David Pickstone (Stewarts Law) reviews the recent Upper Tribunal decision in Ingenious, which considered whether HMRC could make allegations of dishonesty at a late stage in proceedings without having pleaded them in its statement of case.
The Treasury has published its proposed next steps on tackling evasion and avoidance. James Bullock (Pinsent Masons) reviews the detail.
Criticism of HMRC’s failure to prosecute HSBC Swiss tax evaders has been quite unfair, writes Jonathan Fisher QC (Devereux Chambers). There are problems with criminal prosecution and the decision to focus on tax collection through civil settlement is the right one. It makes little sense to criminally prosecute these cases.
The substantial shareholdings exemption is in danger of being misunderstood, warns Heather Self (Pinsent Masons)
Dawn Register and Helen Adams (BDO) take a look at the consultation proposals to strengthen sanctions for tax avoidance
Jolyon Maugham (Devereux Chambers) writes that morality has its uses. As a tool for delivering tax outcomes it is highly imperfect, but the law falls into disrepair when it does not keep pace with changing mores.
Recent media reports about the London mayor’s tax affairs shine a light on the taxation of US citizens living abroad. David Treitel (American Tax Returns Ltd) explains.
Heather Self (Pinsent Masons) asks if this the end for the ‘double Irish’ structure
Mark Middleditch (Allen & Overy) provides this month’s update, including: the limits of the purposive approach in tax avoidance cases; accelerated payments and DOTAS; draft changes on loan relationships and derivative contracts; notice clauses in tax indemnities; and the new HMRC Stamp Taxes on Shares Manual
Anthony and Tracy Hancock v HMRC illustrates the limits of both the Ramsay doctrine and the purposive construction of legislation. Pete Miller (The Miller Partnership) takes a look at the case