CGT Losses & TAAR

[fin1]

Hi,

I am trying not to fall foul of TAAR having read through the examples given,

Situation:

My wife and I both have separate shares accounts (outside of individual ISAs).
We will both have a separate CGT bill this year due to a let property sale.
I have made some end of year share portfolio changes and realised some real losses on my shares. Some of these losses will offset share gains made in same year.
I had planned to use the remainder of the share losses against my property CGT liability.
However, in 2 instances, my wife had purchased (and has retained) the same number/type of shares (as I had sold) in her own account (on same/following day) while adjusting her portfolio.

Question:

Because my wife has purchased the same shares I had sold within 30 days, can I not use these losses (even though real economic loss realised) against my shares gain or property CGT liability?
Example 7 in TAAR seems to imply that this might be OK "or if Mrs H bought the shares and retained them as part of her own share portfolio, it is less likely that the securing of a tax advantage was one of the main purposes of the arrangements, in which case the TAAR would not apply."
But really not sure!!
Is there any further advice/case studies since TAAR introduced for individuals?

Many thanks for any advice,

[AGoodman]

There is no definitive answer as the legislation is unfortunately (but deliberately) drafted so widely that taxpayers have to rely on HMRC guidance. That isn't very helpful when HMRC also provide vague guidance.

I assume you actually run your wife's account or recommended the purchase (or it would be a major co-incidence)

You have not mentioned the most important fact, which was the reason why your wife (presumably acting by you) made the acquisitions. I (and HMRC) would therefore assume that you thought the shares you sold were still a good investment.

You have the advantage that you and your wife are not taxed as a couple, you are individual taxpayers, and both of your economic positions have genuinely changed - you had the shares and now you do not. Your wife did not have the shares and now she does. Neither of you has gained a tax advantage as such and there is no circularity (as in example 6). Overall, my gut instinct is that it should be fine but that is possibly relying on HMRC discretion rather than the underlying legislation which is generally thought to be far too wide.

You could complete a return (you may be anyway) and mention this in the whitespace, together with the fact that your wife has retained her shares.

[fin1]

Many thanks, AGoodman - that is very pragmatic advice and I think covering the concern in the "white space" is good idea. Hopefully then HMRC can see that we are trying to follow the guidance but are not sure exactly hw to interpret it!