Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Appellant) v Marks and Spencer plc (Respondent); Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Respondent) v Marks and Spencer plc (Appellant) – Supreme Court
Supreme Court, 22nd May 2013
Category: HM Revenue & Customs
Marks & Spencer plc v Revenue and Customs Commissioners – WLR Daily
Marks & Spencer plc v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2013] UKSC 30; [2013] WLR (D) 191
“The inquiry as to whether a parent company established in the United Kingdom was entitled to cross-border group relief in respect of the losses of its non-resident subsidiaries was to be conducted on the basis of the circumstances existing as at the date of its claim, and not at the end of the accounting period in which those losses crystallised.”
WLR Daily, 22nd May 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
UK Uncut loses: Taxman’s Goldman Sachs deal “not a glorious episode”, but lawful – UK Human Rights Blog
“Tax avoidance has hit the news again, with Apple currently facing questions from the US Senate about its exploitation of Irish company law loopholes and David Cameron writing to offshore tax havens to push for more transparency over tax rules. As it happens, the High Court has just handed down a ruling in a case which raises many of the same issues.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 22nd May 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
UK Uncut loses legal challenge over Goldman Sachs tax deal with HMRC – The Guardian
“Campaign group UK Uncut Legal Action has lost its high court challenge over the legality of the ‘sweetheart’ tax deal between HM Revenue and Customs and Goldman Sachs.”
The Guardian, 16th May 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Judges to rule on HMRC’s tax deal with Goldman Sachs – BBC News
“Judges are being asked to decide if HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) acted illegally by letting investment bank Goldman Sachs off part of its tax bill.”
BBC News, 2nd May 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Vehicle Control Services Ltd v Revenue and Customs Comrs – WLR Daily
Vehicle Control Services Ltd v Revenue and Customs Comrs: [2013] EWCA Civ 186; [2013] WLR (D) 105
“A taxpayer company which entered into a contract with owners or lawful occupiers of car parks or land to provide parking control services, and levied parking penalty charges on motorists for breach of the particular car park’s rules by issuing a charge notice against a motorist in breach, was entitled to claim that the charges amounted to damages for breach of contract made between the taxpayer and the motorist or damages for trespass; and the taxpayer was therefore not liable to pay VAT on those charges.”
WLR Daily, 13th March 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
HMRC official jailed for plundering taxpayers’ accounts – Daily Telegraph
“A HMRC official has been jailed for siphoning £12,000 from taxpayers’ accounts in a ‘flagrant breach of trust’.”
Daily Telegraph, 19th February 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
Foulser v Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs – WLR Daily
Foulser v Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs [2013] UKUT 038 (TCC); [2013] WLR (D) 51
“The First-tier Tribunal had jurisdiction to deal with an allegation that a fair hearing of a tax appeal before it had been made impossible, but any contention that a party had acted unlawfully in public law had to be put forward by way of an application for judicial review in the High Court or the Upper Tribunal. In a case where the FTT considered that a debarring order was justified and no lesser order would meet the justice of the case but yet, the facts of the case did not come within Rules 7 and 8 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009, the FTT could produce the desired just result by using its power under Rule 5 to ‘regulate its procedure’, particularly to deal with the case fairly and justly.”
WLR Daily, 25th January 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Unlawful cash forfeiture: fruits of the forbidden tree – Halsbury’s Law Exchange
“UKBA v Tuncel and Basbaydar [2012] EWHC 402 (Admin) is a decision of the High Court that is potentially significant in the field of cash seizure and forfeiture proceedings under Pt 5 Ch 3 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.”
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 12th July 2012
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
UK Uncut allowed to challenge Goldman Sachs tax deal – The Guardian
“An anti tax-avoidance campaign group has won permission from the high courts to have a ‘sweetheart’ deal between HMRC and the banking giant Goldman Sachs judicially reviewed for its legality.”
The Guardian, 14th June 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Regina (Eastenders Cash & Carry plc and another) v Revenue and Customs Commissioners (No 2) – WLR Daily
“The protection against costs provided to HM Revenue and Customs by section 144(2) of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979, in respect of proceedings brought against them on account of the seizure or detention of any thing on reasonable grounds, applied to claims for judicial review.”
WLR Daily, 22nd May 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Taxpayers can rely on concession unless it is publicly withdrawn, rules court – OUT-LAW.com
“Taxpayers are entitled to rely on a concession made by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) in a formal publication unless and until the concession is publicly withdrawn, according to the High Court.”
OUT-LAW.com, 11th May 2012
Source: www.out-law.ocm
Activists given High Court go ahead to pursue HMRC over alleged ‘sweetheart’ deals – OUT-LAW.com
“A group of activists is to raise a preliminary challenge to an alleged ‘sweetheart’ tax settlement between HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) and investment bank Goldman Sachs, according to a national newspaper.”
OUT-LAW.com, 18th April 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
Revenue to appear in court over Goldman Sachs ‘sweetheart’ deal – The Guardian
“Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs will be forced to defend itself in court against allegations that it gave one of the world’s most profitable banks a sweetheart deal on the repayment of unpaid taxes worth up to £20m.”
The Guardian, 18th April 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Revenue and Customs Commissioners v First Nationwide – WLR Daily
Revenue and Customs Commissioners v First Nationwide [2012] EWCA Civ 278; [2012] WLR (D) 73
“The tax status of preference dividends from a Cayman Islands company to whose shares the taxpayer had subscribed, was determined by the machinery by which they were distributed. Under Cayman law share premium was distributable as dividend, whereas in English tax law share premium was treated in the same way as paid-up share capital. The transaction was not a sale and repurchase of securities such as to constitute a ‘buying back’ within the meaning of sections 737A and 730B of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988.”
WLR Daily, 13th March 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Premier League clubs settles tax dispute over image rights payments – OUT-LAW.com
“Newcastle United Football Club has settled a disputed tax bill with HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) that is thought to relate largely to image rights payments to players, according to a newspaper report.”
OUT-LAW.com, 7th March 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
Barclays £500m tax loophole closed by Treasury in rare retrospective action – The Guardian
“The Treasury has rushed in legislation to close down two ‘aggressive’ tax avoidance schemes that a high-street bank had disclosed to HM Revenue and Customs in an effort to avoid tax. As it announced highly unusual steps to take retrospective action to shut down the ‘highly abusive’ schemes, the Treasury refused to the name the bank involved, although the Guardian understands that it is Barclays. The bank has refused to comment.”
The Guardian, 28th February 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
New tax watchdog to stop ‘sweetheart deals’ with big firms – Daily Telegraph
“A watchdog is to be appointed to ensure that the taxman does not strike overly-generous sweetheart deals with big firms trying to avoid multi-million pound bills.”
Daily Telegraph, 28th February 2012
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
Exposed: Taxman’s ‘illegal’ war against Britain’s small businesses – The Independent
“Tax Tribunal rules HMRC is waiting months before alerting firms returns are late so that fines stack up.”
The Independent, 13th January 2012
Source: www.independent.co.uk
