In Metso Paper Bender Forrest Ltd v HMRC (TC03056 – 19 November 2013) Metso was applying against HMRC’s decision to deny relief from corporation tax under FA 2003 Sch 23. The provisions grant relief from corporation tax by way of a deduction from business profits when share options are granted to employees. The deduction is equal to the difference between the market value of the shares at the time of the exercise of the option and the actual price paid by the employee under the option. For the provisions to apply the shares must be granted ‘by reason of employment’.
Mr Ritchie held an unpaid directorship in a company ‘UK SubHoldco’ but had no employment contract. The company was directly and indirectly owned by his family. As part of a management buy out of UK SubHoldco Mr...
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:
In Metso Paper Bender Forrest Ltd v HMRC (TC03056 – 19 November 2013) Metso was applying against HMRC’s decision to deny relief from corporation tax under FA 2003 Sch 23. The provisions grant relief from corporation tax by way of a deduction from business profits when share options are granted to employees. The deduction is equal to the difference between the market value of the shares at the time of the exercise of the option and the actual price paid by the employee under the option. For the provisions to apply the shares must be granted ‘by reason of employment’.
Mr Ritchie held an unpaid directorship in a company ‘UK SubHoldco’ but had no employment contract. The company was directly and indirectly owned by his family. As part of a management buy out of UK SubHoldco Mr...
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)")