The First-tier Tribunal has decided that the SDLT general anti-avoidance rule, FA 2003 s 75A, applies to arrangements that are not tax avoidance arrangements, even read purposively. In effect, it self-defines ‘tax avoidance’ with the result that it is an ‘anti-saving’ rule. This potentially has consequences in all cases where real estate is sold via corporate wrappers, especially where the sale is preceded by something, however benign. The shock wave may be even greater. But, realistically, rather than confirming the reach of the rule 13 years after its introduction, it probably only marks the beginning of the search.
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content.
The First-tier Tribunal has decided that the SDLT general anti-avoidance rule, FA 2003 s 75A, applies to arrangements that are not tax avoidance arrangements, even read purposively. In effect, it self-defines ‘tax avoidance’ with the result that it is an ‘anti-saving’ rule. This potentially has consequences in all cases where real estate is sold via corporate wrappers, especially where the sale is preceded by something, however benign. The shock wave may be even greater. But, realistically, rather than confirming the reach of the rule 13 years after its introduction, it probably only marks the beginning of the search.
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content.
.tmb-editorspic.jpg?sfvrsn=df04ab27_1)
