The inspiration for this article is the reluctance expressed by Mann J in Anson to allow the taxpayer to plead TA 1988 s 739 (transfer of assets abroad) an ‘avowedly anti-avoidance’ provision to avoid double taxation on the income arising from his investment in a Delaware LLC. He called it a ‘Lewis Carroll-like inversion’ and expected HMRC to argue that it is for them and not the taxpayer to invoke a section whose purpose is to prevent avoidance. However to his surprise HMRC ‘joined in the game’. He therefore reluctantly decided the case on other grounds. This article considers whether he could have determined the case against the taxpayer on the grounds that only HMRC can invoke the section and the same question in relation to the Ramsay principle.
Mann J’s reluctance to allow the taxpayer to invoke the transfer of assets...
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 inspiration for this article is the reluctance expressed by Mann J in Anson to allow the taxpayer to plead TA 1988 s 739 (transfer of assets abroad) an ‘avowedly anti-avoidance’ provision to avoid double taxation on the income arising from his investment in a Delaware LLC. He called it a ‘Lewis Carroll-like inversion’ and expected HMRC to argue that it is for them and not the taxpayer to invoke a section whose purpose is to prevent avoidance. However to his surprise HMRC ‘joined in the game’. He therefore reluctantly decided the case on other grounds. This article considers whether he could have determined the case against the taxpayer on the grounds that only HMRC can invoke the section and the same question in relation to the Ramsay principle.
Mann J’s reluctance to allow the taxpayer to invoke the transfer of assets...
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:
