header-logo header-logo

06 September 2007 / Peter Vaines
Issue: 7287 / Categories: Features , Tax
printer mail-detail

Taxing matters

ARCTIC SYSTEMS >>
CLARITY ON UK TAX LIABILITY FOR NON UK RESIDENTS >>
RECTIFICATION FOR TRUSTEES >>

ARCTIC SYSTEMS—THE FINAL SOLUTION

The House of Lords has now delivered judgment in Arctic Systems—otherwise known as Jones v Garnett (Inspector of Taxes) [2007] UKHL 35, [2007] All ER (D) 390 (Jul) and it makes interesting reading.
Mr and Mrs Jones each had one share in a company which provided computer consultancy services. Mr Jones did all the work with the clients; Mrs Jones did all the back room admin work; they took small salaries and had large dividends thereby minimising their liability to tax and national insurance contributions. HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) said that it was not a commercial arrangement for Mr and Mrs Jones to hold one share each and to pay dividends in this way—it was an arrangement conferring bounty on Mrs Jones and therefore a settlement within the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988, s 660A (now the Income Tax (Trading and Other Income) Act (ITTOIA 2005), s 624) so that the whole of

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll