There may be a gaping hole (or two) in the NIC rules on share incentives that stems from anti-avoidance action and incomplete attempts at harmonisation of tax and NIC rules. David Heaton explores the arguments
The question was raised as a result of a Large Business Service review of a newly acquired client's share scheme. One of the major moneyspinners for the LBS team currently working its way through UK PLC's 9 000-plus share schemes is the charge in ITEPA 2003 s 222 (the old ICTA s 144A for those still using Old Testament references) on late reimbursement by employees of PAYE on 'notional payments'.
Section 222
Whether or not the employer has accounted...
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:
There may be a gaping hole (or two) in the NIC rules on share incentives that stems from anti-avoidance action and incomplete attempts at harmonisation of tax and NIC rules. David Heaton explores the arguments
The question was raised as a result of a Large Business Service review of a newly acquired client's share scheme. One of the major moneyspinners for the LBS team currently working its way through UK PLC's 9 000-plus share schemes is the charge in ITEPA 2003 s 222 (the old ICTA s 144A for those still using Old Testament references) on late reimbursement by employees of PAYE on 'notional payments'.
Section 222
Whether or not the employer has accounted...
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:
90a1d87b-c1b5-43c3-a720-cd324830adee.tmb-editorspic.jpg?sfvrsn=1b2d0a7e_1)
