Corporate tax compliance

In addition to the general tax compliance and reporting obligations (such as submitting their tax returns), large corporates are also subject to additional compliance obligations, including:

  1. the senior accounting officer regime

  2. the country-by-country reporting requirements

  3. the tax strategy publication requirements, and

  4. with effect for tax returns due to be filed on or after 1 April 2022, the rules on the notification of uncertain tax treatment

Senior accounting officer

The senior accounting officer (SAO) regime aims to ensure that qualifying companies have adequate tax accounting arrangements in place so that the correct tax liabilities are reported to HMRC. It brings personal accountability to senior finance personnel for the failures of a company to furnish timely and accurate tax returns. The regime applies to financial years beginning on or after 21 July 2009. For a summary of the key obligations imposed by the SAO rules, see the: Senior accounting officer (SAO) rules—checklist.

SAO requirements

For each financial year that a company is a qualifying company for the purposes of the SAO regime, there are three main requirements:

  1. the responsible officers of the company must appoint

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 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 Tax by content type :

Popular documents