This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more about cookies on this website and how to delete cookies, see our Cookie Policy.
Analytics

Tools which collect anonymous data to enable us to see how visitors use our site and how it performs. We use this to improve our products, services and user experience.

Essential

Tools that enable essential services and functionality, including identity verification, service continuity and site security.

Where Taxpayers and Advisers Meet
Entrepreneurs' Relief
21/01/2012, by Peter Vaines, Tax Articles - Business Tax
4480 views
0
Rate:
Rating: 0/5 from 0 people

Peter Vaines comments on a recent tax tribunal case regarding Entrepreneurs' Relief.

Some useful guidance has been provided by the Tribunal in the case of Gilbert v HMRC TC1542.

Mr Gilbert carried on a business of selling food on commission representing 9 different suppliers. He sold part of his business to one of his suppliers and claimed Entrepreneurs' Relief on the resultant gain.

The sale was of all the business connected to that particular supplier and the brands. The supplier bought the database containing the list of customers and all the goodwill which went with it.

HMRC rejected the claim to Entrepreneurs' Relief on the basis that it was merely a disposal of business assets which was not enough to satisfy the requirements for Entrepreneurs' Relief. There also needs to be “the disposal of the whole or part of a business”.

However, the tests put forward by HMRC seem to be more appropriate to a situation where somebody is carrying on more than one business and sells one of the businesses – rather than the statutory test of selling part of a business.

The Tribunal had no difficulty in concluding that this was the sale by Mr Gilbert of part of his business as a going concern including the customer database, the goodwill, the trademarks and business information together with the benefit and burden of contracts and records.

The Tribunal observed that during their reading they discovered where the test put forward by HMRC came from. They drew attention to the fact that the test advanced by HMRC had been queried by the High Court in another case and substantially weakened by the House of Lords who considered that the matter should be looked at in a different way.

About The Author

The above item is an extract from ‘UK Tax Bulletin’ which is written by Peter Vaines and is reproduced with the kind permission of the author.

Peter Vaines is a barrister at Field Court Tax Chambers. He advises clients in the UK and overseas on all aspects of corporate tax and personal tax law including tax investigations, trusts and offshore structures as well as wider issues such as the valuation of unquoted shares for fiscal purposes. He is one of the leading authorities in the UK on the law of residence and domicile. Mr Vaines is also qualified as a chartered accountant, chartered arbitrator and member of the Institute of Taxation. He is a columnist for the New Law Journal and the Tax Journal and is a former member of the editorial board of Taxation. He was awarded Tax Writer of the Year in the LexisNexis Taxation Awards of 2015.

(W) www.fieldtax.com

Back to Tax Articles
Comments

Please register or log in to add comments.

There are not comments added