In P Hunt v HMRC [2019] UKFTT 210 (26 March 2019) the FTT confirmed that when deciding whether a company is a personal company for entrepreneur’s relief (ER) purposes the nominal value of the issued shares needs to be considered.
Mr Hunt had sold his entire shareholding in Foviance and the issue was whether he qualified for ER on the basis that Foviance was his personal company for the purpose of TCGA 1992 s 169S(3). Mr Hunt held 5.94% of the total number of issued shares but only 4.16% of the nominal value of the total issued share capital.
The FTT noted that there are over a hundred references to ‘ordinary share capital’ within TCGA 1992 and that it would be ‘startling’ if the term had different meanings in different parts of the Act. It added that the meaning established in Canada Safeway [1972] 1 All...
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 P Hunt v HMRC [2019] UKFTT 210 (26 March 2019) the FTT confirmed that when deciding whether a company is a personal company for entrepreneur’s relief (ER) purposes the nominal value of the issued shares needs to be considered.
Mr Hunt had sold his entire shareholding in Foviance and the issue was whether he qualified for ER on the basis that Foviance was his personal company for the purpose of TCGA 1992 s 169S(3). Mr Hunt held 5.94% of the total number of issued shares but only 4.16% of the nominal value of the total issued share capital.
The FTT noted that there are over a hundred references to ‘ordinary share capital’ within TCGA 1992 and that it would be ‘startling’ if the term had different meanings in different parts of the Act. It added that the meaning established in Canada Safeway [1972] 1 All...
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:
