Market leading insight for tax experts
View online issue

Moulsdale and the option to tax

The option to tax anti-avoidance rules have always been complex, but do they make the option to tax an endless roundabout or a one-way street? Chris Nyland (Gowling WLG) explores.

The option to tax anti-avoidance rules are flawed. Unwittingly co-opted to facilitate planning (such as option-washing in the self-storage sector); they have a proclivity to clatter benign transactions. They are sufficiently complicated that many cases consider whether a taxpayer could be expected to understand them. And HMRC has over-estimated their power: deploying them in litigation when there were better weapons to hand (such as the unused abuse argument in Principals and Fellows of Newnham College Cambridge v HMRC [2008] UKHL 23).

But there is a difference between ‘complicated’ and ‘unfathomable’: and in its decision in D Moulsdale t/a Moulsdale Properties v HMRC [2021] CSIH 29 the Court of Session had to determine the proper operation of an apparent...

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:

Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this article in full.
Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.
EDITOR'S PICKstar
Top