Stamp duty

FORTHCOMING CHANGE relating to the modernisation of stamp taxes on shares framework: Stamp duty and SDRT will, in 2027, be replaced with a single, self-assessed tax on securities, the securities transfer charge (STC), that will be paid (and reported) through a new online portal. The features of the STC will generally follow the proposals for that tax outlined in a consultation undertaken in 2023. Finance Bill 2026 (FB 2026) introduces a power that will take effect from Royal Assent to allow secondary legislation to be introduced to enable taxpayers to test the new digital service by self-assessing their stamp taxes on securities obligations and to report transactions electronically through a digital service. For more information on the modernisation of stamp taxes on securities, see News Analyses: Budget 2025—Tax analysis—Stamp and transfer taxes, Tax update spring 2025—Stamp taxes on shares modernisation, Tax update spring 2025—Tax analysis—Stamp and transfer taxes, TAMD 2023—Stamp taxes on shares modernisation, TAMD 2023—consultation—stamp taxes on shares and Tax Administration and Maintenance Day—27 April 2023—Stamp and transfer taxes.

Additionally, the government consulted on modernising and clarifying the legislation imposing 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

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