Since 1927 the leading authority on tax law, practice and administration

Section 419 liability

© Copyright LexisNexis 2024. All rights reserved.

13 August 2008

Issue: 4171 / Categories: Forum & Feedback

Can a company be wound up without the payment of a liability under TA 1988, s 419?

A client company's balance sheet consists solely of £50 000 share capital and an overdrawn shareholder/director's current account of £50 000.

Our client wants to get rid of the company but as the company has over £4 000 share capital the normal strike-off route appears risky and a formal liquidation too expensive.

HMRC are pursuing our client for tax under TA 1988 s 419 on the overdrawn current account and have attempted to levy distraint on assets and are now progressing further legal action.

Our intention is to use the new Companies Act 2006 provisions to cancel and repay the share capital thereby crediting the current account and enabling the s 419 tax to be repaid but these provisions are not to be implemented until 1 October 2008.

Has anyone had experience of getting HMRC to agree to withdraw from seeking s 419 tax where the...

If you or your firm subscribes to Taxation.co.uk, please click the login box below:

If you are not a subscriber but are a registered user or have a free trial, please enter your details in the following boxes:

Subscribe Now...

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.

Section 419 liability

© Copyright LexisNexis 2024. All rights reserved.

13 August 2008

Can a company be wound up without the payment of a liability under TA 1988, s 419?

A client company's balance sheet consists solely of £50 000 share capital and an overdrawn shareholder/director's current account of £50 000.

Our client wants to get rid of the company but as the company has over £4 000 share capital the normal strike-off route appears risky and a formal liquidation too expensive.

HMRC are pursuing our client for tax under TA 1988 s 419 on the overdrawn current account and have attempted to levy distraint on assets and are now progressing further legal action.

Our intention is to use the new Companies Act 2006 provisions to cancel and repay the share capital thereby crediting the current account and enabling the s 419 tax to be repaid but these provisions are not to be implemented until 1 October 2008.

Has anyone had experience of getting HMRC to agree to withdraw from seeking s 419 tax where the...

If you or your firm subscribes to Taxation.co.uk, please click the login box below:

If you are not a subscriber but are a registered user or have a free trial, please enter your details in the following boxes:

Subscribe Now...

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.

Issue:

4171

Categories: Forum & Feedback [1]

SourceURL:

Links:

READERS' FORUM premium icon

Tax tip: Work from home allowance Readers’ forum: Is there an alternative to using time apportionment? Readers’ forum: Tax liability on paying out distribution to members Readers’ forum: Should taxpayers submit form VAT652? Readers’ forum: Does option to tax on land also apply to buildings?

FIVE WAYS TO MAKE ACCOUNTS PRODUCTION AND TAX EASIER.
Download the exclusive Xero
free report here.

New queries

Please email any questions you might have
to: taxation@lexisnexis.co.uk.

NEWS

In brief: 25 July 2024 Movers and shakers: 25 July 2024 Agent update 121 available New power for the Office for Budget Responsibility Pressing tax issues need prioritising, says CIOT

Third slide

Deadline dates for August 2024

CASES

Rental income disclosure was unprompted Ignorance of the law is an excuse Clear winner but costs reduced for other factors Company was not resident in the US for treaty purposes Collagen-based drink was a beauty product

MOST POPULAR

Rental income disclosure was unprompted Ignorance of the law is an excuse Clear winner but costs reduced for other factors Company was not resident in the US for treaty purposes Collagen-based drink was a beauty product

back to top icon