One minute with Sam Inkersole, Associate Director at BKL.
What’s keeping you busy at work?
Generally I spend my time solving problems for clients and stopping them from the unintended consequences which can arise from their entrepreneurial drive. At the moment, my ‘in tray’ of work includes two chunky restructuring projects, helping a family set up a FIC and working with two clients on acquisitions.
If you could make one change to a tax law or practice, what would it be?
There are technical points which need massaging to make them work better, but generally these don’t affect large swathes of companies and individuals. What ‘keeps me up at night’ is the number of individuals being dragged into the need to file a personal tax return, as a result of tax-free thresholds reducing (and inflation). There is a lack of communication from HMRC to the public generally on thresholds (for interest, dividends and capital gains), which will lead to large numbers of people missing tax return filing deadlines.
Although this is more a matter of tax policy than legislation, the impact of changing allowances back to more reasonable levels, which rise with inflation, would lift a large amount of individuals out of the personal tax return reporting requirements which can only be a good thing.
What do you know now that you wish you’d known at the start of your career?
There are a mountain of things which I wish I had known, but three points which stick out for me, two for clients and one of internal matters.
Clients: (i) make sure that you try to get to the ‘why’ they are asking a question: clients usually ask either the wrong question or are looking at a problem from the wrong point of view, and (ii) keep things simple: tax is really complicated and it’s easy to go down a rabbit hole of detail when talking with clients which tends to lose them.
Internal matters: listen to the view of others, understand why they have that view and build on ideas to bring the team to your way of thinking if needed.
Has a recent tax case caught your eye?
M Group Holdings Ltd v HMRC [2023] UKUT 213 (TCC) is an interesting case and raises the question as to whether all single entities should have a non-dormant subsidiary entity as a matter of standard practice. Of course, this would only be for single entities of certain sizes in order to enable flexibility for future reorganisations and the ability to utilise the Substantial Shareholding Exemption (SSE).
The judgment clarified that a single entity does not constitute a group for the purposes of para 15A of TCGA 1992 Sch 7AC. As such, SSE cannot be applied to a de-grouping charge which arises on a subsidiary leaving the group, when it leaves the group within 12 months of the subsidiary being incorporated.
Previously, many have been relying on the fact that assets had been used within a trade for a period of 12 months before they left the group, where the group was in place at the time the assets left the group. However, given that we now have clarity over the meaning of a group for SSE purposes, advisers will need to look more carefully at timings through a transaction.
What are clients asking about?
In the run up to the election there was a plethora of queries around IHT planning (including FICs), realising capital gains and cryptocurrency queries. Now we have a new party running the country, similar questions are still arising on a daily basis. Fingers crossed we have a little more clarity from the government in the coming weeks regarding what changes we can expect over the next few years.
Finally, you might not know this about me but…
I am currently converting a white van (Peugeot Boxer) into a campervan! It has been a great learning experience and something completely different to the day job.
One minute with Sam Inkersole, Associate Director at BKL.
What’s keeping you busy at work?
Generally I spend my time solving problems for clients and stopping them from the unintended consequences which can arise from their entrepreneurial drive. At the moment, my ‘in tray’ of work includes two chunky restructuring projects, helping a family set up a FIC and working with two clients on acquisitions.
If you could make one change to a tax law or practice, what would it be?
There are technical points which need massaging to make them work better, but generally these don’t affect large swathes of companies and individuals. What ‘keeps me up at night’ is the number of individuals being dragged into the need to file a personal tax return, as a result of tax-free thresholds reducing (and inflation). There is a lack of communication from HMRC to the public generally on thresholds (for interest, dividends and capital gains), which will lead to large numbers of people missing tax return filing deadlines.
Although this is more a matter of tax policy than legislation, the impact of changing allowances back to more reasonable levels, which rise with inflation, would lift a large amount of individuals out of the personal tax return reporting requirements which can only be a good thing.
What do you know now that you wish you’d known at the start of your career?
There are a mountain of things which I wish I had known, but three points which stick out for me, two for clients and one of internal matters.
Clients: (i) make sure that you try to get to the ‘why’ they are asking a question: clients usually ask either the wrong question or are looking at a problem from the wrong point of view, and (ii) keep things simple: tax is really complicated and it’s easy to go down a rabbit hole of detail when talking with clients which tends to lose them.
Internal matters: listen to the view of others, understand why they have that view and build on ideas to bring the team to your way of thinking if needed.
Has a recent tax case caught your eye?
M Group Holdings Ltd v HMRC [2023] UKUT 213 (TCC) is an interesting case and raises the question as to whether all single entities should have a non-dormant subsidiary entity as a matter of standard practice. Of course, this would only be for single entities of certain sizes in order to enable flexibility for future reorganisations and the ability to utilise the Substantial Shareholding Exemption (SSE).
The judgment clarified that a single entity does not constitute a group for the purposes of para 15A of TCGA 1992 Sch 7AC. As such, SSE cannot be applied to a de-grouping charge which arises on a subsidiary leaving the group, when it leaves the group within 12 months of the subsidiary being incorporated.
Previously, many have been relying on the fact that assets had been used within a trade for a period of 12 months before they left the group, where the group was in place at the time the assets left the group. However, given that we now have clarity over the meaning of a group for SSE purposes, advisers will need to look more carefully at timings through a transaction.
What are clients asking about?
In the run up to the election there was a plethora of queries around IHT planning (including FICs), realising capital gains and cryptocurrency queries. Now we have a new party running the country, similar questions are still arising on a daily basis. Fingers crossed we have a little more clarity from the government in the coming weeks regarding what changes we can expect over the next few years.
Finally, you might not know this about me but…
I am currently converting a white van (Peugeot Boxer) into a campervan! It has been a great learning experience and something completely different to the day job.
