Employment-related securities

Various income tax and National Insurance contributions (NICs) charges can arise for an employee or director in relation to the acquisition, ownership or disposal of employment-related securities. Associated PAYE and NICs obligations can also arise for the employing company.

What is an employment-related security?

A security (which includes shares, debt, derivatives and interests in investment partnerships) will be an employment-related security where the right or opportunity to acquire the securities (or interest in securities) is:

  1. available by reason of an employment of the person acquiring the securities (or interest) or any other person, or

  2. made available by a person's employer (or a person connected with a person's employer) (the deeming provision) unless such right or opportunity is made available:

    1. by an individual, and

    2. in the normal course of the domestic, family or personal relationships of that individual

For these purposes, employment includes a former, current and prospective employment.

The rules on employment-related securities apply very broadly because of the deeming provision. It means that the employment-related securities rules must be considered whenever shares are acquired in the employing company or a connected company.

For

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