![TC09660 - [2025] UKFTT 01226 (TC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_7HSuEAV.png){kind=logo}
Heading
Neutral Citation: [2025] UKFTT 01226 (TC)
Case Number: TC09660
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL
TAX CHAMBER
In public by remote video hearing
Appeal reference: TC/2024/02231
INCOME TAX – contractor loan scheme – application to strike out – jurisdiction? – yes - reasonable prospect of success? – no – appeal struck out
Heard on: 22 July 2025 and 9 September 2025
Judgment date: 10 October 2025
Before
TRIBUNAL JUDGE NIGEL POPPLEWELL
Between
PATRICK BROWN
Appellant
and
THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HIS MAJESTY’S REVENUE AND CUSTOMS
Respondents
Representation:
For the Appellant: In person
For the Respondents: Mr Daniel Hopkins litigator of HM Revenue and Customs’ Solicitor’s Office
DECISION
- Heading
- INTRODUCTION
- THE EVIDENCE AND THE FACTS
- DISCUSSION
- There is no justification for HMRC saying that the tribunal has no jurisdiction in relation to his appeal
- The Rangers decision was released after the tax year under consideration
- The loan was repaid and thus there is no liability to tax on it
- The effect of the decision in RFC 2012 plc (formerly the Rangers Football Club plc) v Advocate General for Scotland [2017] UKSC 45 (“ Rangers ”) is that the payments made by the employer to the trust
- The decision in Hoey v HMRC [2022] EWCA Civ 656 (“ Hoey ”) is authority for the proposition that this tribunal has no jurisdiction to consider HMRC’s discretion to impose any tax on Mr Brown rather th
- There is no justification in the complaints made about the statutory review process which was undertaken wholly properly The application of the loan charge legislation is not relevant to this appeal
- My view
- Conclusions