This Practice Note looks at the position where a UK real estate investment trust (REIT or, as they are referred to in the tax legislation, UK REIT) owns property indirectly through a vehicle such as a partnership, offshore unit trust or a company. It then goes onto focus on the situation where a REIT holds an interest in property via a joint venture company (or group of companies). For an overall summary of the REIT regime, see Practice Note: REITs—summary of the tax regime. Other specific aspects of the REIT regime are examined in more detail in Practice Notes: • REITs—the conditions and tests • REITs—tax treatment of the REIT and its shareholders • REITs—breaches and exit Indirect ownership of property REITs may hold indirect interests in property through vehicles such as partnerships, offshore unit trusts or companies. The tax treatment for a REIT of such indirect ownership of property depends on the legal nature of each vehicle. A helpful table summarising the treatment for different types of entity

The regime for UK real estate investment trusts (REITs or, as they are referred to in the legislation, UK REITs) was introduced on 1 January 2007. There are currently over 150 REITs in existence, a number of which converted into the fund-type when the regime was introduced. Those original REITs have been joined by a significant number of additional entrants to the regime as a result of changes that were made to the entry rules, notably: the abolition of the entry charge, allowing REITs to invest in other REITs, and the relaxation of the requirement for listing so that companies without a listing but which are admitted to trading and actually traded on a recognised stock exchange (including, for example, on markets such as AIM) can also qualify. Several further changes have been made to the REITs rules over recent years with the stated aim of making the regime more attractive for additional entrants. The legislation governing the tax regime for REITs can be found primarily in Part 12 of the Corporation

This Practice Note looks at the tax treatment of UK real estate investment trusts (REITs or, as they are referred to in the tax legislation, UK REITs) and their shareholders. The aim of the UK’s REIT regime is to provide a tax-efficient vehicle that enables investment into the UK real estate sector by a wide range of investors. The key element of the regime is the movement of the tax point away from the investment vehicle and onto its shareholders. Broadly, this is achieved by: • exempting from corporation tax the profits on real estate investments and related gains realised within the REIT, but • requiring the REIT to distribute the significant majority of such profits to its shareholders: ◦ subject to the imposition of withholding tax, and ◦ treating such distributions in the hands of shareholders as income from a property business This Practice Note covers: • in broad terms, the distinction between a single company REIT and a group REIT • what happens

The regime for UK real estate investment trusts (REITs or, as they are referred to in the tax legislation, UK REITs) requires a number of conditions to be satisfied by a company or group wishing to benefit from the regime. These conditions, and certain other tests, must continue to be met throughout each accounting period while the company or group remains within the regime. This Practice Note looks at what those conditions and tests are. Breaches of the conditions and the tax consequences of an exit from the REIT regime are considered in Practice Note: REITs—breaches and exit. A summary of the REIT regime as a whole can be found in Practice Note: REITs—summary of the tax regime. For the tax treatment of the REIT vehicle and its investors, see Practice Note: REITs—tax treatment of the REIT and its shareholders. Company REITs v group REITs It should be noted that a REIT can take the form of either a single company or a group of companies, and this Practice Note considers the conditions

(US terminology) Roentgen Equivalent Man: A standard unit of radiation dose. It measures the effects of ionising radiation on humans. The dose equivalent in REMs is equal to the absorbed dose in rads multiplied by the quality factor of the type of radiation.

On 12 March 2024, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (‘DESNZ’) published the long awaited second consultation wide-range of reforms that the government has proposed to make to the GB electricity market through the Review of Electricity Market Arrangements (‘REMA’)(the ‘Consultation’). This follows the first consultation (the ‘First REMA Consultation’) published in July 2022 (see LNB News 19/07/2022 28). The summary of responses for the First REMA Consultation highlighted a general consensus among respondents regarding the necessity for market reform, however, it lacked clarity on the proposed options for effecting change. The key headlines of this latest Consultation include a focus on zonal pricing and an emphasis on unabated gas generation. We set out below the four key challenges that DESNZ is seeking to address in this Consultation and the key considerations for industry participants. This Consultation closes on 7 May 2024. For details of how to respond, as well as the full text of the consultation, see LNB News 12/03/2024 51.

The Radiation (Emergency Preparedness and Public Information) Regulations 2001

This Practice Note tracks the progress of secondary legislation introduced as part of the government’s post-Brexit reform agenda. It includes a database collating details of draft and enacted secondary legislation introduced under the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023. See: For details of primary legislation associated with post-Brexit reform, and Brexit SIs introduced using alternative enabling legislation, see Practice Note: Brexit legislation tracker [Archived]. Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 (REUL(RR)A 2023) contains a range of legislative powers, initially enabling relevant national authorities to reform retained EU law (REUL) before the end of 2023 by introducing secondary legislation to amend, revoke, restate and/or replace it, and enabling them to amend, revoke, restate and/or replace assimilated law as from 2024. Instruments made using these powers are referred to here as ‘REUL reform SIs’). The main legislative powers are set out in REUL(RR)A 2023, ss 11–16. The main procedural requirements (including parliamentary scrutiny procedures) for these instruments are set out in REUL(RR)A 2023, s 20

Public Law analysis: The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 (REUL(RR)A 2023) contains a range of legislative powers, enabling relevant national authorities to introduce secondary legislation to amend, revoke, restate and/or replace assimilated law. Under the REUL(RR)A 2023, before certain statutory instruments are formally laid in Parliament, they have to go through a preliminary sifting process to confirm the appropriate parliamentary procedure. If the relevant select committee recommends that a proposed negative SI should be upgraded to the affirmative procedure, the government may accept the recommendation or reject it. In the latter case, the minister responsible must provide an explanation, but may still proceed with the SI under the negative procedure. The latest draft SIs laid for sifting are reported here. Subjects covered include amendments to legislation in the field of company law, regarding the recognition of third-country corporate audit qualifications and training.

Public Law analysis: The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 (REUL(RR)A 2023) contains a range of legislative powers, enabling relevant national authorities to reform retained EU law (REUL) by introducing secondary legislation to amend, revoke, restate and/or replace REUL and assimilated law. Under the REUL(RR)A 2023, before certain statutory instruments (described here as ‘REUL reform SIs’) are formally laid in Parliament, they have to go through a preliminary sifting process to confirm the appropriate parliamentary procedure. The recommendations of the sifting committees are set out in regular reports. If either committee recommends that a proposed negative SI should be upgraded to the affirmative procedure, the government may accept the recommendation or reject it. In the latter case, the minister responsible must provide an explanation, but may still proceed with the SI under the negative procedure. The latest draft REUL reform SIs laid for sifting are reported here. Subjects covered include amendments to legislation in the fields of environment, food and rural affairs.

Public Law analysis: The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 (REUL(RR)A 2023) contains a range of legislative powers, enabling relevant national authorities to reform retained EU law (REUL) by introducing secondary legislation to amend, revoke, restate and/or replace REUL and assimilated law. Under the REUL(RR)A 2023, before certain statutory instruments (described here as ‘REUL reform SIs’) are formally laid in Parliament, they have to go through a preliminary sifting process to confirm the appropriate parliamentary procedure. The recommendations of the sifting committees are set out in regular reports. If either committee recommends that a proposed negative SI should be upgraded to the affirmative procedure, the government may accept the recommendation or reject it. In the latter case, the minister responsible must provide an explanation, but may still proceed with the SI under the negative procedure. The latest draft REUL reform SIs laid for sifting are reported here. Subjects covered include amendments to legislation in the field of weights and measures of alcohol.

Public Law analysis: The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 (REUL(RR)A 2023) contains a range of legislative powers, enabling relevant national authorities to reform retained EU law (REUL) by introducing secondary legislation to amend, revoke, restate and/or replace assimilated law. Under the REUL(RR)A 2023, before certain statutory instruments (described here as ‘REUL reform SIs’) are formally laid in Parliament, they have to go through a preliminary sifting process to confirm the appropriate parliamentary procedure. The recommendations of the sifting committees are set out in regular reports. If either committee recommends that a proposed negative SI should be upgraded to the affirmative procedure, the government may accept the recommendation or reject it. In the latter case, the minister responsible must provide an explanation, but may still proceed with the SI under the negative procedure. The latest draft REUL reform SIs laid for sifting are reported here. Subjects covered include amendments to legislation in the field of authorisations of health claims.