View more on these topics

Capital gains tax: valuation and arms length principle

Under S17 TCGA 1992 a person&#39s acquisition or disposal of an asset can be deemed to be for consideration equal to the market value of the asset where the disposal is otherwise than by way of bargain made at arms length ie. not just when the parties are connected with each other. In the case of any transactions between unconnected parties at obviously less the market value then there is a subjective test to be applied as to whether the bargain is made at arms length or not and whether one of the parties to a transaction has the intention of conferring a gratuitous benefit on the other party to the transaction. If they do then it seems that the transaction between them will be one that is otherwise than by bargain made at arms length. If this is the case the market value rule applies.



There are a number of issues to consider in determining whether there is an intention to confer a gratuitous benefit or not.



– The presence or absence of real negotiations between the parties about the terms of the transaction



– How the terms of the transaction compare with those in similar transactions.



– Whether the parties have separate legal or other professional representation.



– Whether the parties had received independent advice.



– The character of any comparable prior dealings between the parties.



– Whether the transaction between the parties may be linked with any other transaction between the same parties.



– The relationship between the parties outside the transaction in question.



In the case of Bullevant Holdings Ltd -v- Inland Revenue Commissioners (1998) STC 905 unusually the taxpayer argued for a higher value than that agreed on the basis that the agreement was other than at arms length. The taxpayer&#39s appeal was dismissed on the basis that the price was indeed negotiated at arms length (based on the facts of the case) and there were good explanations for the low price.



Comment



It is important, despite the Bullevant case, however, for anybody seeking to argue that even where a low price was agreed the arrangement was nevertheless at arms length take fully into account that the Bullevant case was decided on its facts and that it will be the facts of each case that will determine the outcome on what is a very subjective issue.

Recommended

Shepherds and Savignon promotes Teps in Gibraltar

Shepherds and Savignon Financial Services is holding a seminar in Gibraltar next month to promote its Traded Endowment Policies.The Tep provider says it is targeting the expatriate market because Teps are a safe investment haven for UK nationals living abroad.The seminar will also provide participants with an opportunity to try out Shepherds&#39 quotation software.

A&L says 750,000 could switch bank accounts this year

Nearly three quarters of a million people will switch banks in 1999 according to Alliance & Leicester commissioned research.The lender suggests that there will be a move away from traditional high street players towards direct telephone operations.The survey, conducted by market research organisation NOP, shows that 4 million people have switched their main current account […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

    Leave a comment