Chris Bates and Judy Harrison review the decision of the First-tier Tribunal in Eclipse 35 in which it was held that a film leasing partnership was not trading.
The First-tier Tribunal in Eclipse Film Partners No 35 LLP v HMRC [2012] UKFTT 270 TC held that a film partnership was not trading. Two points of particular interest have arisen as a result of the Eclipse decision. The first is that it is the second recent case in which a film partnership has been held not to be trading (Samarkand Film Partnership No.3 [2012] SFTD 1 being the other case). Whilst Samarkand is currently being appealed and it seems likely that Eclipse intend to appeal these two successes are likely to encourage HMRC...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
Chris Bates and Judy Harrison review the decision of the First-tier Tribunal in Eclipse 35 in which it was held that a film leasing partnership was not trading.
The First-tier Tribunal in Eclipse Film Partners No 35 LLP v HMRC [2012] UKFTT 270 TC held that a film partnership was not trading. Two points of particular interest have arisen as a result of the Eclipse decision. The first is that it is the second recent case in which a film partnership has been held not to be trading (Samarkand Film Partnership No.3 [2012] SFTD 1 being the other case). Whilst Samarkand is currently being appealed and it seems likely that Eclipse intend to appeal these two successes are likely to encourage HMRC...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes: