When the UK Supreme Court ruled in favour of HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) in the Tower MCashback decision in May concerning capital allowances, many tax practitioners lamented what the Court seemed to be saying about the tax avoidance arguments that HMRC may advance during a hearing. The decision comes at a time when HMRC is entering into more enquiries and disputes with corporate taxpayers. Erin Kelechava investigates whether the case is yet another sign of a new era defined by more contentious relationships between Revenue and taxpayers.
Unlock this content.
The content you are trying to view is exclusive to our subscribers.
The new guidance is not meant to reflect a substantial change to UK law, but the requirement that tax advice is ‘likely to be correct’ imposes unrealistic expectations
China and a clutch of EU nations have voiced dissent after Estonia shot down the US side-by-side deal; in other news, HMRC has awarded companies contracts to help close the tax gap