In Murphy and another v HMRC [2021] EWHC 1914 (Admin) (13 July 2021) the High Court found that HMRC had interpreted ESC D18 on the treatment of beneficiaries receiving income from non-resident discretionary trusts. The court summarised the principles for construing the application of ESCs using the concept of ‘ordinarily sophisticated taxpayer’ and confirmed that the long standing practice of HMRC is not relevant to the correct interpretation.
The Queen (oao M Sehgal and another) v HMRC [2021] UKUT 151 (TCC) (29 June 2021) includes a detailed assessment of what happened at an ADR meeting which might be interesting to some to read. The UT found that the parties had not as the taxpayer contended come to an agreement on the facts of the underlying tax dispute (involving the tax treatment of the redemption...
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 Murphy and another v HMRC [2021] EWHC 1914 (Admin) (13 July 2021) the High Court found that HMRC had interpreted ESC D18 on the treatment of beneficiaries receiving income from non-resident discretionary trusts. The court summarised the principles for construing the application of ESCs using the concept of ‘ordinarily sophisticated taxpayer’ and confirmed that the long standing practice of HMRC is not relevant to the correct interpretation.
The Queen (oao M Sehgal and another) v HMRC [2021] UKUT 151 (TCC) (29 June 2021) includes a detailed assessment of what happened at an ADR meeting which might be interesting to some to read. The UT found that the parties had not as the taxpayer contended come to an agreement on the facts of the underlying tax dispute (involving the tax treatment of the redemption...
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: