The obvious conclusion from the Upper Tribunal decision is that every standalone company should form a dormant subsidiary, writes Robert Langston (Saffery Champness), but there are anti-avoidance rules to consider.
Case background
The facts of M Group Holdings Ltd v HMRC [2023] UKUT 213 are relatively straightforward. M Group Holdings Ltd was a standalone company which provided services to hospitals under NHS contracts. In 2015 there were a number of interested buyers in the company but potential tax liabilities made the company less attractive to those buyers.
M Group Holdings Ltd therefore incorporated a new subsidiary Medinet Clinical Services Ltd (MCS) to which it transferred its trade. M Group Holdings Ltd then sold MCS to the buyer. This...
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 obvious conclusion from the Upper Tribunal decision is that every standalone company should form a dormant subsidiary, writes Robert Langston (Saffery Champness), but there are anti-avoidance rules to consider.
Case background
The facts of M Group Holdings Ltd v HMRC [2023] UKUT 213 are relatively straightforward. M Group Holdings Ltd was a standalone company which provided services to hospitals under NHS contracts. In 2015 there were a number of interested buyers in the company but potential tax liabilities made the company less attractive to those buyers.
M Group Holdings Ltd therefore incorporated a new subsidiary Medinet Clinical Services Ltd (MCS) to which it transferred its trade. M Group Holdings Ltd then sold MCS to the buyer. This...
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:
