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
Inheritance Tax Business Property Relief: Planning Points
25/07/2008, by Matthew Hutton MA, CTA (fellow), AIIT, TEP, Tax Articles - Inheritance Tax, IHT, Trusts & Estates, Capital Taxes
3202 views
0
Rate:
Rating: 0/5 from 0 people

Matthew Hutton MA, CTA (fellow), AIIT, TEP, Presenter of Monthly Tax Review (MTR), highlights some planning points on inheritance tax business property relief by Alex McDougall and James Kessler QC from a recent IBC IHT and Trusts Conference.

Matthew Hutton
Matthew Hutton
Context

The following points were made in a lecture by Alex McDougall and James Kessler QC at IBC’s IHT and Trusts Conference in London on 22 May 2008. 

Planning for BPR

Alex McDougall emphasised the importance of regular review.  Client assets should be examined to see if BPR would be available in the event of a death now and, if yes, what needs to be done over time to retain this.  Indeed, can the extent of the relief be increased, eg by adding non-relieved value to the value of the business.  If not, what can be done to obtain relief?

Disqualifying Contracts for Sale

The rule in IHTA 1984, s 113 is well known, that BPR is denied in any case where the property is subject to a binding contract for sale.  However, Alex suggested that many old partnership agreements still gave to continuing partners a right to acquire the interest of a deceased or a retiring partner.  Consequent disallowance of BPR could so easily be avoided by instead structuring these as option arrangements.  In so doing, however, it was important to specify whether the price was market value or book value.  For example if one failed to specify book value HMRC would typically argue for market value for example to restrict APR to ‘agricultural value’ in a case where BPR was not available on the excess.  Second, if the beneficiaries were not also members of the partnership, HMRC would seek to argue for market value. 

BPR on Death

HMRC practice, advised Alex McDougall, was to start with the responses to IHT Account Form 200 and then to check the information given in the supplementary form D14.  There were helpful flowcharts in IHTM25022 to determine if BPR was available.  Although the content of this part of the Manual will have a change in focus following the current revisions the questions will not.  Once the Special Commissioner’s decision in McCall has become final further guidance is due. 

Deferred Shares

The use of deferred shares, passing value over gradually until such time as they came to rank pari passu with the ordinary shares, was especially in fashion before the advent of the potentially exempt transfer.  Maybe they would come back into vogue, in cases where 100% BPR was not available, where it was desired to settle shares in investment companies under the FA 2006 regime for trusts.  HMRC published a curious interpretation of the application of IHTA 1984, s 98 in 1991 expressing the view that there was an alteration of rights caught by the section at such time when the deferred shares came to rank equally or become merged with the ordinary shares.  Most commentators felt that that was wrong.  However, it should be possible by drafting to avoid even that interpretation to ensure that there was a gradual shift of value from the existing ordinary to the deferred shares over a period of time, suggested James Kessler QC. 

(Alex McDougall and James Kessler QC lecture notes 22 May 2008)

The 7th Estate Planning Conference: Current Issues 2008

For the seventh successive year Matthew is running a series of full-day Conferences in 6 venues round the country, in the course of September and October 2008.

Audience:  Solicitors  Accountants  Tax Advisers  Private Bankers 

Estate Planning continues to be an intriguing and interesting subject.  But it is no mere intellectual exercise.  For our clients, the advice we give and the decisions they make, if not exactly 'life or death', can have far-reaching consequences over a long period of time.  Decided cases and developing HMRC attitudes (with reference to the Manuals, especially) must both be taken into account.  Flexibility is essential in structuring the family assets. 

This series of Conferences will major on developments over the last year or so, putting them into context and drawing out the practical planning aspects.  There will be plenty of time for delegate questions and discussion.

Price: £295 plus VAT (Concessions: £25 discount for 2007 delegates OR '5 delegates for the price of 4').

Dates and Venues:

4th September 2008The Cambridge Belfry - nr Cambridge
18th September 2008Norton Manor Hotel - Sutton Scotney, nr Winchester
25th September 2008Ansty Hall Hotel - Ansty, Coventry
2nd October 2008Marriott Hollins Hall Hotel - Shipley, Bradford
16th October 2008Aztec Hotel - Almondsbury, Bristol
30th October 2008Jurys Great Russell Street Hotel - London

About The Author

Matthew Hutton is a non-practising solicitor (admitted 1979), who has specialised in tax for over 25 years. Having run his own consultancy (latterly through Matthew Hutton Ltd) until 30th September 2000, he now devotes his professional time to writing and lecturing.
Back to Tax Articles
Comments

Please register or log in to add comments.

There are not comments added