Property funds (PAIFs and REITs)

Property funds come in different guises. In each case, their primary purpose is to facilitate collective investment in real estate. Investment in real property is popular and often seen as lower risk than investing on the equity markets.

As with other fund-types, collective investment in real estate (as opposed to independent investment) offers many advantages. These include:

•
the ability to share investment risk—funds can 'afford' to take greater investment risk because risk is spread more widely and, as a result, they can (potentially) access higher rewards
•
access to a larger and more diverse portfolio of property assets that an individual investor would otherwise not be able to afford, and
•
professional investment management

Collective investment in real property has been widely encouraged. Developments in the UK's tax regime to ensure that tax does not hinder or dissuade collective investment in property funds have been rapid over the last few years. Central to the UK's regime has been the development of:

•
the real estate investment trust (REIT), and
•
the property authorised investment fund (PAIF)

REITs v PAIFs

There is a good deal

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Tax News

Preliminary decision of FTT finds closure notices had wide scope allowing HMRC to raise alternative arguments in the substantive litigation (Tinkler v HMRC)

Tax analysis: In Tinkler v HMRC, the First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) in a preliminary decision considered the taxpayer’s application for it to decide that HMRC was prevented by the scope of its closure notices from raising two alternative arguments in the appeal. The FTT decided in favour of HMRC in relation to both arguments.

FTT considers the meaning of life (Lexgreen Services Ltd v HMRC)

Tax analysis: In Lexgreen Services Ltd v HMRC, the First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) held that a company can be liable for inheritance tax under section 201(1)(d) of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (IHTA 1984) if that company is a ‘live company’ at the time of the relevant transfer.

Tax weekly highlights—28 August 2025

This week's edition of Tax weekly highlights includes: (1) Agent Update: Issue 134 and (2) News Analysis on the FTT’s decision in John Jones Civil Engineering & Groundworks Ltd v HMRC.

Landfill tax and illegal waste disposal (John Jones v HMRC)

Environment analysis: In John Jones Civil Engineering & Groundworks Ltd v HMRC, the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) (Tax) dismissed the company’s appeal against a £547,000 landfill tax assessment on waste unlawfully deposited at a farm. The tribunal held that HMRC’s decision to levy tax on the unauthorised disposal was lawful and not ‘conspicuously unfair’ despite the appellant’s argument that an invasive plant made waste removal impossible. The case confirms that waste operators face both environmental penalties and Landfill Tax liabilities in parallel if they dispose of waste unlawfully. Environmental complications (like the presence of invasive species, such as Japanese Knotweed, or, in this case, Australian swamp stonecrop) do not excuse tax liability. Written by Stephen Sykes, head of climate, environment and sustainability law at Capital Law.