Reorganisations and tax

Corporate reorganisations and reconstructions are afforded special tax treatment intended to make these arrangements neutral for the purposes of taxation on chargeable gains. Without this special regime, the arrangements would result in disposals giving rise to capital gains tax or corporation tax on chargeable gains.

Reliefs are available both for shareholders and, where relevant, the company being reorganised.

The underlying policy rationale is that, as there is no substantial change in the economic ownership of the underlying business of the reorganised or reconstructed company, and to the extent no value is extracted, such transactions should not be taxed.

The tax relief afforded to reorganisations ensures that companies retain the flexibility to arrange their capital structure in the way they see best.

Reorganisations

Reorganisations of share capital involve a single company. They include transactions that increase or reduce a company's share capital.

Reorganisations involve new shares or debentures (the new holding) being issued by the reorganised company to its shareholders in respect of and in proportion to their shareholding before the reorganisation (the original shares).

A reorganisation can be restricted to a particular class of shares.

The

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