Business rates (NNDR)

This subtopic provides guidance in relation to the revenue raising and retention powers of local authorities in relation to hereditaments (units of property) in their area through the national non-domestic rates (NNDR). It explains:

  1. the legislative operation of the scheme and how it has evolved

  2. the assessment of rateable value

  3. who is liable for payment of NNDR

  4. when an exemption of liability is appropriate

  5. what discretionary reductions and reliefs for NNDR may be claimed

  6. how the system is billed, collected and recovered

Legislative framework

As a tax on property, rates have existed in some form since 1601. The revenue raising framework currently in place was largely established by the Local Government Finance Act 1988 (LGFA 1988). LGFA 1988 established that:

  1. rates were to be raised only on non-domestic property—occupiers of domestic property would instead pay community charges (from 1993 replaced by council tax, see Practice Note: Council tax)

  2. rates bills were to be set nationally by way of government specified multipliers to be applied to rateable values for each financial year

  3. local authorities would administer

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 Property 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 Property by content type :

Popular documents