Disputes with HMRC: appeals

FORTHCOMING CHANGE: A consultation (closing on 7 July 2025) seeks views on options for simplifying, modernising and reforming HMRC’s approach to dispute resolution with the aim of raising awareness of the dispute resolution processes and improving access to (and take-up of) alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and statutory review processes. The consultation also proposes aligning and simplifying the approach for appeals processes to combine the benefits of the different approaches currently used for direct and indirect tax disputes. For more information, see News Analysis articles: Tax update spring 2025—Tax analysis—Taxes management and dispute resolution and Tax update spring 2025—Improving HMRC’s approach to dispute resolution.

FORTHCOMING CHANGE: The Tribunal Procedure Committee (TPC) consultation on the provision of written reasons for decisions (30 July to 22 October 2024) includes proposals to amend the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009, SI 2009/273. For more information, see LNB News 13/08/2024 4.

Most HMRC decisions are able to be appealed by the taxpayer.

Once a taxpayer has received an appealable decision, the clock has already started to run for:

  1. requesting an HMRC review of that

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