header-logo header-logo

Discretionary matters

15 April 2010 / Paola Fudakowska , Adam Cloherty , Paul Hewitt
Issue: 7413 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Paul Hewitt, Paola Fudakowska & Adam Cloherty report from the courts

In Futter and Cutbill v Futter and HMRC [2010] EWHC 449 (Ch)
Mr Futter set up the No 3 and the No 5 Settlements of which he was entitled to the income for life. It was intended to bring both settlements onshore after 5 April 2008 which would trigger a 28.8% capital gains tax (CGT) liability. He was advised that the CGT liability on termination of the No 3 Settlement could be avoided if sufficient losses on his personal portfolio were generated and offset against the maximum “stockpiled gains” in the trust that would be attributed to him on distribution of the trust fund to him.

Section 87 of the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 (TCGA 1992) applies to settlements where the trustees are not resident or ordinarily resident in the UK. TCGA 1992, s 87(2) says that there shall be computed in respect of every year of assessment the amount on which the trustees would have been chargeable to CGT

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll