Market leading insight for tax experts
Subscribe
Home
Saved articles
Viewed articles
Login
Logout
E-newsletter
Advertise
About us
Help
View online issue
BROWSE BY TOPIC
Corporate Taxes
Compliance
Corporation tax
DPT
Groups
Transactional tax
Employment taxes
Employment taxes
Termination payments
Indirect Taxes
Customs & Excise duties
Environmental taxes
IPT
VAT
International Taxes
BEPS
CFCs
Cross border
Double tax relief
Foreign profits
Residence
Transfer pricing
UK competitiveness
Withholding taxes
Private Business Taxes
OMBs
Partnerships
Private Client Taxes
CGT
IHT
Pensions & investments
Trusts & estates
Real Estate Taxes
Property taxes
REITs
Stamp Taxes
SDLT
SDRT
Tax policy & administration
Anti-avoidance
Appeals
Brexit
Compliance
HMRC Powers
Investigations
Litigation
Tax policy
Tax risk
NEWS
CASES
IN BRIEF
ANALYSIS
ONE MINUTE WITH
PEOPLE & FIRMS
TRACKERS
AUTHORS
ISSUE ARCHIVE
BROWSE BY TOPIC
Corporate taxes
Compliance
Corporation tax
DPT
Groups
Transactional tax
Employment taxes
Employment taxes
Termination payments
Indirect taxes
Customs & Excise duties
Environmental taxes
IPT
VAT
International taxes
BEPS
CFCs
Cross border
Double tax relief
Foreign profits
Residence
Transfer pricing
UK competitiveness
Withholding taxes
Private business taxes
OMBs
Partnerships
Private client taxes
CGT
IHT
Pensions & investments
Trusts & estates
Real estate taxes
Property taxes
REITs
Stamp taxes
SDLT
SDRT
Tax policy & administration
Anti-avoidance
Appeals
Brexit
Compliance
HMRC Powers
Investigations
Litigation
Tax policy
Tax risk
Subscribe
Home
Saved articles
Viewed articles
View virtual issue
View online issue
Login
Logout
E-newsletter
Advertise
About us
Help
News
Cases
In brief
Analysis
One Minute With
People & Firms
Trackers
Authors
Issue Archive
SEARCH
Home
Appeals
Home
Appeals
APPEALS
How close is close enough? Orsted and the limits of ‘on the provision of plant’
Paul Farey
Paul Farey (AECOM) assesses how the Supreme Court’s stricter approach narrows the scope for capital allowances on preparatory expenditure.
Penalty suspension
Jake Landman
Abigail McGregor
Jake Landman and Abigail McGregor (Pinsent Masons) revisit the
discretionary regime allowing HMRC to suspend penalties for careless
inaccuracies, in light of recent Upper Tribunal guidance.
Back to square one: late appeals after Medpro
Adam Craggs
Liam McKay
The Court of Appeal restores a strict approach to late appeals, leaving taxpayers facing the familiar
Martland
hurdle once again, write Adam Craggs and Liam McKay (RPC).
Estoppel and abuse of process in VAT
Claire Logan
Claire Logan (Grant Thornton) explains why estoppel and abuse of process
are increasingly relevant in VAT disputes and how they can materially affect
how cases are argued and resolved.
The last word on tax appeals
Malcolm Gammie CBE KC
The Supreme Court stands at the head of the UK’s judicial appeals system.
Malcolm Gammie CBE KC (One Essex Court) examines when permission
to appeal to the Supreme Court is likely to be granted, and considers how
taxpayers and HMRC are faring in securing permission.
Misunderstanding purpose in Osmond and Allen
Thomas Chacko
The First-tier Tribunal’s ruling in Osmond and Allen reveals a mistaken approach to the transactions in securities rules, and to purpose tests in general, writes Thomas Chacko (Pump Court Tax Chambers).
Changes to applying for permission to appeal
Sophie Rhind
Sophie Rhind (Macfarlanes) reports on the game changing amendment to rule 24 of the Upper Tribunal rules.
Contentious tax quarterly
Constantine Christofi
Robert Waterson
Recent trends in the contentious tax world, by Robert Waterson and Constantine Christofi (RPC).
Indirect effects: who can appeal a judgment?
Victor Cramer
What rights do those indirectly affected by tax disputes have if they disagree with the outcome?
Contentious tax: quarterly review
Constantine Christofi
Adam Craggs
Your quarterly review of developments in the contentious tax world, by Adam Craggs and Constantine Christofi (RPC).
Go to page
of
57
EDITOR'S PICK
Budget 2026: protecting the UK’s tax competitiveness
David Gordon
1 /7
The Orsted ‘tax nothing’
Andrew Page
2 /7
Budget 2026: options for taxing wealth
Dom Rothbarth
3 /7
HMRC powers and the taxpayer relationship: when is enough, enough?
Chris Sanger
,
Constantine Christofi
,
Craig Kirkham-Wilson
4 /7
Redrawing the line: modernising the taxation of distributions
Jill Gatehouse
,
Emily Szasz
,
Joe Williams
,
Tom Gardner
5 /7
Reckless tax statements: a lower threshold for crime?
Adam Craggs
,
Tom Jenkins
6 /7
Permanent Establishment exemption: preparing for mandatory application
Alison Lobb
,
Lisa Shipley
7 /7
Budget 2026: protecting the UK’s tax competitiveness
David Gordon
The Orsted ‘tax nothing’
Andrew Page
Budget 2026: options for taxing wealth
Dom Rothbarth
HMRC powers and the taxpayer relationship: when is enough, enough?
Chris Sanger
,
Constantine Christofi
Redrawing the line: modernising the taxation of distributions
Jill Gatehouse
,
Emily Szasz
Reckless tax statements: a lower threshold for crime?
Adam Craggs
,
Tom Jenkins
Permanent Establishment exemption: preparing for mandatory application
Alison Lobb
,
Lisa Shipley
NEWS
Read all
Tax Journal authors for October
Budget capital allowances changes: mixed picture for business investment decisions
Government declines to expand land remediation relief
HMRC publish new RTI guidance for employers
ERS: annual returns after scheme closure
CASES
Read all
Abbey Group Ltd v HMRC
Strauss Phillips & Co Ltd v HMRC
Education Training Collective v HMRC
Other cases that caught our eye: 30 October 2026
ScottishPower (SCPL) Ltd and others v HMRC
IN BRIEF
Read all
AI and the unwinnable case
Corporate residence: beyond the paperwork
Hill: the Upper Tribunal on reasonable excuse
Loans to participators: s 455
Modernising the taxation of distributions
MOST READ
Read all
The Nigel Blackwell Family Trust and others v HMRC
One minute with... Helen Miller
Chancellor reportedly rejects alignment of CGT and income tax rates
ScottishPower (SCPL) Ltd and others v HMRC
Side-by-Side: four scenarios for 2030