The Appeal
The Appeal
On 5 April 2024, PricewaterhouseCoopers (“PwC”), on behalf of the Appellant, appealed to HMRC against the Determinations. The appeal grounds were as follows:
“Although not set out in the Determinations themselves, we understand from previous correspondence that the Determinations are to collect PAYE from BGC Services Holdings LLP (“BGC”) on the basis that amounts allocated to the members of the LLP as profit allocation, fall to be taxed as if Sections 863A-863G of the Income Tax (Trading and Other Income) Act 2005 applied to those members (“the Salaried Member Rules”).
We appeal on the basis that we do not consider that the Salaried Member Rules apply to any of the members set out in the schedules to the Determinations. As HMRC have not set out the basis upon which they consider that the Salaried Members Rules apply, we reserve the right to make further detailed arguments as the appeal progresses.
We further appeal on the basis that even if the Salaried Member Rules were to apply, the quantum of the Determinations is also incorrect.
In relation to the periods 2017/18 and 2018/19, we also appeal on the basis that BGC do not satisfy the criteria set out at section 36 Taxes Management Act 1970 and as such HMRC are not able to assess under the extended time limit. We note that the Determinations do not stipulate the basis upon which HMRC believes that they are able to assess beyond the 4 year time limit and as such BGC reserves their right to make further detailed arguments as the appeal progresses.
We consider that the Determinations overcharge BGC to tax and or the amount of tax set out in the Determinations is excessive as no additional PAYE is due at all; as such, we apply for the amount set out in the Determinations to be postponed under section 55 of the Taxes Management Act 1970.”
On 8 April 2025, PwC filed a Notice of Appeal to the Tribunal, which included the following grounds of appeal:
“The Appellant understands that the Determinations seek to charge them to Income Tax (PAYE) in respect of allocations of profit made to their members. The Determinations do not particularise why the Commissioners have concluded that additional Income Tax (PAYE) is chargeable against the Appellant.
The Appellant appeals on the basis that the Determinations are incorrect in both fact and law and no additional amounts of Income Tax (collected via PAYE or otherwise) are due from the Appellant.”
- Heading
- Introduction
- Publication of this decision
- The Salaried Member Rules
- The Compliance Check
- The Determinations
- The Appeal
- The F&B Application
- The First Decision
- The case law
- Schedule 36
- Duty to give reasons and Reg 80
- The Tribunal Rules
- Overall conclusion
- The PTA application in relation to the First Decision
- The case law
- The Grounds of the PTA Application
- Ground 1: Rule 20
- Ground 2: duty to give reasons
- Ground 3: burden of proof
- Ground 4: positive case
- Ground 5: case management of the appeal
- Ground 6: 4Site
- Ground 7
- Overall conclusion on the PTA Application relating to the First Decision
- The Statement of case
- The SoC Application
- The law
- Failure to provide full information?
- Failure to provide “any evidence of what the SMR position is”
- Acceptance in correspondence that the SMR had been incorrectly applied?
- Reliance on the fraud?
- Out of time Determinations
- Overall conclusion
- Directions
- PTA Application in relation to the Second Decision
- A bare assertion?
- The TMA
- The case law
- Duty to give reasons
- Discerning the Appellant’s case?
- The Directions
- Barring Order
- Other submissions
- Other
- Next steps
![TC09548 - [2025] UKFTT 00700 (TC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_7HSuEAV.png)