Let's say I closed down a limited company (MVL) and was intending to move abroad.
I have correspondence with a solictor demonstrating that I was in the process of acquiring property in the other country.
Then at the last minute I was offered a new contract.
- it is a non-technical role (project management) having previously worked a technical role
- I want to postpone the move until the contract is finished
- I want to set up a new limited company for the contract
There have been plenty of threads on the TAAR rules but they mostly focus on Condition C, and less so on Condition D.
Condition C
Within two years of a distribution in a liquidation, the individual carries on a trade or activity which is similar to that of the company which was liquidated.
Condition D
It is reasonable to assume that the main purpose (or one of the main purposes) of the liquidation is the avoidance, or reduction, of Income Tax.
In addition to Condition C, could it also be argued that Condition D does not apply here, as there is evidence documenting the move abroad and therefore the liquidation was not for the avoidance of income tax?
Before the pitchforks come out, let me just say that this is a real situation and not something contrived to work around the rules.
Are there any tax/accounting services out there that can carry out an assessment, as they do for IR35?
I have correspondence with a solictor demonstrating that I was in the process of acquiring property in the other country.
Then at the last minute I was offered a new contract.
- it is a non-technical role (project management) having previously worked a technical role
- I want to postpone the move until the contract is finished
- I want to set up a new limited company for the contract
There have been plenty of threads on the TAAR rules but they mostly focus on Condition C, and less so on Condition D.
Condition C
Within two years of a distribution in a liquidation, the individual carries on a trade or activity which is similar to that of the company which was liquidated.
Condition D
It is reasonable to assume that the main purpose (or one of the main purposes) of the liquidation is the avoidance, or reduction, of Income Tax.
In addition to Condition C, could it also be argued that Condition D does not apply here, as there is evidence documenting the move abroad and therefore the liquidation was not for the avoidance of income tax?
Before the pitchforks come out, let me just say that this is a real situation and not something contrived to work around the rules.
Are there any tax/accounting services out there that can carry out an assessment, as they do for IR35?
Comment