UT (Tax & Chancery) UT/000086, 87, 89/2022 - [2024] UKUT 00058 (TCC)
Upper Tribunal Tax and Chancery Chamber

UT (Tax & Chancery) UT/000086, 87, 89/2022 - [2024] UKUT 00058 (TCC)

Fecha: 01-Dic-2023

The FTT’s approach in the present case

The FTT’s approach in the present case

133.

We have described above the test for POEM applied by the FTT. The FTT stated that it was applying the general approach of the SpC in Smallwood, without reference to the test for central management and control described in Wood v Holden. We are satisfied that the FTT applied the test for POEM described by the SpC at [130]. It considered “in which state the real top level management (or the realistic, positive management) of the trustee qua trustee is found”. In applying that test the FTT did not use the tool of Wood v Holden and in light of the judgment of Hughes LJ in Smallwood it was entitled to take that approach.

134.

We are satisfied therefore that the FTT made no error of law in the test it applied. The FTT at [361] found that the POEM of the trusts was the UK in the relevant period. It based that conclusion on its findings of fact summarised at [362]. Those findings mirror the findings which Hughes LJ held entitled the SpC in Smallwood to find that the POEM of the trust in that case was the UK.

135.

Mr Rivett accepted that if the FTT did apply the right test then the appeal must be dismissed. The application of the test is acutely fact sensitive and there was no Edwards v Bairstow challenge on this appeal.