We have written to HMRC to express concerns that Finance Bill 2016 clause 35 will lead to unintended consequences, and create uncertainties for taxpayers undertaking commercial transactions with no tax avoidance motive.
When the seeds of the disclosure of tax avoidance schemes (DOTAS) régime were first sown the Government may have thought they included the acorn from which a mighty oak would grow. But since then the result, variegated by the general anti-abuse rule (GAAR) and follower notices and accelerated payment notices (APNs), has come to resemble an impenetrable thicket whose thorns now include heavy penalties for non-observance. The Government has even felt the need to include harsher penalties for non-compliance with the GAAR in the draft Finance Bill 2016 clauses despite no compliance failures having been recorded yet.
This consultation concerns the tax rules governing distributions by a company. It also covers the specific changes put forward in the draft legislation published in Finance Bill 2016 clauses 16, 17 and 18 which amends the Transactions in Securities (TIS) rules in Income Tax Act (ITA) 2007 Part 13, and the distributions rules in general.
We have commented on the draft examples which were published by HMRC on 22 December 2015 to support the proposed new rules to counteract tax avoidance through hybrid and other mismatch arrangements set out in draft clause 33 of the Finance Bill 2016 published on 9 December 2015.
CIOT Tax Policy Director John Cullinane was part of a panel of three quizzed by the House of Commons Treasury Committee today as it begins its consideration of whether radical changes are needed to corporate taxation.
On 22 October 2015, HMT published a consultation document on Tax deductibility of corporate interest expense. This consultation seeks views on the proposals to tackle Action 4 of the Base Erosion Profits Shifting project, set out in the OECD report on Limiting Base Erosion Involving Interest Deductions and Other Financial Payments.