In Anderson (a case in which the writer of the article acted) the First-tier Tribunal considered for the first time the scope of TMA 1970 s 12ABZB. The case focused particularly on the extent to which s12ABZB(4) prevents a referral of a dispute as being ‘in substance’ about the quantum of partnership profit. The FTT was persuaded that the fact that the outcome of the dispute potentially affected the quantum of the partnership profit inevitably meant that that was what the dispute was ‘in substance’ about and no s12ABZB referral could be made. The inescapable conclusion from Anderson is that if a partnership allocates as profit share anything that would otherwise be tax-deductible that allocation may not be challenged by the allocatee under s12ABZB. Can it really be right as the FTT decided that the taxability (or not) of the receipt can be determined by the...
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content.
In Anderson (a case in which the writer of the article acted) the First-tier Tribunal considered for the first time the scope of TMA 1970 s 12ABZB. The case focused particularly on the extent to which s12ABZB(4) prevents a referral of a dispute as being ‘in substance’ about the quantum of partnership profit. The FTT was persuaded that the fact that the outcome of the dispute potentially affected the quantum of the partnership profit inevitably meant that that was what the dispute was ‘in substance’ about and no s12ABZB referral could be made. The inescapable conclusion from Anderson is that if a partnership allocates as profit share anything that would otherwise be tax-deductible that allocation may not be challenged by the allocatee under s12ABZB. Can it really be right as the FTT decided that the taxability (or not) of the receipt can be determined by the...
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content.
.tmb-editorspic.jpg?sfvrsn=df04ab27_1)
