.png)
.png)
REBECCA MURRAY is not refreshed by the High Court's decision in Limitgood
KEY POINTS
- A refresher scheme made use of capital losses realised in an unconnected company
- The High Court judge decided to take a purposive approach to the legislation
- Can tax avoidance ever accord with the purpose of the legislation?
Quite a stir was caused in the tax profession by the recent decisions of the Special Commissioners in the Fiveoaks and Limitgood appeals on capital loss refresher schemes.
The Fiveoaks (SpC 563) appeal was heard by Dr Avery Jones who found for HMRC on a purposive interpretation of the statute. The taxpayer did not appeal to the High Court. Next the Limitgood (SpC 612) appeal was also heard by Dr Avery Jones but this time he sat with Mr Theodore Wallace.
Mr Wallace disagreed with Dr Avery Jones' decision in Fiveoaks. He found for the taxpayer on a literal interpretation and because...
Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this item in full.
Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.
