2024–25—Budgets and Finance Bills

ARCHIVED: This overview and the Practice Notes in this subtopic have been archived and are not maintained. This subtopic draws together content on the fiscal events throughout the tax year 2024–25, starting with the Spring Budget on 6 March 2024.

All the analysis produced in this subtopic will be collected in Practice Note: 2024–25—Fiscal events, including Spring Budget 2024 and Finance Bill 2024—Private Client analysis [Archived].

For more information on the annual Budget and Finance Bill process, see Practice Note: The Budget and Finance Bill process and Tax—Finance Bill 2025 tracker.

Spring Budget 2024

The Spring Budget 2024 was delivered by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Jeremy Hunt, on Wednesday 6 March 2024.

Our analysis includes:

  1. Spring Budget 2024—Private Client analysis—a summary of the key private client announcements in the Spring Budget and initial reactions from experts in the market,

  2. Video analysis—Spring Budget 2024: Key Private Client announcements—Neil Lancaster, Private Client partner and John Bull, Head of US UK Private Client at Blick Rothenberg LLP discuss the key Private Client measures announced in the Spring

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Private Client News

Market value, distributions and notional transactions—key SDLT lessons from Tower One St George Wharf Ltd v HMRC

Tax analysis: In Tower One St George Wharf Ltd v HMRC, the Court of Appeal considered the basis on which stamp duty land tax (SDLT) should be assessed and whether that resulted in SDLT being paid on the market value, the actual consideration paid, or on some other basis for a complex transaction within a corporate group. The taxpayer argued that the ‘Case 3’ exception under section 54(4) of the Finance Act 2003 (FA 2003) applied, which would result in SDLT being charged on the actual consideration. HMRC argued that the exception did not apply, which would result in SDLT being paid on the market value of the property. Alternatively, HMRC argued that if the exception did apply then the anti-avoidance provisions at FA 2003, s 75A applied, potentially resulting in an even higher SDLT charge. The Court of Appeal held that although the Case 3 exception applied, the anti-avoidance provision in FA 2003, s 75A also applied. This resulted in SDLT being assessed on an aggregate amount that was even higher than the property's market value (although HMRC did not seek to increase its assessment beyond market value). Therefore, the appeal was dismissed. As explained by Jon Stevens, partner, and Rory Clarke, solicitor, at DWF Law LLP, this decision deals with the interaction of a number of complex SDLT provisions and clarifies the SDLT provisions relating to transfers to connected companies and the SDLT anti-avoidance provisions, with implications for corporate structuring and tax planning.

View Private Client by content type :

Popular documents