header-logo header-logo

01 February 2007 / Peter Vaines
Issue: 7258 / Categories: Features , Tax
printer mail-detail

taxing matters

RESIDENCE: THE LATEST APPROACH

The case of Gaines-Cooper v HMRC SpC 568 has recently been reported by the special commissioners and has caused a good deal of comment in the national and professional press. The issue is all about how you count the days to determine whether somebody is resident in the UK or not and whether you can rely on the HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) booklet IR20 on residence. The question was whether Robert Gaines-Cooper was resident in the UK. He prepared a detailed schedule of days spent in the UK, carefully and precisely in accordance with the IR20 HMRC guidance, ignoring days of arrival and departure. However, HMRC said that the days of arrival and departure should not be ignored after all. What about its hallowed practice which has been in IR20 for the last 30 years? Never mind about that; HMRC decided that it should count the days in another way—and concluded that Gaines-Cooper was resident.

A worrying approach and a new test

This approach is intensely worrying and everybody is

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
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
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
back-to-top-scroll