header-logo header-logo

30 October 2014 / Francesca Kaye , Mary Hodgson
Issue: 7628 / Categories: Features , Tax , Commercial
printer mail-detail

The Taxman cometh

Francesca Kaye & Mary Hodgson discuss the important changes to capital gains tax and compensation payments

In the case of Zim Properties Ltd v Proctor [1985] STC 90, 58 TC 371, the court decided that the right to take court action for compensation or damages is treated as an intangible asset for capital gains tax (CGT)/corporation tax purposes. This does not, however, apply to rights pursuant to statute or contract.

All references to CGT in this article apply equally to corporation tax.

According to the decision in Zim, anyone receiving compensation or damages, whether pursuant to a court order or negotiated settlement is treated as disposing of that asset (the right to sue) and the sum received is the gain which attracts CGT.

The right to sue is treated as having no acquisition cost as there will not have been any expenditure involved in acquiring that right, and the entire amount of the compensation will therefore be taxable.

Extra statutory concession D33—Pre-January 2014

To counteract the effect of Zim,

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

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