CGT Loss Occurs When Payment Made, Not Before

18th July 2019 By Alireza Nurbakhsh

When a personal guarantee has to be given in order to give a lender the security it needs, the guarantor hopes that the guarantee will never be called in. However, when it is, the loss suffered by the guarantor will normally qualify as a loss for Capital Gains Tax (CGT) purposes to be set against gains chargeable to CGT.

A recent case dealt with the question of when a loss under a guarantee arises for the purposes of obtaining relief against CGT. Is it when the guarantee becomes payable or when it is actually paid? It involved a man who had been assessed to CGT over two successive years (2009/10 and 2010/11) with a liability of a little over £8,000.

He had given a guarantee by way of a deposit of money into a bank for the borrowings of a company that failed during the property crash. Some years later, when he tried to access the money in 2012, this was refused and in the tax year 2012/13 the legal title to the money was passed across to the bank under the guarantee.

He claimed the sum paid under the guarantee as a loss for CGT purposes to be set against the tax payable in the two earlier tax years. CGT losses are not available to be set back against gains assessable in earlier years, but he argued that once he had placed the funds with the bank, he no longer had control over them. The bank could have enforced its guarantee in the earlier years, but did not. He argued that the fact that the bank waited until the 2012/13 tax year to enforce its guarantee formally did not mean that he had not lost the money until then, as it was inevitable that it would do so once the company foundered.

The case was further complicated by the fact that ill health had meant that the taxpayer had given scant attention to his financial affairs during the years concerned.

Regrettably for the taxpayer, the rules that apply for relief to be given in such cases set out several criteria, all of which must be met. One of these is that the payment under the guarantee has to have been made.

The taxpayer’s claim was refused.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Informal Agreement Leads Family to Court of Appeal

22nd August, 2019 By Alireza Nurbakhsh

Disputes within families are very common indeed and one of the issues the courts see over and over again is where there is a family 'understanding' that ends in a disagreement. In a recent case, the result of one such dispute is that an 82-year-old woman will be forced to sell the home she has lived in for decades. Many such cases involve farming businesses. These traditionally pass down from generation to generation, and often one child will work on the farm for many years with the others moving away. It...

Tax Investigations – Judge Authorises Disclosure of Credit Card Bills

19th August, 2019 By Alireza Nurbakhsh

To what extent are the tax authorities entitled to delve into what would otherwise be your private financial information? The High Court tackled that issue in authorising disclosure of a wealthy businessman's credit card statements to HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) as part of a cross-border investigation into his tax affairs. The Swedish businessman claimed not to be subject to Swedish tax on the basis that he had emigrated to Switzerland. The Swedish tax authorities considered that he remained ordinarily resident in Sweden and requested HMRC's assistance in investigating the...

Court Returns Two-Year-Old to Land of Birth When Parents' Marriage Collapses

16th August, 2019 By Alireza Nurbakhsh

For a UK court to have jurisdiction over a family law case, it is necessary to show that at least one party to it has habitual residence in the UK. In a recent case, an Israeli woman divorcing her Israeli husband sought a declaration that their two-year-old daughter was habitually resident in the UK so that the UK Family Court could deal with the hearings regarding the child's welfare. The Court refused the application and accepted that the child should be removed to Israel in accordance with the father's wishes....

Be Careful What You Post

13th August, 2019 By Alireza Nurbakhsh

Although the final result was not financial ruin for the defendant, a recent case illustrates how unwise it is to vent one's spleen on social media. It involved a firm of solicitors that had been involved in the sale of 'off plan' properties in Cyprus. This led an unhappy purchaser to make a post on Facebook and in a webinar that made allegations of mis-selling against the firm and others related to it. The result was a claim for damages for defamation. In hearing the claim, the High Court had firstly...