3 ms·
[IANAUKTL] That would appear to run directly up against the Ramsay Principle.[1] Specifically, if a company does a series of pre-ordained business transaction
by mfringel 11y ago
[IANAUKTL]
That would appear to run directly up against the Ramsay Principle.[1] Specifically, if a company does a series of pre-ordained business transactions with no commercial purpose, specifically with the goal of reducing their tax burden, Inland Revenue can look at the whole transaction and assess payment based on what would have happened otherwise.
A similar case happened in the US with Gregory v. Helvering[2], with the out-of-context quote from Judge Learned Hand in the predecessor case (Helvering v. Gregory[3]) saying roughly the same thing as Lord Clyde.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramsay_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramsay_principle
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_v._Helvering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_v._Helvering
[3] http://www.leagle.com/decision/193487869F2d809_1591/HELVERING%20v.%20GREGORY http://www.leagle.com/decision/193487869F2d809_1591/HELVERIN...
- AnthonyMouse 11y agoThe Ramsay Principle requires there to be no commercial purpose. But "commercial purpose" is so broad that you can fall into it without even trying.