Estates—inheritance tax

Introduction to IHT

For a quick guide to the basics of the inheritance tax (IHT) regime and a broad overview of UK tax rates, exemptions, basic nil rate band (NRB), residence nil rate band (RNRB), transferable NRB and RNRB, agricultural property relief (APR), business property relief (BPR), the reduced 36% tax rate for estates which include at least 10% gifts to charity, the territorial scope of IHT, restrictions on deducting loans and debt, lifetime gifts, small gifts relief, the use of trusts and compliance procedures, see Practice Note: Introductory guide to IHT.

See also Practice Note: Case study—IHT calculation on death.

The charge on death

The IHT charge on death falls under two headings:

  1. the additional charge—which arises on the chargeable lifetime transfers and the potentially exempt transfers (PETs) made in the seven years before death, and

  2. the estate charge—which arises on the value of all the property the deceased owns (or is deemed to own) immediately before death

The calculation and apportionment of IHT due on death can be complex, especially taking account of trust interests, chargeable lifetime transfers, the potential mix

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 section 75A FA 2003 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