TC09618 - [2025] UKFTT 01019 (TC)
First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)

TC09618 - [2025] UKFTT 01019 (TC)

Fecha: 08-May-2025

Is this company liable?

Is this company liable?

78.

Having decided that s 201(1)(d) can apply to a company where the company was a live company at the relevant time, it is necessary to apply that decision to the facts in this case in order to determine the appeal.

79.

There has been no suggestion that Lexgreen has not remained a live company from its incorporation up until HMRC’s determination.

80.

I could simply provide this decision as a decision in principle on the common issue for the purposes of rule 18. However, I consider it is in the interests of justice to determine the matter on the material before me. If any party considers that the decision fails to take into account particular evidence, then an application can be made to have the decision set aside.

81.

On the evidence available before me (being a copy, in the hearing bundle, of the Companies House overview produced on 15 April 2025 showing the Appellant as incorporated on 20 May 1996 and having active status on 15 April 2025), I find that the Appellant was a live company at all times between 20 May 1996 and 15 April 2025.

82.

I must confess to being a little unclear on what transfer s 201(1)(d) refers to in this case. Section 201 operates by reference to the value transferred by a chargeable transfer, but I am not sure that section 64 gives rise to a transfer.

83.

Section 64 provides (so far as is relevant):

“Principal charge to tax

64 Charge at ten-year anniversary.

(1)

Where immediately before a ten-year anniversary all or any part of the property comprised in a settlement is relevant property, tax shall be charged at the rate applicable under sections 66 and 67 below on the value of the property or part at that time.”

84.

On my reading, this is a straightforward charging provision that operates separately to a chargeable transfer. Section 66 posits a hypothetical chargeable transfer for the purposes of determining the rate of the s 64 charge, but tax does not appear to be imposed on a hypothetical transfer.

85.

In any event, this point has not been raised before me, so I simply determine the matter on the basis of the factual finding I have made.

86.

As the Appellant was live at all times between 20 May 1996 and 15 April 2025, any transfer made between those dates was made ‘during the life’ of the Appellant. The Appellant’s appeal must therefore be dismissed.