Inheritance tax

FORTHCOMING CHANGE: The newly elected Labour government announced on 29 July 2024 that it intends to replace the current (2024–25) domiciled-based assessment of inheritance tax (IHT) with a new residence-based system from 6 April 2025, which would bring non-UK assets within the scope of IHT if the owner has been resident in the UK for ten tax years and keep them within the charge to IHT for between three and nine years after that person ceases to be UK resident. Details of the new rules were published in the Budget on 30 October 2024 (Autumn Budget 2024). See paragraph 5.51 of Autumn Budget 2024 and Technical Note: Reforming the taxation of non-UK domiciled individuals.

FORTHCOMING CHANGE: In the Budget on 30 October 2024 (Autumn Budget 2024), the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced that business property relief (BPR) at the current rate of relief of 100%, which applies to the value of certain types of property, will be limited to the first £1 million of that value and the remainder will receive relief at only 50%. If the taxpayer, or the estate of the taxpayer,

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