"The court ruled against a scheme promoted by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), the accountancy firm, used by a businessman in a bid to avoid about £11m in tax.
When another 200 taxpayers attempting to use the scheme are taken into account, the total cost in lost tax would have been nearer £100m, experts said. But the court ruling sets a precedent that could mean billions of pounds in potentially avoided tax will instead flow to the public purse.
"This gives a very clear indication of the way courts are now looking at tax schemes," said Mike Warburton of Grant Thornton. "The ruling says in effect, 'we are not going to countenance aggressive tax schemes'. You have to see this as an important victory for the taxman.
"Things are now running very much against tax avoidance schemes, both politically and in the courts." He put the potential tax savings from the knock-on effects of the ruling in the "billions of pounds
After a case about 30 years ago, such schemes were seen as invalid, but the legal situation was not watertight. However, this week's case reinforces the so-called "Ramsay principle" that artificial schemes to circulate money in a bid to avoid tax are not valid.
Lady Justice Hallett, one of the Appeal Court judges, said: "To my mind, this appeal was a thinly disguised attempt to undermine the Ramsay principle. Once it was accepted that the principle remains valid, and once the findings of the First Tier Tribunal were accepted, this appeal was doomed to fail."
HMRC said: "This was an artificial, circular, self-cancelling scheme designed with no purpose other than to avoid tax. The court delivered a very strong judgment that such transactions do not work in law. This case involved losses of about £11m but there are other users of the generic scheme on which this scheme was based generating substantial losses [of tax to HMRC]."
David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, said: "This is a great result for the country and it's another example of HMRC taking firm action against the avoidance schemes that would otherwise deprive the UK of billions of pounds. ".
The case was brought by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) against Howard Schofield, who had been sold a scheme by PwC to avoid capital gains tax on £10.7m. It involved a complex series of derivatives transactions that, in effect, went in a circle but had the effect of avoiding the tax otherwise due. "
Source: Tax avoidance: HMRC could gain billions as court rules against 'artificial' scheme - Telegraph
I wonder if some QC had an opinion that the scheme was valid and all is good?
A rare victory for the taxpayers.
When another 200 taxpayers attempting to use the scheme are taken into account, the total cost in lost tax would have been nearer £100m, experts said. But the court ruling sets a precedent that could mean billions of pounds in potentially avoided tax will instead flow to the public purse.
"This gives a very clear indication of the way courts are now looking at tax schemes," said Mike Warburton of Grant Thornton. "The ruling says in effect, 'we are not going to countenance aggressive tax schemes'. You have to see this as an important victory for the taxman.
"Things are now running very much against tax avoidance schemes, both politically and in the courts." He put the potential tax savings from the knock-on effects of the ruling in the "billions of pounds
After a case about 30 years ago, such schemes were seen as invalid, but the legal situation was not watertight. However, this week's case reinforces the so-called "Ramsay principle" that artificial schemes to circulate money in a bid to avoid tax are not valid.
Lady Justice Hallett, one of the Appeal Court judges, said: "To my mind, this appeal was a thinly disguised attempt to undermine the Ramsay principle. Once it was accepted that the principle remains valid, and once the findings of the First Tier Tribunal were accepted, this appeal was doomed to fail."
HMRC said: "This was an artificial, circular, self-cancelling scheme designed with no purpose other than to avoid tax. The court delivered a very strong judgment that such transactions do not work in law. This case involved losses of about £11m but there are other users of the generic scheme on which this scheme was based generating substantial losses [of tax to HMRC]."
David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, said: "This is a great result for the country and it's another example of HMRC taking firm action against the avoidance schemes that would otherwise deprive the UK of billions of pounds. ".
The case was brought by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) against Howard Schofield, who had been sold a scheme by PwC to avoid capital gains tax on £10.7m. It involved a complex series of derivatives transactions that, in effect, went in a circle but had the effect of avoiding the tax otherwise due. "
Source: Tax avoidance: HMRC could gain billions as court rules against 'artificial' scheme - Telegraph
I wonder if some QC had an opinion that the scheme was valid and all is good?
A rare victory for the taxpayers.
Comment