A man has received a two year jail term, suspended for two years, for running a fake passport factory from his home in Battersea, London. Rodolfo Napoleon Carpio Gonzalez was arrested by National Crime Agency officers on 10 April 2019, after his fingerprints were linked to a fake passport used by a man suspected of illegally smuggling migrants into the UK. An NCA investigation found that Gonzalez had produced hundreds of false documents dating back to at least 2011, and that those documents were used by people who had arrived illegally from outside the EU to secure jobs or rent properties. In addition, Gonzalez was sentenced to 200 hours of community service, a 30 day rehabilitation order and an £800 fine. He was also ordered to forfeit and dispose of all the fake documents and equipment used to make them.

Law360, London: A man who pretended he was forced to cancel 14 holidays because of coronavirus (COVID-19) restrictions so he could claim more than £61,000 in insurance payouts has been sentenced at a London court to two years in prison, suspended for 18 months.

The Metropolitan Police has announced that, following an investigation by the Met’s Counter Terrorism Command, a software and analytical engineer, who purposely leaked highly sensitive military information and data has been sentenced for offences contrary to the Official Secrets Acts. Simon Finch of Southport initially pled not guilty but then pleaded guilty half-way through his trial at the Old Bailey to: recording information for a purpose prejudicial to the safety of interests of the state, contrary to section 1 of the Official Secrets Act 1911, making a damaging disclosure relating to defence contrary to section 2 of the Official Secrets Act 1989 and failing to comply with a notice requiring disclosure contrary to section 53 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. Finch was sentenced to four-and-a-half years’ imprisonment and will be subject to a five-year Serious Crime Prevention Order upon release from prison.

An individual found guilty of selling illegal streaming devices which provided unauthorised access to premium pay TV content has been jailed for two years. Between 2015 and 2019, Paul Jaques received more than £200,000 from the online sales of his product which allowed consumers to access premium sports, film and TV content for free. FACT Chief Executive, Kieron Sharp, stated that this is another case which ‘shows the serious consequences faced by individuals that choose to break the law by supplying illegal content. FACT will continue to work with broadcasters and rights holders to crackdown on illegal streaming and to hold those behind it accountable for their actions’.

Environment analysis: In a significant decision for UK environmental protection, a landowner will have money confiscated under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 for offences under forestry legislation. Richard Broadbent, Director at Freeths, provides comment on the development.

A facility where a network operator manages the re-routing of a customer's traffic on that customer's private circuits to overcome a fault or congestion.

A payphone installed on a private or commercial site, but operated under a contract with a payphone communications provider who pays the landowner a fee and collects the revenues and carries out maintenance.

This Practice Note explains what constitutes a managed service company (MSC) and when the anti-avoidance legislation will apply for income tax and NICs purposes. The implication of the transfer of debt provisions that form a part of the MSC regime is also discussed, as is HMRC’s ongoing approach to these structures. What are managed service companies? Many individual workers supply their services to clients, not directly as a self-employed person, but via an intermediary (often a personal service company (PSC)). This arrangement can potentially have tax and National Insurance contributions (NICs) advantages—for more details, see Practice Note: Personal service companies—the key benefits and key tax considerations. Where a PSC is owned by the individual worker, it is likely to come within the scope of the anti-avoidance intermediaries legislation, commonly known as 'IR35' (after the reference number of the HMRC Press Release announcing the rules in Budget 1999). For more details, see Practice Notes: IR35—the small client off-payroll regime and IR35—the large and public client off-payroll regime. In the years following the introduction of that

Where the managed service company (MSC) legislation applies, the MSC is treated as making to the worker, and the worker is treated as receiving, a payment or benefit that is treated as earnings from employment. This Practice Note explains how that deemed employment payment is calculated for income tax purposes, and how the worker's attributable earnings are calculated for National Insurance contributions (NICs) purposes. For details of what constitutes a MSC and when the anti-avoidance legislation will apply for income tax and NICs purposes, see Practice Note: Managed service companies and the anti-avoidance legislation. The attributable earnings for NICs purposes are computed on the basis of the income tax rules that calculate the deemed employment payment. As a result, references in this Practice Note to the deemed employment payment apply equally to attributable earnings. The calculation of the deemed employment income payment is based on the payment that is received by a worker in respect of the services the worker provides via the MSC. The calculation has to be repeated each

This Agreement is made on [date] Parties 1 [insert name of the Supplier], a company incorporated in [England and Wales] under number [insert registered number] whose registered office is at [insert address] (Supplier); and 2 [insert name of the Customer], a company incorporated in [England and Wales] under number [insert registered number] whose registered office is at [insert address] (Customer), each of the Supplier and the Customer being a party and together the Supplier and the Customer are the parties. Background (A) The Supplier is an experienced provider of [insert details] managed services. (B) The Customer wishes to appoint the Supplier to provide and manage [insert description] services to support its business operation. The parties agree: 1 Definitions and interpretation 1.1 In this Agreement: Affiliate • means, in relation to a party, any other entity which directly or indirectly Controls, is Controlled by, or is under direct or indirect common Control with that party from time to time; Agreement • means the main body of this Agreement together with its schedules and the annexes to each schedule[, as each may be amended from time to time in accordance with their terms]; Authorised Contact • means each person appointed by each of the Customer

A leveraged buy out (LBO) where the existing management acquire the target company.

Key considerations The abolition of the remittance basis and the introduction of a residence-based test for inheritance tax (IHT) has reduced the tax advantages of offshore trusts for UK-resident settlors. However, depending on individual circumstances, a non-UK resident trust can still offer both tax and non-tax benefits. The management and control of a trust is distinct from the residence of a trust. For information on the residence of trusts for UK tax purposes, see Practice Note: Tax position of non-resident trusts. In order to access the benefits of having an offshore trust, it is vital to ensure that the trust is indeed resident outside the UK, and that the management and control of the trust also takes place outside the UK. Key considerations include: • the trust must be managed and controlled from outside the UK • the trustees should have appropriate experience and expertise in the administration of trusts • the trust deed should require that the trust is resident in the chosen jurisdiction outside the UK. If this is not the case, the deed should