Market leading insight for tax experts
View online issue

Taxpayer pleads anti-avoidance rule or Ramsay

Nigel Doran explains why, very occasionally, tax practitioners should be alive to the possibility that they can reduce their client’s tax bill by pleading a statutory provision or a rule of construction which one would expect to have precisely the opposite effect.

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...

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:

Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this article in full.
Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.
EDITOR'S PICKstar
Top