The latest developments that matter, reviewed by Mike Lane and Zoe Andrews (Slaughter and May).
McCabe: MAP arguments not required to be disclosed in domestic proceedings
The substantive dispute in K McCabe v HMRC [2020] UKUT 266 (TC) involves the location of the taxpayer’s tax residence. HMRC determined Mr McCabe as UK tax resident in the relevant years but he disputes this. In 2016 mutual agreement procedure (MAP) proceedings were begun under the UK/Belgium treaty. Mr McCabe argued he was resident in Belgium but in 2017 the MAP process determined him to be UK resident. There is no reasoned judgment for a MAP decision so a taxpayer does not know the rationale for the decision or the arguments put forward by HMRC.
Mr McCabe is now challenging before the First-tier Tribunal (FTT)...
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 latest developments that matter, reviewed by Mike Lane and Zoe Andrews (Slaughter and May).
McCabe: MAP arguments not required to be disclosed in domestic proceedings
The substantive dispute in K McCabe v HMRC [2020] UKUT 266 (TC) involves the location of the taxpayer’s tax residence. HMRC determined Mr McCabe as UK tax resident in the relevant years but he disputes this. In 2016 mutual agreement procedure (MAP) proceedings were begun under the UK/Belgium treaty. Mr McCabe argued he was resident in Belgium but in 2017 the MAP process determined him to be UK resident. There is no reasoned judgment for a MAP decision so a taxpayer does not know the rationale for the decision or the arguments put forward by HMRC.
Mr McCabe is now challenging before the First-tier Tribunal (FTT)...
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)")