Private equity funds

FORTHCOMING CHANGE relating to the tax treatment of carried interest: Following a call for evidence on the tax treatment of carried interest that ran over summer 2024, at Autumn Budget 2024 the government announced that it would introduce a revised tax regime for carried interest from 6 April 2026 that would sit within the income tax framework, subject to special rules to take account of the unique characteristics of the reward. A consultation on potential new qualifying conditions for access into the new regime followed, with a government response to this being issued in June 2025. Draft legislation for the new tax regime for carried interest was published on 21 July 2025, for inclusion in Finance Bill 2026. The new rules will have effect for carried interest arising on or after 6 April 2026. All this was confirmed at the Budget on 26 November 2025, where it was also noted that some changes had been made to the draft legislation to reflect stakeholder feedback. Pending the coming into force of the new regime, the capital gains tax rates applicable to carried interest were increased to 32% with

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

Upper Tribunal denies EIS relief as trade not commenced (Putney Power and Piston Heating v HMRC)

Tax analysis: The Upper Tribunal (UT) has held that the First-tier Tax Tribunal (the FTT) made a material error of law in its approach to determining when a trade has ‘begun to be carried on’ by a company for the purposes of qualifying for Enterprise Investment Scheme (EIS) relief under section 179(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act 2007 (ITA 2007). The FTT had identified a set of principles by reference to factors which were of relevance in previous cases and applied those ‘legal’ principles to determine that neither Putney Power Limited (‘Putney’) nor Piston Hearing Services Ltd (‘Piston’) had begun to carry on a trade by the relevant date of 4 April 2018. The UT set aside the FTT’s decision on the basis that the FTT had sought to apply a principles-based test which did not exist as a matter of law. The proper approach requires a multi-factorial evaluation of all of the circumstances in the case at hand. The UT re-made the decision but ultimately reached the same conclusion as the FTT, dismissing the appeals of both Putney and Piston and holding that neither company had commenced trading by the relevant date. The decision is significant because it clarifies that there is no strict legal test for when a trade commences: the question remains highly fact sensitive and will be determined by reference to the particular facts and circumstances of each case. Written by Kate Ison (partner at Macfarlanes LLP) and Victoria Braid (associate at macfarlanes LLP).

View Tax by content type :

Popular documents