In The test claimants in the Franked Investment Income group litigation v HMRC and Evonik Degussa UK Holdings and others v HMRC [2016] EWCA Civ 1180 (24 November 2016) the Court of Appeal upheld most of the High Court’s decisions on the various issues pertaining to the quantum of tax and remedies.
The appeal concerned the long running Franked Investment Income (FII) group litigation. The litigation arose out of the way in which under the regime in force until 5 April 1999 advance corporation tax (ACT) and corporation tax under Sch D Case V were charged on dividends received by UK resident companies from non-resident subsidiaries. The original test claimants in the litigation were all UK resident companies in the British American Tobacco (BAT) group but they had been joined by other companies in respect of specific...
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 The test claimants in the Franked Investment Income group litigation v HMRC and Evonik Degussa UK Holdings and others v HMRC [2016] EWCA Civ 1180 (24 November 2016) the Court of Appeal upheld most of the High Court’s decisions on the various issues pertaining to the quantum of tax and remedies.
The appeal concerned the long running Franked Investment Income (FII) group litigation. The litigation arose out of the way in which under the regime in force until 5 April 1999 advance corporation tax (ACT) and corporation tax under Sch D Case V were charged on dividends received by UK resident companies from non-resident subsidiaries. The original test claimants in the litigation were all UK resident companies in the British American Tobacco (BAT) group but they had been joined by other companies in respect of specific...
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:
