| Home > Tax Articles > National Insurance contributions > When Does 5 Equal 6 For Tax Purposes? |
| When Does 5 Equal 6 For Tax Purposes? |
 |
 |
|
TaxationWeb by Malcolm Finney Malcolm Finney points out that tax law is complex, and that mistakes are possible even by examiners in tax exams. No-one is perfect and mistakes in life are inevitable.Tax law changes on an ever frequent basis whether as a consequence of court decisions and/or changes in legislation and/or practice. Keeping up to date is by no means an easy task even for the most seasoned practitioner/academic. However, there can be no excuses for the glaring mistake made in ACCA’s Question 5 of Paper 2.3 (Business Taxation) in the December 2005 examination.
Unfortunately Music Plc in fact has 6 not 5 associated companies (see below). The examiner who set the question and all the persons responsible for checking that the question was correct all abysmally failed to spot this glaring error; an error expected of a student but not of an experienced tax lecturer/practitioner/reviewer. Interestingly in the January issue of PQ magazine on page 27 under the banner “Running the rule over December’s diet: So what did our experts think of the latest exams?” in connection with Paper 2.3 absolutely no mention of the error was made. Why? Did the contributors to the piece actually read the Paper? Perhaps students at the relevant institutions are being taught incorrectly? The term “associated company” is defined in section 13 ICTA 1988; “control” is in turn defined in section 416 ICTA 1988. Accordingly, Music controls all the companies except for Drum and thus has 6 not 5 associated companies. What went wrong?The mistake which seems to have been made (and I can only guess) is that in determining whether a company is associated with another company the examiner has assumed that Music does not control Gong (or of course Drum) as the share ownership of Music in Gong is 80% x 75% x 80% ie 48% which is less than 50%; however, this is not the correct interpretation of “control” for this purpose.Whether or not this is in fact the reason for the error is irrelevant. The error, quite simply, should not have been made. The blame falls fairly and squarely on the ACCA. What happens next?The key issue must be to decide how are students who took the examination to be recompensed? How are the ACCA going to put students in the position they would have been had the mistake not been made?In short, of course, they can’t. But something has nevertheless to be done about adjusting marks to reflect the error. This should not be done in secret. Some public statement needs to be made by the ACCA. But what about the longer term? As stated in the opening few sentences above no one (least of all myself) is infallible; mistakes, even with the best of intentions, are made. What is clear is that the process for checking exam papers needs to be reviewed and if appropriate tightened and/or amended. January 2006 Malcolm Finney is an international tax consultant and is currently a visiting lecturer at the University of Greenwich. The above article was first published in ‘Pass’ magazine (February 2006) |
|
About The Author  Mark McLaughlin is TaxationWeb's Co-Founder, Director and Technical Editor. He is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Taxation and a member of the Association of Taxation Technicians and the Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners. He lectures on tax subjects, is co-author of Tottel's IHT Annual and Ray & McLaughlin's IHT Planning, and Editor of Tottel's Tax Planning and Annual series. Mark's work has also been published in Taxation, Tax Adviser, Tolley's Practical Tax, Tax Journal and Simon's Weekly Tax Intelligence. Since January 1998, Mark has been a consultant in his own tax practice, Mark McLaughlin Associates, which provides tax consultancy and support services to professional firms. He publishes a regular 'Tax Update' e-Newsletter for clients and other professional firms. To receive future copies, contact Mark via his website. |
|
Article Added Saturday, 04 March 2006 | 3980 Hits |
Tax Insider Lite
Each month our tax experts reveal FREE tax strategies to help minimise your taxes. Get Tax Insider Lite:
Tax Books
BOOK OF THE WEEK
Capital Allowances for Fixtures: The New Rules
A full technical analysis of the proposed new rules re capital allowances for fixtures, as announced in the HMRC consultation document issued on 31 May 2011. It is based on the draft legislation published in December 2011.
BOOK OF THE MONTH
A-Z of Plant & Machinery
An analysis of more than 200 types of common expenditure, showing whether or not they qualify as plant or machinery. Each entry includes statutory and case law references, together with HMRC guidance and the authors? personal commentary.
Corporation Tax Memo 2011-2012
The first edition of this brand new publication, published in November, includes comprehensive commentary on all relevant legislation, case law and HMRC practice, including the recent Corporation Tax Acts and Finance Act 2011.
Capital Gains Tax Roll-over, Hold-over and Deferral Reliefs 2011/12
A unique and user-friendly reference guide to all the capital gains tax reliefs that may apply on the sale of businesses, business assets, and for gifts, including entrepreneurs' relief.
Share Valuation Handbook
Share Valuation Handbook brings together the practical methods of share valuation, the statutory requirements for a fiscal valuation and the decisions of the courts in a single volume.
PROUDLY SUPPORTING
