The Upper Tribunal decision in Gunfleet Sands clarifies the meaning of qualifying expenditure ‘on the provision of’ plant for capital allowances purposes. In denying allowances for various environmental and technical studies carried out before the construction of windfarms, the UT ruled that the test was not whether the expenditure had to be incurred in order for the plant to be provided, but rather what the effect was of incurring the expenditure: is it on the provision of plant or on something else? The UT also held that the timing of expenditure has no bearing on whether or not the expenditure had been incurred on the provision of plant.
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 Upper Tribunal decision in Gunfleet Sands clarifies the meaning of qualifying expenditure ‘on the provision of’ plant for capital allowances purposes. In denying allowances for various environmental and technical studies carried out before the construction of windfarms, the UT ruled that the test was not whether the expenditure had to be incurred in order for the plant to be provided, but rather what the effect was of incurring the expenditure: is it on the provision of plant or on something else? The UT also held that the timing of expenditure has no bearing on whether or not the expenditure had been incurred on the provision of plant.
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:
