1. Taxpayer ‘entitled to’ income under film rights scheme
In T Good v HMRC [2023] EWCA Civ 114 (reported in Tax Journal 17 February 2023) the Court of Appeal (CA) held that the taxpayer was (i) 'entitled to' the income arising from the 'minimum annual payments' (MAPs) even though he assigned his rights to these to a third party and (ii) liable to income tax on the payments despite not receiving them.
The taxpayer had participated in a tax avoidance scheme. Using a combination of own funds and borrowed money he invested in film distribution rights and then (pursuant to a ‘distribution agreement’) assigned them in return for an entitlement to an ongoing share in film profits plus minimum annual payments (MAPs) sufficient for the taxpayer to meet his loan obligations. By way of...
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:
1. Taxpayer ‘entitled to’ income under film rights scheme
In T Good v HMRC [2023] EWCA Civ 114 (reported in Tax Journal 17 February 2023) the Court of Appeal (CA) held that the taxpayer was (i) 'entitled to' the income arising from the 'minimum annual payments' (MAPs) even though he assigned his rights to these to a third party and (ii) liable to income tax on the payments despite not receiving them.
The taxpayer had participated in a tax avoidance scheme. Using a combination of own funds and borrowed money he invested in film distribution rights and then (pursuant to a ‘distribution agreement’) assigned them in return for an entitlement to an ongoing share in film profits plus minimum annual payments (MAPs) sufficient for the taxpayer to meet his loan obligations. By way of...
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:
