header-logo header-logo

15 January 2009 / Peter Vaines
Issue: 7352 / Categories: Features , Tax , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Taxing matters

Peter Vaines is intrugued by a Revenue U-turn and the meaning of residency

HM Revenue & Customs have issued a statement relating to last years’ limited amnesty for undisclosed offshore accounts. It will be remembered that an opportunity arose for those with such accounts to disclose them and pay a fixed 10% penalty rather than to feel the full weight of the Revenue falling on them for lack of disclosure. The Revenue does not like to call this an amnesty because nobody is being relieved of any tax; they are just paying a limited penalty. The term off shore disclosure facility is the preferred term.

The Revenue had the advantage of a successful application to the courts for the disclosure of offshore bank accounts of the customers of a number of the major banks. This meant that those with such accounts could never be sure whether the details had already been provided to the Revenue and they ought therefore to come clean for fear of worse consequences awaiting them. The Revenue subsequently issued a statement

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll