• Home
  • Multi-Asset
  •  
    Retirement
    • Pensions
    • Income
    • Investment
    • Regulation
    • Estate planning
    • Equity release
  •  
    Your profession
    • Adviser tips
    • Business models
    • Companies
    • People
  • Regulation
  • Tax planning
  • Protection
  • Diversity
  • Events
  • Whitepapers
  • Industry blogs
  • EM and Asia spotlight
  • Newsletters
  • ESG spotlight
  • Sign in
  • Events
    • Upcoming events
      event logo
      Professional Adviser's Working Lunches in partnership with Orbis Investments - 2019

      Join us in March for the Professional Adviser Working Lunch series in partnership with Orbis Investments.

      • Date: 05 Mar 2019
      • Knutsford, Leeds, Surrey, Bristol
      event logo
      Professional Adviser Working Lunches 2019 - Baillie Gifford & First State Investments

      Professional Adviser is delighted to announce the launch of the new Working Lunches in partnership with Baillie Gifford and First State Investments. Travelling across the UK to provide valuable market insights for Senior Financial Advisers.

      • Date: 13 Mar 2019
      • Southhampton, Worcester, Durham, Norwich, Liverpool, Exeter, Sheffield, Leicester, Nottingham
      event logo
      Professional Adviser 360 2019

      The highly anticipated Professional Adviser 360 conference is taking place on 25th April 2019 at The Brewery in London.

      • Date: 25 Apr 2019
      • The Brewery Chiswell Street London EC1Y 4SD, London
      event logo
      Fund Manager of the Year Awards 2019

      The 2019 Fund Manager of the Year returns on Thursday 27th June 2019, Grosvenor House Hotel, London. Save the date.

      • Date: 27 Jun 2019
      • Grosvenor House Hotel 86-90 Park Lane Mayfair London W1K 7TN, London
      View all events
      Follow our events

      Sign up to receive email alerts about our events

      Sign up
  • Whitepapers
    • Find whitepapers
      Search by title or subject area
      View all whitepapers
  • Sign in
  •  
    •  

      Personalise your on site experience

      Download and use the apps

      Access your subscription from outside of the office

      Get relevant news and insight straight to your inbox

      Sign in
     
     
      • Newsletters
      • Account details
      • Contact support
      • Sign out
     
  • Follow us
    • RSS
    • Twitter
    • LinkedIn
    • Newsletters
    • YouTube
  • Register
  • Industry blogs
  • EM and Asia spotlight
  • ESG spotlight
Professional Adviser
Professional Adviser
  • Home
  • Multi-Asset
  • Retirement
  • Your profession
  • Regulation
  • Tax planning
  • Protection
  • Diversity
 
  •  

    Personalise your on site experience

    Download and use the apps

    Access your subscription from outside of the office

    Get relevant news and insight straight to your inbox

    Sign in
 
 
    • Newsletters
    • Account details
    • Contact support
    • Sign out
 
Professional Adviser
  • Your profession

Tax avoidance schemes: adviser liabilities

How can advisers become targets during HMRC investigations?

high-court-pa
Miller & Pangbourne
  • Julian Miller and Tom Pangbourne
  • 23 September 2010
  • Tweet  
  • Facebook  
  • LinkedIn  
  • Google plus  
  • Send to  
0 Comments

Julian Miller and Tom Pangbourne, solicitors at Beachcroft LLP, discuss how advisers can become targets during HMRC investigations.

Since 1997, a number of tax reliefs have been introduced, designed to encourage investment in particular areas of British industry. This included investment in British films, technology start-ups and in research and development.

However despite the best intentions, this inevitably attracted not just those wishing to invest in the relevant sector, but also high-net-worth individuals seeking to use the tax reliefs without any real interest in the underlying asset or the commercial success. This led to increased scrutiny by HMRC, the gradual restriction of the reliefs available, and the failure of several schemes – which has inevitably resulted in an increase in claims against professional advisers.

Related articles

  • Gillian Hutchison: Should you be allocating to real assets?
  • Adviser noticeboard: Post-it note size stuff for IFAs
  • Relive the 2019 PA Awards in photographs
  • Tom Poulter: Target practices
  • Talking with … J.P. Morgan AM's Karen Ward

Investors would typically pay from their own resources a proportion of the sums required for the relevant investment, raising the balance by way of a bank loan. Although the investor would only have contributed 20% of their own funds, with a bank loan for the remaining 80%, a claim for tax relief on the full amount of the investment was made.

No relief

Scrutiny by HMRC led to reliefs being withdrawn, often effective immediately on ministerial statements being made. The Finance Act 2002 restricted relief on British films only to those genuinely intended for cinematic release.

Restrictions on the use to which trading loss could be put were introduced in 2004, and prevention of ‘double-dipping’, whereby the same films were used to generate losses twice (for example, for production, then for acquisition), was put in place in 2005.

In addition, HMRC has disallowed some of the reliefs sought on a case-by-case basis. Commonly, its decision was influenced by the use of circular finance, the lack of a trade on a commercial basis with a view to the realisation of profit, or failure properly to acquire the asset. A particular focus has been on whether investors should be allowed relief on the 100% investment or only their own 20% investment.

In cases where HMRC indicates reliefs may be disallowed, some investors negotiate with HMRC for some relief, though inevitably lower than anticipated. It is in those circumstances that the professional advisers may be targets, if the investors have sustained losses or contend that they might other­wise have invested in schemes on which full relief would have been given.

Investors look to the IFAs, accountants and lawyers who advise the schemes to seek recovery of their investments, and the reliefs to which they consider they should have been entitled.

One high profile case involved Tower MCashback, and a key issue in this litigation was circular funding. HMRC argued that expenditure had not been incurred, as the borrowing was on uncommercial terms – consequently there was no real expenditure. HMRC succeeded at first, but the taxpayers prevailed on appeal. The court found that because the partnership had acquired the full rights to the software and was therefore able to use it to generate income, expenditure had been incurred and the tax reliefs should be allowed. This decision may be reviewed in a further appeal to the Supreme Court.

Uncertain future

The future holds significant uncertainty for professionals advising investors in such schemes and those insuring them. The combined effect of HMRC’s critical approach to such tax reliefs and the judgment in Tower MCashback means that those who have already invested in such schemes may be susceptible to investigation. Tax enquiries and closure notices are likely to become lengthier and fuller. Where investors are denied relief, or relief is clawed back, their losses may include interest and penalties payable to HMRC.

Most claims have settled out of court, so the full extent of the duties of an investor’s professional advisers, or those advising the scheme promoter, have not been tested. A statement published by Government alongside the budget confirmed that it intends to examine whether the adoption of a general anti-avoidance rule should form one element of a strengthened tax system.

Where reliefs are withdrawn however, it is inevitable that those involved will look to their advisers, and other professionals involved in the schemes – and there appears to be no end to these claims in sight.

  • Tweet  
  • Facebook  
  • LinkedIn  
  • Google plus  
  • Send to  
  • Topics
  • Your profession
  • Better Business
  • tax
  • HMRC

More news

Janus Henderson amends pricing of property funds
  • Property Investment
Janus Henderson adjusts pricing approach on £2.8bn Property fund

To promote 'long-term investment'

  • 15 February 2019
  • Wrap/platforms
'Broken platform market' exposed by data from the lang cat

Switching 'hard and expensive'

  • 15 February 2019
  • Your profession
SJP directed to waive client's exit fees after 'catalogue of errors'

Ombudsman decision

  • 15 February 2019
There might be smaller, more nimble funds performing better than larger ones in the IA universe
  • Investment
How much does fund size matter?

Smaller funds still packing a punch

  • 15 February 2019
Green hand
  • SRI
Vicki Bakhshi: Five responsible investment themes to watch in 2019

To drive progress

  • 15 February 2019
Back to Top

Most read

SJP directed to waive client's exit fees after 'catalogue of errors'
'Broken platform market' exposed by data from the lang cat
Joined arrow
Schroders-Lloyds tie-up to provoke 'war for advice talent'
Millennial Money: Use social media to pull in younger clients
Janus Henderson amends pricing of property funds
Janus Henderson adjusts pricing approach on £2.8bn Property fund
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Marketing solutions
  • Terms and conditions
  • Privacy and Cookie policy
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Newsletters
  • YouTube

© Incisive Business Media (IP) Limited, Published by Incisive Business Media Limited, New London House, 172 Drury Lane, London WC2B 5QR, registered in England and Wales with company registration numbers 09177174 & 09178013

Digital publisher of the year
Digital publisher of the year 2010, 2013, 2016 & 2017