Loss Relief: The Give and The Take

28 May 2020
Author: JHA

Share Loss Relief

There has been some good news for those companies wishing to offset losses from previous years to reduce their tax liability. This follows the European Commission’s challenge against the UK’s conditions to qualifying for the share loss relief scheme for income and corporation tax. Under this scheme, certain taxpayers could set a capital loss on a disposal of unquoted shares in a trading company against its income. The Commission took exception to one of those conditions, namely that the unquoted trading company had to carry on its business wholly or mainly in the UK.

A reasoned opinion was issued by the Commission in January 2019 which found such a condition to be incompatible with EU law. The Finance Bill 2020, which was debated at second reading on 27 April 2020, repeals this condition. However, this will only effect disposals that take place on or after 24 January 2019. This said, as the illegality of this condition has been confirmed by the Commission and impliedly accepted by the Government, it is possible that taxpayers could make claims for share loss relief where disposals occurred before 24 January 2019.

Should you be interested in the broader applicability share loss relief, please contact any member of our team who will be able to advise further.

Corporate Capital Loss Restriction

Unfortunately, the Finance Bill 2020 does not bring entirely good news for those seeking loss relief. This is because it also implements the corporate capital loss restrictions (CCLR) originally announced in Budget 2018.

This will bring carried-forward capital losses into the same regime as the corporate income losses restrictions (CILR) regime. Once enacted, this will mean that a deductions allowance of £5 million, which originally only applied to CILR, will be shared across the two restrictions. As such, where carried-forward capital losses exceed this allowance, the amount of chargeable gains that can be relieved will be restricted to 50%.

The CCLR will not, however, apply to the following:

  1. The offset of Basic Life Assurance and General Annuity Businesses (BLAGAB) losses against BLAGAB gains;
  2. Ring fenced allowable capital losses arising in certain UK extraction activities of oil and gas companies;
  3. Real estate investment trusts where the capital losses are attributable to property income distributions.

Although the Bill has only just debated at second reading at the end of last month, and the Public Bill Committee are not scheduled to report until 25 June 202, these provisions will apply to accounting periods beginning on or after 1 April 2020. Accounting periods that begin before this date but end after it will be split into two notional periods and will generally be treated as if they were two separate accounting periods.

Return to List of Articles by UK Lawyers on Tax Disputes, Tax Litigation, HMRC Tax Appeal Return to Listings
Left Button on Tax Dispute & Tax Litigation Lawyers in London

Our Insights

Insights from UK Tax Dispute Lawyers & HMRC Tax litigation

JHA ranked in top tier again in Legal 500 UK 2025

We are happy to announce that JHA's Tax Disputes Team has again been ranked as Tier 1 by Legal 500 today, a ranking we have proudly achieved every year since we began in 2013. A special congratulations to Graham Aaronson KC who has again been recognised in the Hall of Fame category, Iain MacWhannell (ranked as a Leading Partner) and Mei Wong (ranked as a Leading Associate).

This is the latest successful ranking, following previous top-tier rankings in Chambers UK Legal Guide 2024 and Chambers High Net Worth Guide 2024.

Read More
Insights from UK Tax Dispute Lawyers & HMRC Tax litigation

Armour Veterinary Group v HMRC – Warning for Partnership Personnel Changes?

In this decision, the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) (“FTT”) dismissed an appeal against discovery assessments which disallowed amortisation relief claimed by the Appellant company for three types of goodwill acquired from a partnership. The decision examined the applicability of each of the circumstances set out in s882 CTA 2009 before concluding none of them had been satisfied. It also provided guidance on the meaning of carrying on a business pursuant to s884 CTA 2009. In rejecting the appeal, the FTT reached a number of key conclusions:

  1. partners can potentially rebut the presumption that individual partners do not own the goodwill of the business (in whole or part) by expressly recording the division in a partnership agreement;
  2. whether a partner is an equity or salaried partner has no bearing on whether they can be treated as carrying on the business for the purpose of s884;
  3. when determining whether and when a partner carries on a business, the FTT will consider, inter alia, (1) if they are in a partnership as per the definition in s1 of the Partnership Act 1890 and (2) their role in the day-to-day running of the practice;
  4. a fundamental aspect of the self-assessment regime is that taxpayers must ensure that they retain adequate records (backed up by an external valuation as relevant in the case of a goodwill transfer) sufficient to support the information provided in their returns, including evidence to support claims made for relief.

Read More

Right Button on Tax Dispute & Tax Litigation Lawyers in London