Issue Seven – the tax consequences of the transaction effected by Agreements in the event that Section 179(3) applied
Issue Seven – the tax consequences of the transaction effected by Agreements in the event that Section 179(3) applied
The parties’ submissions
Mr Gammie said that, if a charge under Section 179(3) arose in respect of the Goodwill, then CPW would be treated as having re–acquired the Goodwill for £107,658,000 at the start of the accounting period in which CPW left the CPW Chargeable Gains Group.
CPW’s subsequent receipt in that accounting period of £50,800,000 from BBUK would then have amounted to a part disposal of that Goodwill pursuant to Section 22 of the TCGA 1992 because the sum in question was a capital sum derived from the Goodwill. The Goodwill derived its value from the anticipated future profits of the Businesses and, at the time when the Agreements were executed:
that value was equal to the amount paid by BBUK under the SPA; and
the sum paid by BBUK for the Goodwill was attributable to its right to receive part of those future profits (in the form of a fixed percentage of the future gross revenues of the Businesses).
It therefore followed that the amount received by CPW from BBUK must have “derived from” the Goodwill for the purposes of Section 22 of the TCGA 1992.
- Heading
- Introduction
- Key parties
- Acquisition of the Businesses
- The SPA and the MSA
- The Degrouping
- Procedural background
- the agreed issues
- the agreements
- The SPA
- The MSA
- The Side Letter
- Initial observations on the Agreements and the Side Letter
- other documents
- The Prior SPAs
- The Property Services Agreement
- The Brand Licence
- The Accounts
- The Invoice
- “ About the matter we have finished checking
- “Partial closure notice (PCN)
- The issues – a summary
- Issue One – applicability of the authorities in relation to statutory construction
- Conclusion
- “15 In the task of ascertaining whether a particular statutory provision imposes a charge, or grants an exemption from a charge, the Ramsay approach is generally described – as it is in the statements
- Issue Two – the scope of the rule prohibiting assignment “in gross”
- Conclusion
- Issue Three – ownership of the Businesses following the execution of the Agreements
- Conclusion
- No provision in the Agreements for the transfer of the Businesses
- No provision in the Agreements for the transfer of assets other than Goodwill or the assumption of any liabilities
- No transfer of employees
- Did BBUK carry on the Businesses after the Agreements became effective?
- This meant that the only way that BBUK could carry on the Businesses was through CPW as its agent. In that regard, I do not doubt the fact that it is possible for a company to carry on a business thro
- Entitlement to the profits of the Businesses
- Conclusion in relation to the ability to dictate the overall strategy and direction of the Businesses and entitlement to the profits of the Businesses
- Final observations
- Conclusion
- Issue Four – assignment in equity
- Conclusion
- Issue Five – not the same asset
- Conclusion
- Issue Six – the relevance of the transaction effected by Agreements in the event that Section 179(3) applied
- Conclusion
- Issue Seven – the tax consequences of the transaction effected by Agreements in the event that Section 179(3) applied
- Conclusions
![TC09562 - [2025] UKFTT 00762 (TC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_7HSuEAV.png)