What do all these have in common?
They are three things we’ve been thinking about this month as we’ve been:
- Advising on when HMRC can be bound to act as promised – the starting point to establish a “legitimate expectation” being that the taxpayer has put all their cards “face upwards on the table” and sought a fully considered ruling from HMRC (per the statement in the classic case of MFK Underwriting);
- Considering the upcoming changes that will impact personal service companies (“PSCs”) – putting the obligation to make the employee/ contractor distinction (and possibly to account for the PAYE and NICs liabilities) on to the end-users (the clients) of PSCs. We liked a description we recently heard by an advocate of the employment test as being difficult to apply as it is “open, textured and diffuse”. And this being due to it being derived from centuries of case law, which uses terms “redolent of a bygone era” e.g. “master and servant”; and
- Assisting an American law firm with ensuring their client pays the correct amount of stamp duty on a transaction. This was a complex case, so we recommended they go through HMRC’s adjudication process, because (as was said in the Caledonian Railway Company case over a century ago) if a person gets an adjudication stamp then “the mouth of the Inland Revenue is shut forever”.
If you’d like to discuss any concerns around HMRC resiling on an agreement, changes to PSC taxation, stamp taxes adjudication or any other tax queries (or share any interesting tax-related quotes) we would like to hear from you.
0131 558 5800