In T Good v HMRC [2023] EWCA Civ 114 (10 February 2023) the Court of Appeal (CA) upheld the findings of the Upper Tribunal (UT) that the taxpayer who had participated in a scheme for the exploitation of film rights was subject to income tax on certain ‘minimum annual payments’ arising as part of the scheme on the basis that he was ‘entitled to’ 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 security the taxpayer assigned the benefit...
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 T Good v HMRC [2023] EWCA Civ 114 (10 February 2023) the Court of Appeal (CA) upheld the findings of the Upper Tribunal (UT) that the taxpayer who had participated in a scheme for the exploitation of film rights was subject to income tax on certain ‘minimum annual payments’ arising as part of the scheme on the basis that he was ‘entitled to’ 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 security the taxpayer assigned the benefit...
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: