Peter Vaines considers the ‘outrageously unfair’ rules at issue in the Lobler case.
What goes around comes around? It is unlikely that this observation on the natural order of things will be of any comfort to Mr Lobler.
I read with interest the recent case of Joost Lobler v HMRC (TC02539) [2013] UKFTT 141 (TC). Mr Lobler had invested in some life assurance policies and in due course he made a partial surrender of a number of those policies. The result was a shocking tax charge. The First-tier Tribunal noted that: ‘he made no profit or gain as that term is commonly or commercially understood and yet he becomes liable to pay tax which exhausts his life savings and may bankrupt him. That is an outrageously unfair result’. Regrettably ...
