.png)
.png)
Geering and others (TC6466)
The taxpayers took part in a sub-sale scheme to mitigate stamp duty land tax. It sought to take advantage of the disregard in FA 2003 s 45(3) and was similar to the one used unsuccessfully in Vardy (TC2241).
The parties were described as:
- A – the unconnected vendors;
- B – the unlimited companies in which C were shareholders and directors having subscribed for shares equal in value to the deposit due on the properties; and
- C – the shareholders who received the properties bought by B by way of a distribution in specie from B.
The question was in essence which party should pay the tax – rather than whether the tax was due. The taxpayers said the shareholders were not liable to SDLT on the transfer of rights to the property because they had not given any direct consideration...
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.
