Disclosure of tax avoidance schemes

FORTHCOMING CHANGE: At Budget 2025 on 26 November 2025, the government announced that it will legislate in Finance Bill 2026 (also known as Finance (No 2) Bill 2024–26) to introduce measures targeting promoters or enablers of marketed tax avoidance. For more information, see News Analysis: Budget 2025—Private Client analysis — Tax avoidance, evasion and non-compliance.

The rules on the disclosure of tax avoidance schemes (DOTAS) (and their indirect tax equivalent, disclosure of tax avoidance schemes for VAT and other indirect taxes (DASVOIT)) oblige tax advisers, or sometimes the taxpayer, to inform HMRC about certain arrangements avoiding UK taxes. Further rules require the disclosure of certain cross-border arrangements to avoid obligations to report information on financial accounts and beneficial ownership. Initially these rules were contained in legislation implementing the EU directive known as DAC 6, but these were replaced by legislation to implement the OECD Mandatory Disclosure Rules (MDR) applicable to arrangements entered into on or after 28 March 2023.

For more information on the MDR, see Practice Note: Disclosable cross-border tax arrangements—Mandatory Disclosure Rules (MDR) and below.

Making

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