Litigation, which is diverse (from inheritance tax, to employment tax to corporate debt). A recent case was Marlborough DP Ltd v HMRC (for HMRC, on employment tax) in the Court of Appeal. Tax practice for almost everyone at the Tax Bar is 90% litigation (with only a few exceptions).
What do you know now that you wish you’d known at the start of your career?
I would like to have known (and, as a result, had more confidence) that success will come purely as a result of your own efforts, irrespective of your background (I went to a perfectly normal state school in Scotland and had no contacts at the Bar at all).
I should also like to have known how readily generous senior members of the Bar can be. I very much owe my career to my Pupil Supervisor, Jan Matthews, who helped me find a Chancery pupillage after my tax pupillage and others along the way who gave me good advice. This again would have given me a lot of confidence much earlier than I eventually got some.
You were the leading counsel for HMRC in the Rangers case, one of the most important tax decisions in recent memory. Was there anything about that litigation that surprised you at the time?
HMRC’s case was very simple: to say ‘do not pay my wages to me, pay my mama [or my friendly EBT], which I am happy about because my mama/EBT is likely to lend or give me this money’ does not work. Put like that, it seemed very simple and right. I was very surprised that HMRC lost twice and the surprise (and for some, outrage) at HMRC’s wins in the Inner House and the Supreme Court.
If you could make one change to tax, what would it be?
I would welcome more leading tax practitioners from the Tax Bar to be encouraged to sit in the FTT and the UT, as experience in tax litigation would be invaluable to the UK litigation system.
Has a tax case caught your eye?
I think Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v HMRC on the relationship between the VAT group provisions and the time of supply provisions in the Supreme Court is very important. The answer will tell us a lot about the very nature of a tax charge (not just VAT) and whether provisions which seemingly apply to provide a time at which VAT is due can apply to determine the very taxable person making a supply. There are also important questions about post-Brexit remedies, which may or may not become visible. I thought (if I may say so) the case was brilliantly argued by both sides in the Supreme Court (I watched online), and I am very interested in the outcome.
Have you noticed any recent trends in tax?
There have been more international tax cases recently than for a good while, whether involving Double Tax Treaties, Diverted Profits Tax or unilateral relieving provisions, which makes expertise (especially in the FTT and the UT) even more important.
Finally, you might not know this about me but…
I have boxed, played cricket and fenced competitively (no longer), which I loved, even though most competitors and teammates were far better than me.
Litigation, which is diverse (from inheritance tax, to employment tax to corporate debt). A recent case was Marlborough DP Ltd v HMRC (for HMRC, on employment tax) in the Court of Appeal. Tax practice for almost everyone at the Tax Bar is 90% litigation (with only a few exceptions).
What do you know now that you wish you’d known at the start of your career?
I would like to have known (and, as a result, had more confidence) that success will come purely as a result of your own efforts, irrespective of your background (I went to a perfectly normal state school in Scotland and had no contacts at the Bar at all).
I should also like to have known how readily generous senior members of the Bar can be. I very much owe my career to my Pupil Supervisor, Jan Matthews, who helped me find a Chancery pupillage after my tax pupillage and others along the way who gave me good advice. This again would have given me a lot of confidence much earlier than I eventually got some.
You were the leading counsel for HMRC in the Rangers case, one of the most important tax decisions in recent memory. Was there anything about that litigation that surprised you at the time?
HMRC’s case was very simple: to say ‘do not pay my wages to me, pay my mama [or my friendly EBT], which I am happy about because my mama/EBT is likely to lend or give me this money’ does not work. Put like that, it seemed very simple and right. I was very surprised that HMRC lost twice and the surprise (and for some, outrage) at HMRC’s wins in the Inner House and the Supreme Court.
If you could make one change to tax, what would it be?
I would welcome more leading tax practitioners from the Tax Bar to be encouraged to sit in the FTT and the UT, as experience in tax litigation would be invaluable to the UK litigation system.
Has a tax case caught your eye?
I think Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v HMRC on the relationship between the VAT group provisions and the time of supply provisions in the Supreme Court is very important. The answer will tell us a lot about the very nature of a tax charge (not just VAT) and whether provisions which seemingly apply to provide a time at which VAT is due can apply to determine the very taxable person making a supply. There are also important questions about post-Brexit remedies, which may or may not become visible. I thought (if I may say so) the case was brilliantly argued by both sides in the Supreme Court (I watched online), and I am very interested in the outcome.
Have you noticed any recent trends in tax?
There have been more international tax cases recently than for a good while, whether involving Double Tax Treaties, Diverted Profits Tax or unilateral relieving provisions, which makes expertise (especially in the FTT and the UT) even more important.
Finally, you might not know this about me but…
I have boxed, played cricket and fenced competitively (no longer), which I loved, even though most competitors and teammates were far better than me.
.tmb-editorspic.jpg?sfvrsn=c9a7a0cc_1)
