HMRC revises and expands its guidance on the loan relationships unallowable purpose test, noting that it is subject to change as some of the case law it references is still being litigated. The advocate general opines in the Engiecase that state aid cannot be used to challenge tax rulings unless they are manifestly discriminatory. The Upper Tribunal in Shinelockdecides the relevant payment was a distribution and was prevented from giving rise to a debit under the loan relationships rules, contrary to the reasoning of the First-tier Tribunal. Shinelock also raises some interesting procedural points including when a judge can decide a case on an argument raised by neither party.
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:
HMRC revises and expands its guidance on the loan relationships unallowable purpose test, noting that it is subject to change as some of the case law it references is still being litigated. The advocate general opines in the Engiecase that state aid cannot be used to challenge tax rulings unless they are manifestly discriminatory. The Upper Tribunal in Shinelockdecides the relevant payment was a distribution and was prevented from giving rise to a debit under the loan relationships rules, contrary to the reasoning of the First-tier Tribunal. Shinelock also raises some interesting procedural points including when a judge can decide a case on an argument raised by neither party.
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:
