2023–24—Fiscal events including Budget

ARCHIVED: This Overview has been archived and is not maintained.

This subtopic draws together content on the fiscal events throughout the tax year 2023–24, including:

  1. Tax Administration and Maintenance Day (TAMD), which took place on 27 April 2023

  2. Tax legislation day (L Day), which took place on 18 July 2023

  3. Autumn Statement, which took place on 22 November 2023

  4. the publication of the Autumn Finance Bill 2023 (AFB 2023), also known as Finance Bill 2024 and Finance Bill 2023–24, which was published on 29 November 2023 and which received Royal Assent on 22 February 2024 and was enacted as Finance Act 2024

  5. Spring Budget 2024, which took place on 6 March 2024, and

  6. the publication of the Spring Finance Bill 2024 (SFB 2024), also known as Finance (No 2) Bill 2024 and Finance (No 2) Bill 2023–24, which was published on 13 March 2024 and which received Royal Assent on 24 May 2024 and was enacted as Finance (No 2) Act 2024

For more information on the annual Budget and Finance Bill process, see Practice Note:  The

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 Tax 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 FA 2003, s 75A 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 Tax by content type :

Popular documents