The First-tier Tribunal has decided that the SDLT general anti-avoidance rule, FA 2003 s 75A, applies to arrangements that are not tax avoidance arrangements, even read purposively. In effect, it self-defines ‘tax avoidance’ with the result that it is an ‘anti-saving’ rule. This potentially has consequences in all cases where real estate is sold via corporate wrappers, especially where the sale is preceded by something, however benign. The shock wave may be even greater. But, realistically, rather than confirming the reach of the rule 13 years after its introduction, it probably only marks the beginning of the search.
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:
The First-tier Tribunal has decided that the SDLT general anti-avoidance rule, FA 2003 s 75A, applies to arrangements that are not tax avoidance arrangements, even read purposively. In effect, it self-defines ‘tax avoidance’ with the result that it is an ‘anti-saving’ rule. This potentially has consequences in all cases where real estate is sold via corporate wrappers, especially where the sale is preceded by something, however benign. The shock wave may be even greater. But, realistically, rather than confirming the reach of the rule 13 years after its introduction, it probably only marks the beginning of the search.
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:
.jpg?sfvrsn=335a554c_0 "300 x 250 (MPU)")