header-logo header-logo

15 July 2016 / Peter Vaines
Issue: 7707 / Categories: Features , Tax , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Taxing matters

nlj_7707_vaines

Peter Vaines delves into some most interesting tax issues

  • Entrepreneurs relief.
  • New DOTAS hallmark.
  • Restricted securities
  • Careless conduct.

The recent case of Mr and Mrs McQuillan v HMRC TC 5074 gives rise to a most interesting issue (actually, if anybody else finds this interesting, they should buy an anorak and come on holiday with me).

The taxpayers each held 33 ordinary shares of £1 each in a trading company. Other shareholders had 30,000 non-voting shares which had no rights to dividends.

The question was whether these 30,000 non-voting shares were “ordinary shares” for the purposes of entrepreneurs’ relief because if they were, the taxpayers obviously did not have the necessary five per cent of the ordinary share capital enabling them to qualify for the relief.

Section 989 of the Income Tax Act 2007 provides the definition of ordinary share capital as follows: “All the company’s issued share capital (however described) other than capital the holders of which have a right to a dividend at a fixed rate

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

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll