Cross-border: Tax

Our summary of the key business tax announcements in the 23 March 2011 Budget. 70 leading tax practitioners told us what they thought of the Budget. We have published an article incorporating their views: 2011 Budget: Keep calm and carry on.

Gordon Brown, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, delivered his eleventh and (probably) final Budget speech on 21 March 2007.

In a decision released on 21 December 2010, the Court of Appeal endorsed the decision of the High Court in Test Claimants in the ACT Group Litigation (Class 4 and Class 2) v HMRC, [2010] EWCA Civ 1480.

This practice note explains what domicile is in the context of UK taxation and how it is determined. It does not seek to cover the application of domicile in the context of the conflict of laws, which is beyond the scope of this note. NOTE: This resource is being reviewed in light of the 2013 Budget. For more information, see 2013 Budget: key private client tax announcements.

The Supreme Court has held that both Woolwich and DMG restitutionary claims should be available to claimants seeking repayment of tax paid contrary to EU law. The court held that one measure removing extended time limits for the latter type of claim contravened EU law but has asked the ECJ to give a preliminary ruling on the validity of another such measure. (Test Claimants in the Franked Investment Income Group Litigation v Inland Revenue [2012] UKSC 19.)

A legal update about the High Court's decision in Test Claimants in the ACT Group Litigation (Classes 4 & 2) v HMRC [2010] EWHC 359 (Ch), released on 26 February 2010.

In Gaines-Cooper v Commissioners for HM Revenue & Customs 2007 EWHC 2617, the High Court upheld the Special Commissioners' decision that an individual had not acquired an overseas domicile but had retained his domicile in England.The case illustrates the difficulty of establishing that a UK domicile of origin has been abandoned, particularly when dealing with an international businessman who spends much of his time in different countries. The case also illustrates the importance of severing as many ties with the UK as possible and, conversely, creating as many ties as possible with the country alleged to be the domicile of choice.

As we reported briefly last week (see Legal update, Compound interest awarded on restitutionary claim), in Sempra Metals Limited v HM Commissioners of Inland Revenue and anr [2007] UKHL 34, the House of Lords has confirmed that compound interest is recoverable in restitution to reflect the time value of corporation tax which was mistakenly paid prematurely. The House of Lords' decision represents a clear recognition of the commercial reality that money is lent and borrowed on terms requiring the payment of compound interest. Although strictly obiter, the Lords also addressed more generally the issue of whether compound interest is recoverable as damages for breach of contract or in tort. Stressing that compound interest is a feature of modern commercial life, the Lords indicated unanimously that, in principle, and subject to proof of loss and remoteness issues, compound interest is recoverable as a head of loss. As a result of this landmark decision, compound interest will be available more widely.

The Chancellor, Alistair Darling, delivered his first Pre-Budget Report on 9 October 2007.

This note explains what the Court of Justice of the European Union (formerly known as the European Court of Justice (ECJ)) is, why a reference would be made to it and who can make a reference. The note gives examples of questions which might be referred to the ECJ and sets out a brief summary of the procedure to be followed and the effect of a ruling by the ECJ on the question referred.

An outline of the English court system, the doctrine of precedent, and the rules of statutory interpretation.

A detailed update about the decision of the Court of Appeal in The Test Claimants in the FII Group Litigation v HMRC [2010] EWCA Civ 103, released on 23 February 2010.