Ross Fazzini Director Finestra Structured Finance London in the second of two articles discusses the broader aspects of the Special Commissioners' decision in Prudential plc v HMRC
This second article on Prudential plc v HMRC SpC 0636 sets out the broader facts relevant to the case and considers the application of the unallowable purpose provision. In addition it considers an issue that was not litigated in the case: namely whether the amendments introduced by FA 2002 should have applied retroactively to the RBS Swap; in particular whether the judiciary should uphold the retroactive application of:
● the punitive unallowable purpose provisions; and
● the concessionary rules relating to the taxation...
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:
Ross Fazzini Director Finestra Structured Finance London in the second of two articles discusses the broader aspects of the Special Commissioners' decision in Prudential plc v HMRC
This second article on Prudential plc v HMRC SpC 0636 sets out the broader facts relevant to the case and considers the application of the unallowable purpose provision. In addition it considers an issue that was not litigated in the case: namely whether the amendments introduced by FA 2002 should have applied retroactively to the RBS Swap; in particular whether the judiciary should uphold the retroactive application of:
● the punitive unallowable purpose provisions; and
● the concessionary rules relating to the taxation...
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)")