UT (Tax & Chancery) UT/2023/000098 - [2024] UKUT 00404 (TCC)
Fecha: 16-Oct-2024
Heading

UT (Tax & Chancery) Case Number: UT/2023/000098
INCOME TAX AND NICs – PAYE – payment to an EBT, loan of same amount to a director - FTT found purpose of payment was to enable the loan to be made and the purpose of the loan was to reward the director; it was inevitable at the time of payment to the EBT that the loan would be made; there was a genuine repayment obligation - held - FTT made an error of law in concluding that in vast majority of cases a loan confers a taxable benefit and that the loan made to the director conferred such a benefit - decision of FTT set aside - re-made - neither payment to the EBT nor the principal of the loan to the director was earnings - appeal allowed
Hearing venue: The Rolls Building
London
EC4A 1NL
Judgment date: 06 December 2024
Before
MR JUSTICE RICHARD SMITH
JUDGE JEANETTE ZAMAN
Between
M R CURRELL LIMITED
Appellant
and
THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HIS MAJESTY’S
REVENUE AND CUSTOMS
Respondents
Representation:
For the Appellant: Ben Elliott, counsel, instructed by Haslers Business Services LLP
For the Respondents: Edward Waldegrave, counsel, instructed by the General Counsel and Solicitor for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
DECISION
- Heading
- Introduction
- Relevant legislation
- FTT Decision
- Arrangements concerning the EBT
- Approach and conclusions of the FTT
- Ground of appeal
- FTT’s consideration of whether the Loan was a reward or benefit
- Appellant’s submissions
- Exercise of discretion under s12 TCEA 2007
- Reasoning of the FTT in the Decision
- Whether the Decision involved the making of an error of law at [33] to [37]
- Correct outcome on re-making the decision
- HMRC’s submissions
- Headline response to ground of appeal
- Facts as found by the FTT
- Legal principles relevant to test for earnings
- Reasoning of the FTT in the Decision
- Correct outcome on re-making the Decision
- Discussion and conclusion
- Whether the Decision involved the making of an error of law
- Conclusions