The UK Government announces new measures to tackle money laundering in the wake of the Danske Bank Affair
This month, the UK Government has announced new measures to increase further transparency and tackle corruption. These are aimed at stopping the abuse of limited partnerships (LPs) and Scottish liability partnerships (SLPs) for money laundering purposes, an issue which has again come to the fore since the latest revelations regarding what is commonly known as the Danske Bank Affair.
The Danske Bank Affair concerned allegations that up to €200 billion was laundered through the Estonian branch of Denmark’s largest bank between 2007 and 2015. The European Commission has called it the “biggest scandal in Europe”, and it has prompted action from regulators worldwide causing impacts that have reached far beyond those directly involved. Although now closed, the case has triggered investigations in the UK due to the alleged use of limited liability partnerships (LLPs), LPs and SLPs for money laundering purposes.
The UK’s National Crime Agency has openly recognised the “threat posed by the use of UK company structures as a route for money laundering” and is investigating the use of these companies and professional enablers in connection with the widening scandal. One entity linked to the affair is already officially under criminal investigation.
Danske whistleblower Howard Wilkinson, who led the bank’s Baltics trading unit from 2007 to 2014, told a Danish parliamentary hearing last month that “The role of the United Kingdom is an absolute disgrace. Limited liability partnerships and Scottish liability partnerships have been abused for absolutely years”. In September, an inquiry by a Danish law firm into the affair stated that LLPs and SLPs made up the second biggest proportion of their Estonian branch’s non-resident customers – second only to those based in Russia.
Although UK regulators may have been aware of the misuse of these corporate vehicles for some time, this is the first time the Government has officially announced it will be introducing new measures to bring greater transparency and more stringent checks to LPs and SLPs.
The requirements will include that those registering LPs and/or SLPs must demonstrate that they are registered with an official anti-money laundering supervised agent, such as an accountant or a lawyer, or an overseas equivalent. The LP must demonstrate an ongoing link to the UK, for example by keeping its principal place of business in the UK. All LPs must submit a confirmation statement at least every 12 months to Companies House to ensure their information is accurate and up to date, and that Companies House will be given powers to strike off dissolved LPs and SLPs that are not carrying on business.
UK Business Minister Kelly Tolhurst said “The UK is taking strong action in the international fight against money laundering and today’s proposals will increase best practice amongst businesses.” The proposals come ahead of broader reforms which aim to ensure that Companies House is fit for the future and continues to contribute to the UK’s business environment through tackling corruption.
This most recent development in the UK shows the extent of the Danske Bank Affair’s impact. Although discussion around the need for changes to LP requirements dates back to well before revelations of the scandal, it has been a catalyst in bringing about significant changes to this area of UK corporate law. It will affect all UK-registered LPs and could make the UK a less attractive proposition for some investors due to the new demands. It is part of a continuing drive by the UK Government to ensure the country has world-leading corporate standards.
Read the press release from the UK Government on the proposed changes here.
An Assessment to Tax is never ‘stale’, but it might be out of date: HMRC v Tooth
This article briefly discusses the key points arising out of the decision of the UK Supreme Court in HMRC v Tooth  UKSC 17. The case considered (1) whether a discovery assessment could become “stale” and (2) the meaning of the phrase “deliberate inaccuracy”.
VATA 1994 s.47, Agency, Onward Supply Relief, & Double Taxation
On 12 July 2021, the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) (“FTT”) released its decision in Scanwell Logistics (UK) Limited v HMRC  UKFTT 261 (TC), rejecting the taxpayer’s claim for onward supply relief (“OSR”).
Whilst OSR is now limited, post-Brexit, to goods imported into Northern Ireland for onward supply to the EU, the FTT’s discussion of agency under section 47 of the Value Added Tax Act 1994 (“VATA”) is of broader interest.
The case serves as a reminder of the significant financial consequences that can result from errors in tax planning, as Scanwell was ultimately held liable for £5.7 million in unpaid import VAT despite the fact that the imported goods almost immediately left the UK (which, if properly planned, could have meant Scanwell was relieved from liability to import VAT).
Draft Finance Bill 2022—tax avoidance measures
Helen McGhee, senior associate at Joseph Hage Aaronson LLP, considers the draft Finance Bill 2022 clauses published on 20 July 2021 in relation to tax avoidance and recent updates to the tax avoidance regime.
Getting Closer: A Global Minimum Tax on Corporations
On 1 July 2021, US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen announced that countries representing over 90% of global GDP had agreed to a global minimum tax on corporations (“GMCT”). The GMCT seeks to put a floor on tax competition on corporate income through the introduction of a minimum corporate tax of at least 15%. Whilst certain elements give rise to positive expectations, some caveats should be noted. Much will depend on (1) the outcome of future political negotiations and (2) the detail of the drafting at international and national levels.
The DBKAG & K (CJEU) decision: an opportunity for investment funds?
On 17 June 2021, the European Court decided the joint cases K (C-58/20) and DBKAG (C-59/20) regarding whether the supply of certain services constituted the “management of special investment funds”, benefiting from the VAT exemption enshrined in Article 135(1)(g) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC.