.png)
.png)
AFTER ALMOST A quarter of a century the true nature of the Ramsay principle continues to cause uncertainty in tax planning. Its initial conceptual incoherence ensures that attempts to wrest a consistent principle from the line of Ramsay cases require ingenuity of a high order. Until November of last year there were two main eras of Ramsay cases 'pre MacNiven v Westmoreland Investments [2001] STC 237' and 'post Westmoreland' but the decision of the House of Lords in BMBF provides a further authoritative review of a principle which is always ailing but never dies.
The case which started it all Ramsay 54 TC 101 concerned a tax avoidance scheme generating artificial capital losses. The creation of capital losses continues to be a staple of capital gains tax planning. How do such schemes stand in the light of the House of Lords' latest review of Ramsay in BMBF?
Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.
