Murray Group decision 5th July

[webberg]

I have no issues with being disagreed with.

The points raised by CDJ are valid and sensible and he is perfectly correct in saying that the devil is in the detail.

Equally Mr Not Losing Any Sleep, makes a valid and sensible point.

It's probably impossible to set out the implications of this case until we have seen why a decision was reached. Even then there will be disagreement as to what it all means.

I do not assume to have a monopoly on the truth and would encourage everybody here to think for themselves.

[Not Losing Any Sleep]

I have no issues with being disagreed with.

The points raised by CDJ are valid and sensible and he is perfectly correct in saying that the devil is in the detail.

Equally Mr Not Losing Any Sleep, makes a valid and sensible point.

It's probably impossible to set out the implications of this case until we have seen why a decision was reached. Even then there will be disagreement as to what it all means.

I do not assume to have a monopoly on the truth and would encourage everybody here to think for themselves.

HMRC wins Rangers tax case ruling - BBC News

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2016-0073.html

[Dylan]

"Payment to the Principal Trust should have been subject to deduction of income tax under the PAYE Regulations"

"an employer who pays emoluments or earnings to or on account of an employee is obliged to deduct tax in accordance with the PAYE Regulations."

[helen7]

"Payment to the Principal Trust should have been subject to deduction of income tax under the PAYE Regulations"

"an employer who pays emoluments or earnings to or on account of an employee is obliged to deduct tax in accordance with the PAYE Regulations."

So who is now liable to pay the tax - the employer or the employee?

[webberg]

On the face of it, good news.

Lots of issues of detail and connections to be made. We will need to see the written judgement.

It is certainly though in line with the strategy we have been following for close on 3 years now and which is already well advanced for our Big Group.

[Fred Bloggs]

"Payment to the Principal Trust should have been subject to deduction of income tax under the PAYE Regulations"

"an employer who pays emoluments or earnings to or on account of an employee is obliged to deduct tax in accordance with the PAYE Regulations."

Yes, but.............. (Webberg will correct me, I guess) your tax is your own personal issue so you remain liable for ensuring the right tax is paid and for actually paying it? After all, isn't this the basis on which the weasel worded tax advisers get out of having to cough up when their schemes don't work?

[webberg]

So who is now liable to pay the tax - the employer or the employee?

The assessments at the heart of this case are PAYE demands on the employer.

[webberg]

Yes, but.............. (Webberg will correct me, I guess) your tax is your own personal issue so you remain liable for ensuring the right tax is paid and for actually paying it? After all, isn't this the basis on which the weasel worded tax advisers get out of having to cough up when their schemes don't work?

It's a good point.

Yes you are responsible for determining the correct amount of tax due.

However the PAYE Regulations require employers to deduct tax from "emoluments". (The vivos judgement used "remuneration" but I'm taking these as being the same for now). That is an employer liability that can be transferred to employee only in certain circumstances.

Arguably those circumstances changed when the disguised remuneration rules come in (Dec 2010) but before then, primary liability was with employer. Arguably post that date it remained with the employer.

Lots of issues of detail here

[Dylan]

On the face of it, good news.

Lots of issues of detail and connections to be made. We will need to see the written judgement.

It is certainly though in line with the strategy we have been following for close on 3 years now and which is already well advanced for our Big Group.

Written judgement available via the first link:

http://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/doc...3-judgment.pdf
http://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/doc...ss-summary.pdf

Unless there will be something more in depth?

[BrilloPad]

On the face of it, good news.

I thought HMRC won?