header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
04 April 2012 / Peter Vaines
Issue: 7509 / Categories: Features , Tax
printer mail-detail

Taxing times

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Peter Vaines rounds up the latest developments in the world of tax
Previously I made reference to the case of HMRC v P A Holdings Limited (see 160 NLJ 7398 & 7399, p 22) and I make no apology in returning to this really important matter, having regard to the recent Court of Appeal judgment ([2011] EWCA CIV 1414).

HMRC v P A Holdings Ltd

The facts were quite complicated, but in essence, some employees acquired shares in a company connected with their employer. In principle, the receipt of the shares by the employees would represent taxable earnings.
 
The issue was the tax treatment of the dividends subsequently paid by the company on those shares. HMRC argued that the dividends derived from the employment and should, therefore, be taxed as earnings. 

The First-tier Tribunal found that the dividends were correctly categorised as dividends. They also found that they could be treated as earnings, but that did not stop them being dividends. 

Taxing dividends

So, if they were dividends and
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

Read All
Sponsored by
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
Read All
NLJ this week: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
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
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
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
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
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
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
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
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll