View more on these topics

Tony Wickenden: Treble trouble for tax dodgers


I have often referred to the Government’s approach to reducing the (more than £35bn) “tax gap” as one founded on GAAR, stars and TAAR. I like the phonetic symmetry.

GAAR refers to the general anti-abuse rule. This is, in effect, the legislative safety net that will help the Government defeat perceived aggressive attempts to flout the intent of tax legislation. It is a formal recognition that the mere words of legislation may not be enough to achieve the Government’s purpose. It is also a clear recognition of the official discomfort in relying on the courts and tribunals to apply a purposive approach to interpretation and of the need to reduce the high costs litigation brings with it.  We have not seen much evidence of its application so far, though.

The “stars” part of the “triple approach” to anti-avoidance refers to the naming and shaming of high profile individuals and companies. Jimmy Carr and Gary Barlow, for example, have both had to “take that” in relation to their reputation as fine, upstanding taxpaying members of society.

The corporate versions have arguably come in for more stick. Starbucks has been consistently criticised and even boycotted for low tax payment. To be fair, you can get a reasonable alternative to a gingerbread latte in another coffee house. Be that as it may, try and “do Christmas” these days without access to Google and Amazon. Not so easy.

However, there is no doubt the naming and shaming is tremendously effective to change the public’s perception of what is and is not acceptable. This in turn cuts off demand and, if people are not entering into aggressive tax planning schemes, the Government has less litigation and legislation to implement. Result. Much better for them than extending the DOTAS hallmarks and sending out accelerated payment notices.

Meanwhile, we continue to see many TAARs: targeted anti-avoidance rules. Each and every Budget and Autumn Statement brings more anti-avoidance legislation, and the recent Autumn Statement was no exception. However, because of the now pretty much standard practice of announcing future legislation, consulting on it and then issuing draft legislation, it is sometimes a bit hard discerning (more accurately, remembering) whether Budget or Autumn Statement references to tax change are new or the next step in what is increasingly an iterative process. Not that the latter is not to be welcomed – it is. It makes (or, at least, should make) for more coherent final legislation. We can hope anyway.

A good example of this iterative approach is the move towards the legislation on simplifying so-called relevant property taxation. This started life with a consultation that had the avowed intent of simplifying inheritance tax calculations on relevant property trusts – broadly, any trust other than an exempt or absolute trust. Along the way, as a kind of by-product or consequence, there would be a prevention of the use of multiple nil-rate bands by separate trusts created on different days by the same settlor – the so-called “Rysaffe” strategy – after the case of the same name.

I am not going to go into detail here; I will save that for another article soon. However, what I will say is that the process of consultation, consideration, more consultation, more consideration and then draft legislation has led to a pretty good outcome.

The potential complications of the administration of the proposed new tax calculation regime have been largely dropped and the anti-avoidance provision has ended up being very narrowly focused – at least compared to what it was originally proposed to be with a single settlement nil-rate band (i.e. one nil-rate band for all the trusts created by a single settlor).

That has to be as a result of all the clear and strongly felt representations made during the consultation phase. The main mischief the new draft legislation appears to be targeted at is the setting up during lifetime of multiple nominal value pilot trusts to receive substantial amounts from a testator’s will – such additions constituting “same-day added property” for the purpose of the new legislation.

Broadly speaking, the new provisions would operate to aggregate trusts that were established by the same settlor that receive added property on the same day.

It would, however, seem that multiple trusts established on different days with low value/exempt transfers and no “same-day added property” will continue to be capable of accessing their own nil-rate band. So a “Rysaffe” multiple trust strategy can still work with, for example, loan trusts and large sum assured regular premium life assurance protection policies held in trust.

The draft legislation clearly and specifically excludes life policy premiums from being treated as “added property” for the purpose of the provision.

Tony Wickenden is joint managing director at Technical Connection 



High Court winds up £3.3m land banking scam

A land banking scam which raised £3.3m from investors has been wound up by the High Court following an investigation by the Insolvency Service. Four companies involved in the misselling of undeveloped land for investment to the public have been ordered into liquidation. Complete Building Systems, Rawtenstall CBS, Evesham CBS and Hounslow West London were […]


FCA ‘could probe rising proc fees’

The FCA has threatened to intervene in the mortgage market if it believes rising procuration fees are influencing which products brokers recommend for their clients. Several mortgage lenders, including NatWest Intermediary Solutions, Skipton Building Society, Accord Mortgages and Leeds Building Society, have recently raised the fees paid to brokers for completed mortgage deals. Last week, […]

FCA logo new 2 620x430

Trader convicted of fraud in £5m investment scam

A trader has been found guilty of fraud in a conviction brought by the FCA for a £5m investment scam. Alex Hope was found guilty of one count of fraud by a jury at Southwark Crown Court today. He had previously admitted a charge of operating a collective investment scheme without authorisation. Between March 2011 […]

The Downsizing Delusion: Why relying exclusively on your home to fund your retirement may end in tears

By Steve Webb, director of policy The British obsession with homeownership can have dangerous consequences. A recent survey by Barings¹ found that up to three million people of working age were planning to rely wholly on the value of their home to fund their retirement. We are not talking about people investing in buy-to-let or […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


    Leave a comment


    Why register with Money Marketing ?

    Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

    News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
    Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

    Money Marketing Events
    Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

    Research and insight
    Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

    Have your say
    Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

    Register now

    Having problems?

    Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

    Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm