In G Hymanson v HMRC [2018] UKFTT 667 (13 November 2018) the FTT applied an equitable maxim to a tax case on the basis that the High Court would have applied it to rescind the relevant transactions.
Mr Hymanson was the sole director of his company. He had been advised to apply for fixed protection (FA 2011 Sch 18 para 14) in relation to his pension plan under the Registered Pension Schemes (Lifetime Allowance Transitional Protection) Regulations SI 2011/1752 reg 3 but had failed to stop direct debits to two pension schemes. He appealed against HMRC’s decision to revoke his certificate.
Mr Hymanson contended that he had made a mistake as to the tax consequences of the payments to the pension funds and so the transactions should be set aside. On a balance of probabilities – Mr Hymanson’s explanations for the...
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:
In G Hymanson v HMRC [2018] UKFTT 667 (13 November 2018) the FTT applied an equitable maxim to a tax case on the basis that the High Court would have applied it to rescind the relevant transactions.
Mr Hymanson was the sole director of his company. He had been advised to apply for fixed protection (FA 2011 Sch 18 para 14) in relation to his pension plan under the Registered Pension Schemes (Lifetime Allowance Transitional Protection) Regulations SI 2011/1752 reg 3 but had failed to stop direct debits to two pension schemes. He appealed against HMRC’s decision to revoke his certificate.
Mr Hymanson contended that he had made a mistake as to the tax consequences of the payments to the pension funds and so the transactions should be set aside. On a balance of probabilities – Mr Hymanson’s explanations for the...
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:
