Qualifying asset holding companies

The qualifying asset holding company (QAHC) regime is an elective tax-privileged regime available to certain holding companies (referred to as ‘asset holding companies’ or ‘AHCs’) that are used in collective and institutional investment structures to hold investment assets. The main focus of the regime is on alternative fund structures, which are typically closed-ended, non-retail funds which hold assets across a range of private market investment strategies—chiefly credit, private equity and real estate investments.

The QAHC regime was introduced on 1 April 2022 to encourage funds to base their AHCs in the UK where that would otherwise make sense (eg where the investment manager is based in the UK). Traditionally, despite a high concentration of deal professionals and asset management expertise in the UK, Luxembourg has been the preferred location for holding companies, due to its broad treaty network and framework of tax reliefs. Ireland has also offered an attractive framework. Exploring ways to address some of the tax-related barriers to establishing AHCs in the UK formed part of the wider review of the UK funds regime, launched at Spring Budget 2020, to consider tax

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