From what I understand anything that has a justfiable commercial reason will generally be accepted.
So when Starbucks pay no tax this video gves a great explanation as to how they can legitimately do this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Th4fxMFRIt0
In the long distant past I did get a professional accountancy qualification and this is exactly how tax avoidance was taught, i.e. you have leeway as how you structure profits, BUT, and this is important it has to be justified according to standard accounting principles (e.g. generally acceptable methods of calculating depreciation) and commercially viable, i.e. you can't simply charge silly interest rates from the head office or silly transfer prices, and this has to be agreed with HMRC. In other words expect your P&L to be scrutinised by HMRC and that you need to defend your decisions, and expect HMRC to challenge it.
Unfortunately the accountancy and legal profession is undermined by sharks who knowingly push the barriers way beyond this.
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "UT : No immunity from tax for vaccine avoidance scheme"
Collapse
-
Originally posted by eazy View PostUT : No immunity from tax for vaccine avoidance scheme
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/n...oidance-scheme
Published 4 September 2014
A tax avoidance scheme that abused tax relief for research into life-saving vaccines to claim back £77m in tax, has been rejected again by a tribunal.
Investors in the scheme used a Jersey-registered limited partnership which claimed to be involved in creating and exploiting intellectual property from research into vaccines against diseases such as HIV, flu, Hepatitis A and Hepatitis B.
The Vaccine Research Limited Partnership scheme, promoted by Matrix Structured Finance, tried to exploit a tax relief for spending on research and development by claiming back all the tax due on an alleged investment of £114m and a first-year trading loss of £193 million.
But the upper tribunal has now backed a 2013 ruling by the first-tier tribunal in favour of HMRC, finding that only £14m had been spent on R&D.
David Gauke, Financial Secretary to the Treasury, said it was the latest in a series of HMRC tribunal wins over avoidance schemes whose members try to exploit rules for partnerships.
I am able to speak to this one as it reflects a lot of the elements I see every day.
The position is (as you might expect) a bit more complex than it seems but it is a good example of how something packaged as helping the human race is actually a tax avoidance device. We call them tax shaggers.
Matrix have also gone pop since so the members are up that creek using their hands.
Leave a comment:
-
UT : No immunity from tax for vaccine avoidance scheme
UT : No immunity from tax for vaccine avoidance scheme
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/n...oidance-scheme
Published 4 September 2014
A tax avoidance scheme that abused tax relief for research into life-saving vaccines to claim back £77m in tax, has been rejected again by a tribunal.
Investors in the scheme used a Jersey-registered limited partnership which claimed to be involved in creating and exploiting intellectual property from research into vaccines against diseases such as HIV, flu, Hepatitis A and Hepatitis B.
The Vaccine Research Limited Partnership scheme, promoted by Matrix Structured Finance, tried to exploit a tax relief for spending on research and development by claiming back all the tax due on an alleged investment of £114m and a first-year trading loss of £193 million.
But the upper tribunal has now backed a 2013 ruling by the first-tier tribunal in favour of HMRC, finding that only £14m had been spent on R&D.
David Gauke, Financial Secretary to the Treasury, said it was the latest in a series of HMRC tribunal wins over avoidance schemes whose members try to exploit rules for partnerships.Tags: None
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Which IT contractor skills will be top five in 2025? Yesterday 09:08
- Secondary NI threshold sinking to £5,000: a limited company director’s explainer Dec 24 09:51
- Reeves sets Spring Statement 2025 for March 26th Dec 23 09:18
- Spot the hidden contractor Dec 20 10:43
- Accounting for Contractors Dec 19 15:30
- Chartered Accountants with MarchMutual Dec 19 15:05
- Chartered Accountants with March Mutual Dec 19 15:05
- Chartered Accountants Dec 19 15:05
- Unfairly barred from contracting? Petrofac just paid the price Dec 19 09:43
- An IR35 case law look back: contractor must-knows for 2025-26 Dec 18 09:30
Leave a comment: