Taxation logo taxation mission text

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

Tower toppled

14 June 2011 / Mike Truman
Issue: 4308 / Categories: Comment & Analysis , Admin
The implications of the Supreme Court judgment in HMRC v TowerMCashback LLP are examined by MIKE TRUMAN

KEY POINTS

  • Tower MCashback [2011] UKSC 19 decided in favour of HMRC.
  • Importance of the facts: a mix of commerciality and artificiality.
  • Ensign Tankers and BMBF are both still good law.
  • Is this the best way to deal with tax avoidance or would a GAAR be better?

The Special Commissioner hearing the Tower MCashback case said that part of the complex structure of the transaction was ‘window dressing’ designed to obscure exactly what had happened to the funds raised as loan capital.

Perhaps they should have paid more rather than less attention to appearances because if you are going to try and polish up a tax avoidance scheme to make it look better the first thing you should look at...

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:

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.

back to top icon