Home / Tax / Incentivised investment / EIS relief

Legal News

Animation company fails to secure EIS relief for follow-on funding (CHF Pip! v HMRC)

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
Published on: 10 November 2021
Published by a LexisNexis Tax expert

Table of contents

  • Trading and commerciality
  • Excluded activities and risk to capital
  • Why it matters
  • Case details

Article summary

Tax analysis: In CHF Pip! the First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) found that an animation production company, although trading, was not doing so on a commercial basis with a view to a profit. The FTT also briefly considered the ‘risk to capital’ condition for the first time.

Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom

Related documents:

4 News
View More
8 Q&As
View More
Powered by Lexis+®

Related documents:

4 News
View More
8 Q&As
View More

Popular documents

Do shares need to carry voting rights in order to qualify for relief under the seed enterprise investment

Do shares need to carry voting rights in order to qualify for relief under the seed enterprise investment scheme?As set out in Practice Note: SEIS—conditions for relief: issued shares, the funds raised and arrangements in general, the shares issued to the individual investor seeking seed enterprise

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companies

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companiesWhy does it matter?A company that is a member of a group and has incurred any of the types of losses available for surrender by way of group relief may, without any further rules, have more than one way in which to use the loss. There are a

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?What is an appeal?An appeal in insolvency proceedings is no different to an appeal in normal litigation. An appeal will be allowed only if the appeal court is satisfied that the decision of the lower court was 'wrong' or 'unjust because of a

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the current registered owner? Or does the informal exoneration only apply to the parties to the document which informally exonerated the rentcharge?This Q&A considers the situation where, at some