years the prospect of greatly increased fees payable by personal representatives in England and Wales in order to administer the estate of a deceased person is looming. The Government’s aim in moving from a costs recovery basis fee to an enhanced fee is to generate additional income to be used to fund the court service generally. However, there has been much discussion about whether the level of the proposed increased fee is such that it effectively amounts to taxation, although the Government considers that the increase in fees is necessary to provide funds to modernise and update the justice system generally. When do these fees apply? The personal representatives1 of a deceased individual have to administer that individual’s estate and will, in many cases,2 have to apply for a grant of representation3 in order to be able to prove that they are legally authorised to do so.4 The grant is issued by the Probate Service which is part of HM Courts and Tribunal Service and a fee is payable when the application for a grant is made. Before making the application an inheritance tax account has to be submitted to HMRC (unless it is an excepted estate) and HMRC must issue a receipt. Between 1981 and 1999 the application fee for a grant was based on the net value of the estate. For an estate worth £100,000 the fee for a general grant was £250 but the fee increased (with no upper limit) by £50 for every £100,000 (or part thereof) for estates worth more than £100,000. Since 1999, however, the application fee has been set at a flat rate (currently £215 if made by an individual or £155 if made by a solicitor).
Recommended publications
  • When Information Is Abundant, a Good Filter Is Prized

    When Information Is Abundant, a Good Filter Is Prized

    WHEN INFORMATION IS ABUNDANT, A GOOD FILTER IS PRIZED In the internet age, the abundance of free information creates its own problems. This is the opportunity for the big business information groups. Tom Glocer, CEO of Thomson Reuters, argues that a path to relevant information is what people need s Stewart Brand, an early technology That statement is as true now as it was then, guru, wrote in The Media Lab nearly despite the information revolution that has A a quarter century ago, “Information occurred in the intervening years. So much wants to be free. Information also wants to information has become freely available as the be expensive. Information wants to be free internet has evolved. But businesses still need because it has become so cheap to distribute, information that helps them do commerce copy, and recombine – too cheap to meter. and are willing to pay for it. The challenge It wants to be expensive because it can be now lies in providing the most useful and immeasurably valuable to the recipient. relevant information – and in creating an That tension will not go away.” efficient path to it. 12 Brunswick Issue four Review Summer 2011 1851 Paul Julius Reuter opens an office to transmit stock market quotations and news between London 1965 and Paris over the new Thomson Newspapers Dover-Calais submarine becomes a publicly quoted telegraph cable. company on the Toronto 1934 Stock Exchange. Roy Thomson acquires his first newspaper, purchasing the Timmins Daily Press in Ontario. Since the invention of Gutenberg’s press in the were sent via the internet in 2010 alone, and the 15th century, each successive generation has been volume of information continues to grow.
  • REFINITIV MEDIA PACK About Refinitiv

    REFINITIV MEDIA PACK About Refinitiv

    REFINITIV MEDIA PACK About Refinitiv Refinitiv is one of the world’s largest providers of financial markets data and infrastructure, serving over 40,000 institutions in over 190 countries. It provides leading data and insights, trading platforms, and open data and technology platforms that connect a thriving global financial markets community – driving performance in trading, investment, wealth management, regulatory compliance, market data management, enterprise risk and fighting financial crime. On 1 October 2018, the Financial & Risk business of Thomson Reuters became Refinitiv following the closing of the partnership deal between Thomson Reuters and private equity funds managed by Blackstone, which own 55% of Refinitiv, with 45% remaining under Thomson Reuters ownership CEO: David Craig Turnover: over $6bn USD growing at c. 3%. Our DNA We have a rich 168 year legacy as the first ever fintech 1850 1858 1865 1964 1973 1980 1981 1989 1999 PIGEON CABLE TELEGRAPH STOCKMASTER MONITOR TRIARCH DEALING DEALING 2000 REUTERS 3000XTRA Paul Julius Reuter Cable from GB to Reuters first to Market prices carried Monitor Money Rates Launched Reuters Monitor Reuters launches used carrier pigeons U.S. laid, enabling report President from New York to Service launches, Trading Room Dealing Service Dealing 2000 enabling Private network links and the new Calais- Reuters to expand Lincoln London for delivery creating the first Architecture launches enabling FX automated to Reuters. Gives live Dover cable to its expertise in assassination by around Europe on electronic (Triarch) – our trades via video. Quite communication prices from global transmit stock market global currency telegraphing news Stockmaster marketplace first API literally the first social between traders and stock, commodity, quotations exchange to London machines for FX network their back office futures, derivative and bond markets as well as FX price makers.
  • United States District Court Northern District of New York

    United States District Court Northern District of New York

    Case 9:13-cv-00070-NAM-TWD Document 91 Filed 02/03/15 Page 1 of 93 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SEDNEY DELANO, Plaintiff, v. 9:13-CV-00070 (NAM/TWD) R. RENDLE, et al, Defendants. APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL: SEDNEY DELANO 96-A-2760 Plaintiff, pro se Gowanda Correctional Facility P.O. Box 311 Gowanda, NY 14070 LEMIRE, JOHNSON LAW FIRM GREGG T. JOHNSON, ESQ. Attorney for Defendant Collyer MARY ELIZABETH KISSANE, ESQ. 2534 Route 9 - P.O. Box 2485 Malta, NY 12020 THÉRÈSE WILEY DANCKS, United States Magistrate Judge ORDER AND REPORT-RECOMMENDATION I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff, Sedney Delano, an inmate presently confined in Gowanda Correctional Facility, has commenced this pro se action civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant Douglas B. Collyer, an Assistant Clinton County District Attorney (“ADA Collyer” or “Collyer”), is that he illegally obtained a copy of Plaintiff’s medical records from Defendant B. Lecuyer (“Lecuyer”), Nurse Administrator at Clinton Correctional Facility in Case 9:13-cv-00070-NAM-TWD Document 91 Filed 02/03/15 Page 2 of 93 violation of 42 C.F.R. Part 2.1 (Dkt. No. 6 at ¶¶ 14, 17, 58.) Construing Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 6) with “the utmost liberality in light of his pro se status,” the Hon. Norman A. Mordue, S.D.J., identified Plaintiff’s claim that Lecuyer had disclosed his medical records to defendant ADA Collyer without his consent as one for violation of his Fourteenth Amendment right to privacy, and determined that the claim survived initial review and required a response from Lecuyer and ADA Collyer.2 (Dkt.
  • An Information Provider's Wish List for a Next Generation Big Data End-To

    An Information Provider's Wish List for a Next Generation Big Data End-To

    An Information Provider’s Wish List for a Next Generation Big Data End-to-End Information System Mona M. Vernon Brian Ulicny Dan Bennett Thomson Reuters Thomson Reuters Thomson Reuters 22 Thomson Place 22 Thomson Place 610 Opperman Drive Boston, MA 02210, USA Boston, MA 02210, USA Eagan, MN 55123, USA [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT the resulting “Data Lake” and its derivative products up to date. In As the leading source of intelligent information, Thomson Reuters this paper, we describe some of the technologies employed to delivers must-have insight to the world’s financial and risk, legal, ingest, store and link the various data sets across Thomson tax and accounting, intellectual property, science and media Reuters in this initiative. We also discuss the challenges with the professionals, supported by the world's most trusted news current state and the future technologies potentially useful to organization. In this paper we describe a recent initiative at address these challenges. Thomson Reuters to establish Big Data infrastructure to store most of this data, and to apply open standards for linking the 2. Thomson Reuters’ Data Management: contents of this data. We describe our wish list of technology not currently available from open source and commercial solutions for Some Historical Context a next generation big document and data system. In 2009, the idea of a “Content Marketplace” (CM) [8] started to develop on the heels of the Thomson Reuters merger, which Categories and Subject Descriptors presented the opportunity to think about not just combining D.4.3 [Software]: Operating Systems - File Systems Management Thomson Corporation and Reuters Group information assets, but combining them in a way that made them completely enabled and interoperable with each other.