One minute with Edward Allen, partner at Andrew Jackson Solicitors.
What’s keeping you busy at work?
I have a fairly varied workload; however, the majority of my work at the moment involves estate planning advice for business owners and their families. Andrew Jackson has a very busy corporate team at and the transactions they deal with often necessitate pre or post sale planning that I get involved with. It’s enjoyable as you get to work closely with colleagues from other departments, as well as other third-party professional advisers, to ensure clients are receiving comprehensive advice in relation to a wide range of issues that they are addressing at the same time.
What do you know now that you wish you’d known at the start of your career?
We aren’t always there to implement exactly what a client wants to do in the way they want to do it. Often there may be a more appropriate solution and, in those circumstances, it’s a case of explaining to the client why that alternative course of action is preferable. Providing you explain things well enough, in almost all cases clients will follow your advice.
Are any new rules causing a problem?
The trust registration service has been, and will continue to be, a problem. We have a system where there is a requirement to register trusts unless they are excluded, but within those excluded categories of trusts there are further restrictions on the exclusions applying. I know a lot of practitioners who have spent significant amounts of time trying to determine whether trustee clients are correctly registering trusts and not necessarily being able to charge appropriately for the work they are undertaking. In addition, I expect there are a huge number of registerable trusts which have not been registered and where the trustees will only become aware of the requirements when they seek advice about something in the future.
Has a recent case caught your eye?
The recent case of Hall and another v HMRC [2023] UKFTT 32 (TC) is interesting. The FTT heard an appeal in respect of a notice of determination issued by HMRC. The only point being considered was whether a valid life interest had arisen. Mrs Raboni had, in her will, granted a friend the right to live in her house for the rest of his life. However, when she died, there were insufficient other funds in the estate to pay the inheritance tax liability. Instead of selling the house to pay the tax, the remainder beneficiaries agreed to pay the tax and keep the house as an investment, honouring the right of the friend to continue to occupy.
When the friend died, the taxpayers initially treated the friend’s right to occupy as a life interest and paid £190,000 of inheritance tax. However, they subsequently requested a refund on the basis that an interest in possession had not been held because the gift in the will could never be perfected due to the inheritance tax liability on Mrs Raboni’s death and instead the friend had simply occupied the property under a gratuitous licence granted by the remainder beneficiaries. Despite the fact that the friend had occupied the property for nearly 13 years, the tribunal agreed with the taxpayer and allowed the appeal.
The decision is likely to have a wide impact, given the number of wills being prepared that incorporate life interests and rights to occupy.
What are you looking out for later this year?
The closure of the Office of Tax Simplification (OTS) seems to have received little mainstream attention. The OTS was asked, among many other subjects, to review the capital gains and inheritance tax regimes, and it published recommendations which have largely not been implemented. I understand that the Treasury is going to carry out such reviews internally, so it will be interesting to see whether there is any appetite for large scale changes to simplify tax.
You might not know this about me but...
I live with my family in a village on the edge of the Yorkshire Wolds. We like nothing better than getting wrapped up warm on a cold winter morning and taking the dogs out for long walks.
One minute with Edward Allen, partner at Andrew Jackson Solicitors.
What’s keeping you busy at work?
I have a fairly varied workload; however, the majority of my work at the moment involves estate planning advice for business owners and their families. Andrew Jackson has a very busy corporate team at and the transactions they deal with often necessitate pre or post sale planning that I get involved with. It’s enjoyable as you get to work closely with colleagues from other departments, as well as other third-party professional advisers, to ensure clients are receiving comprehensive advice in relation to a wide range of issues that they are addressing at the same time.
What do you know now that you wish you’d known at the start of your career?
We aren’t always there to implement exactly what a client wants to do in the way they want to do it. Often there may be a more appropriate solution and, in those circumstances, it’s a case of explaining to the client why that alternative course of action is preferable. Providing you explain things well enough, in almost all cases clients will follow your advice.
Are any new rules causing a problem?
The trust registration service has been, and will continue to be, a problem. We have a system where there is a requirement to register trusts unless they are excluded, but within those excluded categories of trusts there are further restrictions on the exclusions applying. I know a lot of practitioners who have spent significant amounts of time trying to determine whether trustee clients are correctly registering trusts and not necessarily being able to charge appropriately for the work they are undertaking. In addition, I expect there are a huge number of registerable trusts which have not been registered and where the trustees will only become aware of the requirements when they seek advice about something in the future.
Has a recent case caught your eye?
The recent case of Hall and another v HMRC [2023] UKFTT 32 (TC) is interesting. The FTT heard an appeal in respect of a notice of determination issued by HMRC. The only point being considered was whether a valid life interest had arisen. Mrs Raboni had, in her will, granted a friend the right to live in her house for the rest of his life. However, when she died, there were insufficient other funds in the estate to pay the inheritance tax liability. Instead of selling the house to pay the tax, the remainder beneficiaries agreed to pay the tax and keep the house as an investment, honouring the right of the friend to continue to occupy.
When the friend died, the taxpayers initially treated the friend’s right to occupy as a life interest and paid £190,000 of inheritance tax. However, they subsequently requested a refund on the basis that an interest in possession had not been held because the gift in the will could never be perfected due to the inheritance tax liability on Mrs Raboni’s death and instead the friend had simply occupied the property under a gratuitous licence granted by the remainder beneficiaries. Despite the fact that the friend had occupied the property for nearly 13 years, the tribunal agreed with the taxpayer and allowed the appeal.
The decision is likely to have a wide impact, given the number of wills being prepared that incorporate life interests and rights to occupy.
What are you looking out for later this year?
The closure of the Office of Tax Simplification (OTS) seems to have received little mainstream attention. The OTS was asked, among many other subjects, to review the capital gains and inheritance tax regimes, and it published recommendations which have largely not been implemented. I understand that the Treasury is going to carry out such reviews internally, so it will be interesting to see whether there is any appetite for large scale changes to simplify tax.
You might not know this about me but...
I live with my family in a village on the edge of the Yorkshire Wolds. We like nothing better than getting wrapped up warm on a cold winter morning and taking the dogs out for long walks.
