One minute with Matthew Shayle, partner at tax and private client boutique law firm, Wiggin Osborne Fullerlove.
What’s keeping you busy at work?
My practice is a very broad one, which is both a blessing and a challenge as I usually find myself kept busy by a wide range of matters. At the moment, I am working on (a) a restructuring project to maximise the likely application of business property relief from inheritance tax to a privately-held business structure that contains a mix of trading and non-trading activities, mindful of the indications made in the Phillips case ([2006] SpC 555), (b) tax planning for ‘deemed domiciled’ individuals who had not taken advice before that status was triggered and who now wish to put their remittance basis period earnings to work through an offshore life policy, (c) advice for trustees wishing to make distributions to UK-resident and non-UK resident beneficiaries from an old offshore trust holding sizeable historic income pools, and (d) finding a route to the resolution of a fundamental disagreement at the management level of a non-UK wealth-holding structure with assets across numerous jurisdictions.
If you could make one change to tax, what would it be?
I work a lot with ‘foreign’ people moving to, living in and/or investing in the UK. Many are ‘non-doms’, but at a time when foreign investment must be important for the UK, the premise behind the ‘res/non-dom’ remittance basis seems to be perverse: the UK tells wealthy people to come to the UK but makes it very difficult or unattractive for them to bring their money with them once they are here. Business investment relief is still narrow in scope. The benefits for the UK in having these people here are huge, so surely we should be encouraging them to spend their money here and to do so for longer. For example, an annual ‘lump sum’ tax regime, akin to the ‘forfait’ in Switzerland, could be the way to do this.
What do you know now that you wish you’d known at the start of your career?
Always go back to the legislation! It is easy for young (and not so young) tax advisers to assume that HMRC or the writers of leading texts are right in their published conclusions and guidance, but that assumption can be a mistake – particularly where situations do not conform with ‘normal’ fact patterns. Going back to the legislation and applying it to the specific facts in front of you can bring better understanding, and it can present new avenues of opportunity for clients. In the same way, the advice you or your colleagues gave on a recent matter may not be as directly transferrable to the facts now in front of you as you first thought. Revisiting the legislation will help ensure that your advice is appropriate for each client.
What should we look out for later this year?
I will be looking forward to the results of the OECD’s recent consultation on the cryptoasset reporting framework and associated amendments to the common reporting standard. The OECD’s report is expected in October 2022.
You might not know this about me but...
My interest in the law first came from my father’s occupation; he was a policeman – and more specifically, a detective. He was instrumental in a number of projects that make my own stresses and strains feel very insignificant: investigating globally notorious murders, tackling widespread institutional corruption, improving the access to justice and support for vulnerable abuse victims. But this equally led to me feeling quite evangelical about the rule of law and a lawyer’s role in protecting it; tax law, in particular, is an area in which rule of law arguments are visceral. My father gave me two pieces of advice that have turned out to be invaluable, especially in the context of contentious meetings: first, don’t ask a question if you do not already know the answer and, second, don’t be afraid of letting someone else fill awkward silences.
One minute with Matthew Shayle, partner at tax and private client boutique law firm, Wiggin Osborne Fullerlove.
What’s keeping you busy at work?
My practice is a very broad one, which is both a blessing and a challenge as I usually find myself kept busy by a wide range of matters. At the moment, I am working on (a) a restructuring project to maximise the likely application of business property relief from inheritance tax to a privately-held business structure that contains a mix of trading and non-trading activities, mindful of the indications made in the Phillips case ([2006] SpC 555), (b) tax planning for ‘deemed domiciled’ individuals who had not taken advice before that status was triggered and who now wish to put their remittance basis period earnings to work through an offshore life policy, (c) advice for trustees wishing to make distributions to UK-resident and non-UK resident beneficiaries from an old offshore trust holding sizeable historic income pools, and (d) finding a route to the resolution of a fundamental disagreement at the management level of a non-UK wealth-holding structure with assets across numerous jurisdictions.
If you could make one change to tax, what would it be?
I work a lot with ‘foreign’ people moving to, living in and/or investing in the UK. Many are ‘non-doms’, but at a time when foreign investment must be important for the UK, the premise behind the ‘res/non-dom’ remittance basis seems to be perverse: the UK tells wealthy people to come to the UK but makes it very difficult or unattractive for them to bring their money with them once they are here. Business investment relief is still narrow in scope. The benefits for the UK in having these people here are huge, so surely we should be encouraging them to spend their money here and to do so for longer. For example, an annual ‘lump sum’ tax regime, akin to the ‘forfait’ in Switzerland, could be the way to do this.
What do you know now that you wish you’d known at the start of your career?
Always go back to the legislation! It is easy for young (and not so young) tax advisers to assume that HMRC or the writers of leading texts are right in their published conclusions and guidance, but that assumption can be a mistake – particularly where situations do not conform with ‘normal’ fact patterns. Going back to the legislation and applying it to the specific facts in front of you can bring better understanding, and it can present new avenues of opportunity for clients. In the same way, the advice you or your colleagues gave on a recent matter may not be as directly transferrable to the facts now in front of you as you first thought. Revisiting the legislation will help ensure that your advice is appropriate for each client.
What should we look out for later this year?
I will be looking forward to the results of the OECD’s recent consultation on the cryptoasset reporting framework and associated amendments to the common reporting standard. The OECD’s report is expected in October 2022.
You might not know this about me but...
My interest in the law first came from my father’s occupation; he was a policeman – and more specifically, a detective. He was instrumental in a number of projects that make my own stresses and strains feel very insignificant: investigating globally notorious murders, tackling widespread institutional corruption, improving the access to justice and support for vulnerable abuse victims. But this equally led to me feeling quite evangelical about the rule of law and a lawyer’s role in protecting it; tax law, in particular, is an area in which rule of law arguments are visceral. My father gave me two pieces of advice that have turned out to be invaluable, especially in the context of contentious meetings: first, don’t ask a question if you do not already know the answer and, second, don’t be afraid of letting someone else fill awkward silences.
