The substantive dispute in K McCabe v HMRC [2020] UKUT 266 (TC) involves the location of the taxpayer’s tax residence. HMRC determined Mr McCabe as UK tax resident in the relevant years but he disputes this. In 2016 mutual agreement procedure (MAP) proceedings were begun under the UK/Belgium treaty. Mr McCabe argued he was resident in Belgium but in 2017 the MAP process determined him to be UK resident. There is no reasoned judgment for a MAP decision so a taxpayer does not know the rationale for the decision or the arguments put forward by HMRC.
Mr McCabe is now challenging before the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) HMRC’s assessment of him as UK resident and has raised concerns that HMRC had taken...
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:
The substantive dispute in K McCabe v HMRC [2020] UKUT 266 (TC) involves the location of the taxpayer’s tax residence. HMRC determined Mr McCabe as UK tax resident in the relevant years but he disputes this. In 2016 mutual agreement procedure (MAP) proceedings were begun under the UK/Belgium treaty. Mr McCabe argued he was resident in Belgium but in 2017 the MAP process determined him to be UK resident. There is no reasoned judgment for a MAP decision so a taxpayer does not know the rationale for the decision or the arguments put forward by HMRC.
Mr McCabe is now challenging before the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) HMRC’s assessment of him as UK resident and has raised concerns that HMRC had taken...
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: