Rights issues

A rights issue is a common way in which a company can raise capital.

A rights issue involves a company:

  1. making an offer of new shares to its existing shareholders (normally defined in the rights issue prospectus as qualifying shareholders) at an issue price that is normally set at a deep discount to the market value of the shares

  2. in proportion to (or as nearly as may be in proportion to) their holdings of shares or a class of shares in the company as reflected in the register of members on the record date (ie a specific date prior to the rights issue)

  3. by means of provisionally allotting new shares to those existing shareholders on a nil paid basis (ie providing them with nil paid rights to subscribe for the new shares subject to the terms and conditions of the rights issue) and (unless restricted by securities laws of the UK and/or overseas) involving:

    1. the issue of a renounceable letter or other negotiable document (which is attached to the provisional allotment letter or PAL), to those shareholders who hold their existing shares in certificated

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