header-logo header-logo

31 January 2008
Issue: 7306 / Categories: Legal News , Company , Constitutional law , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Anger over tax U-turn

The chancellor’s U-turn on capital gains tax (CGT) has evoked mixed reactions from lawyers and account­ants, with many complaining that it will complicate the system.

The chancellor’s U-turn on capital gains tax (CGT) has evoked mixed reactions from lawyers and account­ants, with many complaining that it will complicate the system.

Originally Alistair Darling planned to introduce a flat rate of 18% CGT, but was forced to modify the plans after a backlash from business. The chancellor has now announced an Entrepreneurs’ Relief, which introduces a 10% threshold for the first £1m worth of capital gains over a lifetime.

Other changes to the CGT regime include the abolition of both taper relief, which can result in a 10% tax rate, and indexation relief, which avoids tax on inflationary gains. For non-UK domiciled but tax resident individuals, there is a loss of all the CGT advantages on

their offshore assets and trusts.

Lisa Parisi, tax partner at Pinsent Masons, says: “The new Entrepre­neurs’ Relief has been announced as a concession to help ensure that 90% of business sales next year will remain within the 10% tax rate. However, this hides the fact that the new rules will result in a number of inequities and will leave out entirely many of the taxpayers that are fundamental to the success of the UK economy.”

She says that in many cases investment by management share­holders in private equity deals will be in less than 5% of the share capital and they will therefore miss out entirely on this new relief. “The new regime will also penalise long-term entrepreneurs who have held their businesses for many years.

By abolishing [taper and indexa­tion] relief some long-term business owners will find themselves paying tax at a higher rate than they were promised on gains that don’t outstrip inflation,” she adds.

David Kilshaw, head of private client advisory at KPMG in the UK, comments: “The chancellor promised a simplified CGT system, with one tax rate. This announce­ment has killed that hope. The new relief will add complexity, which will add to red tape and costs for business.”

Issue: 7306 / Categories: Legal News , Company , Constitutional law , Commercial
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll