finance
monthly
Personal Finance. Money. Investing.
Contribute
Newsletter
Corporate

Many dedicated cryptocurrency and blockchain companies will be ‘R&D by default’, says specialist tax relief firm, Catax. They could therefore be eligible for much more relief than a standard business, meaning US and UK firms could be in line for hundreds of millions in tax relief. Traditional firms investigating blockchain technology and the commercial potential of cryptocurrencies will also be eligible for R&D tax relief.

Catax estimates that as much as 82% of the work carried out by dedicated crypto firms will be eligible for R&D tax relief given its ‘ingrained innovation’. This compares to roughly 35% with a traditional company performing R&D.

In many cases, the enhanced R&D eligibility is because the majority of the workforce will be focused on developing this technology and adapting it to a specific sector or use case.

Rather than channel-specific, the R&D being performed at these companies is company-wide.

But traditional firms investigating the use of these new technologies for their specific sectors will also be eligible.

Firms in countless sectors are currently weighing up the benefits of trading in cryptocurrency amid the recent $12,000 valuation of Bitcoin, and the acknowledged efficiencies of the blockchain. This amounts to time and money ‘developing a new product or business process’ — the basic requirement for an R&D tax claim.

UK firms have already raised a total of £52.8m ($71m)1 in ICOs, while the total raised in the US has reached more than $1.1bn (£820m). In the United States, firms are allowed to claim relief under the R&S Tax Credit system.

TokenData has revealed 90% of funds raised through ICOs has occurred in 2017, which means R&D tax relief for UK firms will fall well within the two year deadline for claiming.

Mark Tighe, CEO, Catax, commented: “Each day we’re seeing more and more dedicated blockchain and crypto companies emerge, while a growing number of traditional firms are also allocating significant resource into how they could integrate this technology into their own operations and sector.

“Within the crypto field, innovation is often company-wide rather than channel-specific and so the eligible expenditure is considerably higher than with traditional firms carrying out Research and Development.

“While you can’t claim R&D on Bitcoin and the blockchain itself, the potential for relief comes when companies evolve them or create new versions altogether. An example might be creating bespoke ‘sidechains’ for your sector that run alongside the blockchain, or a new digital currency altogether.”

(Source: Catax)

Discussing the latest US tax cuts decision, FTSE updates and bitcoin news, Lee Wild, Head of Equity Strategy at interactive investor, talks to Finance Monthly about the end of year affairs.

With a week to go till Christmas there’s a whiff of Santa rally in the air. Markets should respond well to a ‘yes’ vote on US corporate tax cuts and possible political agreement to avoid a government shutdown on Friday. UK stocks are better value than their US counterparts and, despite the spectre of Brexit horse trading through 2018, there are no obvious banana skins between here and New Year.

In fact, Trump’s tax reform and the failure of progress on Brexit negotiations to revive sterling, will continue to give overseas earners listed here a foreign exchange kick. This, and typically thin trade as investors wind down for Christmas, should allow the FTSE 100 to consolidate gains above 7,500, something it has failed to do thus far. If it does, don’t bet against a new record high by year-end. It’s only one good session away.

An ongoing shutdown of the North Sea Forties pipeline continues to underpin oil prices, with Brent crude looking prepped for a crack at a fresh two-and-a-half-year high.

Whether or not bitcoin traded above $20,000 over the weekend depends on where you get your prices from. According to coinmarketcap.com it peaked Sunday at $20,089.

That bitcoin passed $20,000 for the first time over the weekend is not a surprise. A week ago, with the price at less than $17,000, we said ‘the music may have much longer to play on this one than people think’.

With every new milestone there’s fresh discussion around bitcoin’s legitimacy and potential, both as a trading instrument and revolutionary digital currency. It was the same when it first broke above $10,000 at the end of November. Valuing cryptocurrencies is like sticking your finger in the wind, but traffic is still very much one-way.

Introducing futures contracts in the US was meant to give short-sellers access to the market and improve liquidity, but availability is still fairly restricted. The introduction of bitcoin futures on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange over the weekend may help, but it will take time.

Until it becomes easier to sell short, buying dries up, or there are tech issues or a major hack, bitcoin will keep passing milestones with alarming regularity. Right now, there’s a long queue of investors, both amateur and professional, still waiting for a ride. This bubble is not bursting yet.

Bitcoin is becoming a pretty normal currency in transactions worldwide, and it hasn’t failed to infiltrate paychecks either. So, if a salary is paid in part or in full in bitcoin, how is the income taxed? And how is tax applied to transactions anyway? Fiona Cincotta, Senior Market Analyst at City Index, clarifies the matter for Finance Monthly.

Bitcoin is a virtual currency, that can be generated by mining or bought using cash, credit card or a paypal account. Bitcoin began in 2009. At the start, one of the advantages of bitcoin was the fact that is wasn’t regulated and could be used in transactions to avoid tax obligations. However, tax authorities caught on and since then tax authorities across the globe have been trying to introduce and advance regulation on the bitcoin.

Whilst the cryptocurrencies exist on a global network, tax regulations in general differ for each country around the world. However, broadly speaking most tax authorities are on the same page when it comes to the treatment of the bitcoin.

As a general rule, buying a bitcoin anywhere in the world is not a taxable operation in itself. However, taxes are likely to occur when you sell that bitcoin, or possibly spend the bitcoin, and make a profit in the process.

How much you would be taxed on the transaction would then depend on several factors:

Again, generally speaking, most countries do not consider virtual currencies to be “currencies” from a tax point of view. Instead they are treated as a property or capital asset. This means that any gains are taxed as capital gains in the year that they are realised.

As with property, capital gains tax is liable on profits, meanwhile should an investor realise a loss from a bitcoin transaction, the investor would be able to deduct any losses and therefore reduce the tax bill.

Realization happens when the bitcoin is exchanged for any other type of other property. This could be cash, services or products. Essentially almost any transaction which involves the bitcoin is in fact a realisation event and therefore gains are taxable. The following transactions could be taxable events:

Scenarios which involve mining of bitcoin followed by either selling or exchanging for goods or services afterwards, will mean that the value received for the bitcoin is taxed as personal or business income, after subtracting any expenses incurred from mining eg cost electricity.

Meanwhile the other two examples, taker the bitcoin as an investment asset. Gain are taxed regardless whether the bitcoin was exchanged for money or goods or services. To cement this point let’s consider the following example. Should you own bitcoins that have increased in value, it is impossible to use them with realising a gain. Using the bitcoin to purchase a service or good, for example, is considered to be two transactions. One, selling out or realising the gain on the bitcoin and the second, being the purchase of the service or product. Few tax authorities would allow such a blatant loophole, as to not tax the transaction and ascension of wealth.

However, the implication of this is that every transaction involving the bitcoin is taxable. This in itself raises questions over the effectiveness of bitcoin as a medium of exchange, if the user has to calculate the tax liability after every transaction. So, the possibility now exists that over taxation of crypto currencies, could lead to their death.

As mentioned at the beginning tax implications can vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. The IRS in the US has a fairly standard approach to bitcoin taxation. The UK’s HMRC takes a more personalised approach and has has specifically said that it considers tax on bitcoins on a case by case basis. Whilst such a personalised approach is fine now, should the bitcoin increase in popularity HMRC may find its resources strained.

Yesterday saw Chancellor Phillip Hammond deliver his second budget.  While the abolition of Stamp Duty, several tax revisions, freezes on several duties, increased investment in AI and Technology and a £3 billion investment into the NHS all came as welcome additions they could not prevent a sharp drop in the UK Growth Forecast following the budget.

So with many experts labelling it a ‘make or break’ moment for Hammond and a somewhat beleaguered Government, we spoke to the industry experts to see what the Autumn budget really means for the Financial Sector in a special extended Your Thoughts: Autumn Budget 2017

Choose your sector below or scroll through to read all the insight.

FinTech & Digital
UK Growth, Investment & Forex
Tax
Healthcare & Retail
Property & Real Estate

 

FinTech & Digital

 

Abe Smith, CEO and Founder at Dealflo

London has been a world-leading financial centre since the 19th century, but low growth forecasts and the lack of clarity around Brexit are unsettling for businesses. The Chancellor has had to work hard to ensure that the UK remains an attractive place to invest and innovate post-Brexit. The new National Investment Fund means that even after Brexit, the UK will remain a hub for FinTech innovation and will attract fast-growing tech companies.

Niels Turfboer, Managing Director of UK & Benelux, Spotcap:

The FinTech industry is going from strength to strength and the UK Government can play an important part in enabling FinTechs to continue to thrive.

We therefore welcome Philip Hammond’s promise to invest over £500m in numerous technology initiatives, including artificial intelligence and regulatory innovation, as well as unlock over £20bn of new investment in UK scale-up businesses.

With this assurance, the government has shown a strong commitment to the FinTech sector, which will hopefully help tech companies all around the UK to flourish and grow.

World Economic Forum member Jane Zavalishina, CEO of Yandex Data Factory

The reality is that it is not the scientific development of AI that will be game-changing in the next few years, but instead the more prosaic, practical application of AI across many different sectors.

While AI is too often associated with self-driving cars and robots, the truth is the most significant AI applications that are of most significance to businesses, are actually the least visually exciting. AI that improves decision-making, optimises existing processes and delivers more accurate demand prediction will boost productivity far more powerfully than in all sectors.

But it’s not just productivity that will be significantly impacted – business revenue will also benefit. The beauty of AI lies in its ability to be applied with no capital investments – making it an affordable innovation for businesses to adopt. Unlike what is commonly thought, applying AI does not require infrastructure changes – in many processes cases we already have automated process control, so adding AI on top would require no investment at all. Instead, companies will see ROI within just a few months.

Martin Port, Founder and CEO BigChange:

We welcome this announcement and support for tech businesses from the Chancellor. Financial backing and stability is a huge hurdle facing all start-ups, so I am pleased to see the government pledge more than £20 billion of new investment. I just hope this funding is easy to access and readily available for those who need it, rather than being hidden among reams of red tape.

Leon Deakin, Partner in the technology team at Coffin Mew:

As a firm with a growing technology sector and client base in this area we are obviously delighted to see specific investment in the technology sector, particularly in AI and driverless vehicles.

Doom mongers have long been predicting that the UK and its tech hubs will be hit hard by Brexit and there have been numerous reports of rival cities within the EU which have sought to position themselves as alternative options. However, we are yet to see this materialise and incentives and commitments such as those announced by the Chancellor in these innovative but essential areas have to be great news for the economy, the sector and those who advise businesses in it.

Of course, creating the next unicorn is no easy task but a serious level of investment of the magnitude announced should at least ensure those businesses with promise have the best chance to scale up even if they don’t reach the $1billion level. Likewise, there is little point developing these new technologies if the infrastructure and support is then not there to utilise them properly

Matthew Adam, Chief Executive Officer of We Are Digital:

With the UK economy now expected to grow by 1.5% in 2017, a downgrade from the 2% forecast made in March, coupled with the challenges of Brexit, the need for the UK to sit at the forefront of digital skills and inclusion is more pressing than ever. We need to be able to grasp, with both hands, the digital opportunities that present themselves to us in order to make us a true global digital force.

The reality is that we simply cannot afford not to. Independent analysis shows that getting the UK online and understanding how to use digital tools could add between £63 billion - £92 billion to UK Plc’s annual GDP. Indeed, it is my belief that economies which focus strongly on getting its citizens online are also more productive.

The Chancellor has said that a new high-tech business is founded in the UK every hour, which he wants to increase to every half hour. It is imperative we support this growth through the announced £500m investment in artificial intelligence, to 5G and full-fibre broadband. However, to bridge the need for the 1.2 million new technical and digitally skilled people which are required by 2022, we must create and support retraining opportunities across society to make the UK truly digital.

Technology improvements are causing widespread changes in every market and the public sector should be no exception, especially as it often faces the biggest social problems to solve. I’m glad the government is waking up to the fact that the latest technological advances don’t need to be assigned only to the private sector, but can do a lot of good to the community at large. We know from our direct work with the Home Office that every government and council department is moving its processes online. Whether it’s chatbots to automate processes, or solving how people engage with Universal Credit, there is so much we can do here with ‘Gov -tech’

I therefore welcome the Chancellor’s digital announcements today and consider this budget as not so much a leap in the right digital direction, but more a necessary conservative step.

 

UK Growth, Forex & Investment

 

Owain Walters, CEO of Frontierpay:

The Chancellor’s efforts to win younger voters from Labour by abolishing stamp relief for first-time buyers on homes up to £300,000, and on the first £300,000 of properties up to £500,000, come as no surprise. The potential for such an announcement has been a hot media topic in recent weeks and as such, we don’t expect to see any significant impact on the value of the pound.

“In the wake of this Budget, any real movement from the pound will be caused either by developments in the Brexit negotiations or the potential for a further interest rate rise. I would therefore advise any businesses that want to stay on top of turbulence in the currency markets to keep a close eye on inflation data.

Markus Kuger, Senior Economist, Dun & Bradstreet

It’s not surprising that the Chancellor opened this year’s statement with a focus on Brexit; even as businesses absorb the implications of the Budget, they have a close eye to the ongoing negotiations and any likely trade agreement, which is likely to profoundly impact their future. The government’s move to provide a £3bn fund in the event of a no-deal outcome is designed to increase business confidence. In the meantime the business environment remains challenging, and Dun & Bradstreet forecasts that real GDP growth in 2018 will slow to 1.3% (from 1.8% in 2016). Businesses should continue to follow the Brexit negotiations closely and consider that operating conditions could change dramatically over the next 18 months as the Brexit settlement is clarified.”

 Damian Kimmelman, CEO of Duedil

We welcome the government’s announcement that the Enterprise Investment Schemes’ (EIS) investment limit, for knowledge intensive scale-ups has been doubled.

The EIS has been great for attracting investment for small businesses, however we need to ensure investment through the scheme is not being used for capital preservation purposes, but instead to encourage the growth of companies.

The key to increasing investment in ‘higher risk’ growth companies through the EIS scheme, is to eliminate information friction. With more data, investors can price risk effectively, so they can lend to support the small businesses forming the backbone of the economy, driving growth, and creating jobs.

Lee Wild, Head of Equity Strategy at Interactive Investor:

This budget was always going to be especially tricky for the chancellor. Hitting fiscal targets amid wide divisions over Brexit, while also spending more on populist policies to distract voters from Conservative party infighting and dysfunctional cabinet, was a big ask.  Hammond wasn’t fibbing when he promised a balanced budget. Once tax giveaways, downgrades to growth forecasts, billions more for the NHS and the rest are put through the mincer, both the FTSE 100 and sterling are unchanged.

Given Britain’s housing crisis was an obvious target for the chancellor, he really needed something substantial to make his aim of 300,000 new homes built every year anything more than a pipe dream.  Committing to at least £44 billion of capital funding, loans and guarantees to support the housing market will go a long way to achieving the chancellor’s ambitious target. Abolishing stamp duty for first-time buyer purchases up to £300,000 is a tiny saving, however, and buyers, especially in London, will still require a huge deposit to get a foot on the housing ladder.

The market hung on Hammond’s every word, causing a comical yo-yo effect as the chancellor slowly revealed his strategy.  A threat to use compulsory purchase powers where builders are believed to be holding land for commercial reasons, could cause sleepless nights.

Overall, Hammond’s ideas are sound, but probably not enough of a catalyst to get sector share prices rising significantly near-term, given mixed results in the run-up to this budget.

Mihir Kapadia – CEO and Founder of Sun Global Investments:

The Autumn budget statement from Chancellor Phillip Hammond was as expected, with a few pleasant surprises. While Mr Hammond set out his policy proposals with a "vision for post-Brexit Britain", he also acknowledged that his Budget was "about much more than Brexit".  With the Conservatives struggling in the polls, the Chancellor was under pressure to regain support for his party, which is currently in a fragile coalition.

The expected announcements include the decision to abolish stamp duty for first time buyers on properties up to £300,000, addressing the housing crisis, an immediate injection of £3.75 billion into the NHS, investments into infrastructure (transport and network), freezing duty on fuel, alcohol and air travel, and finally a Brexit contingency budget of £3 billion.

While today’s budget was populist and aimed at the electorate, it has to be noted that the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) sharply downgraded both Britain's productivity and growth forecasts, as well as its business investment forecasts, meaning the UK's finances look set to worsen over the coming years. This does not factor the possibility of a Brexit-related downturn or a wider global recession, which has already been seen as overdue by many forecasters.

We expect the abolition of stamp duty for first time buyers on properties up to £300,000 will draw extra attention and headlines from much of today’s announcements. It is vital that we acknowledge the warnings from the Office for Budget Responsibility.

 

Angus Dent, CEO, ArchOver:

The UK’s productivity growth continues to decrease and we’re looking in the wrong place for answers. It’s not just a case of everyone working a bit harder. Investment in public infrastructure and fiscal policy will be the defining factors that help the UK catch up, while real growth will come from our SME sector.

Britain is known as a nation of entrepreneurs. Yet we’re in real danger of not giving our SMEs the support they need to thrive. We need a bottom-up approach where small businesses with bright ideas have access to the finance and advice they need to grow. Only then will we have the firm economic foundation we need to build our productivity post-Brexit.

The expansion of the National Investment Fund in today’s Budget is a good start, but too many SMEs still have to pay their way with personal savings or put their houses on the line as security if they turn to the big banks for help.

We need to inspire a new culture. We know there is an army of willing investors out there who want to support British business - lending across P2P platforms is on course to rise by 20 per cent by the end of this year according to data from 4thWay.

However, we need to raise awareness among SMEs of the different options available to help them finance their growth. SMEs need to take control of their own destiny. With the right finance in place, they can drive the whole country forward to new heights of productivity. We can’t just leave it to government – small businesses must be given the power and the cash to fulfil their potential.

 

Tax

 

Paul Falvey, tax partner at BDO:

It’s clear that the headline grabbing news revolved around the Chancellor’s decision to abolish stamp duty for first time buyers on properties purchased up to 300,000, at a cost of £600m a year to the tax man. Whilst this is important for people getting on the property ladder, there were other key assertions.

Firstly, HMRC will start to charge more tax on royalties relating to UK sales when those royalties are paid to a low tax jurisdiction.  Although this is only set to raise approximately £200m a year, it sets a precedent that tax avoidance will continue to be on the governments agenda. Implementing the OECD policies is a tactic we expected.

Furthermore, companies will pay additional tax on the increase in value of their capital assets from January 2018. The expected abolition of indexation allowance will mean that, despite falling tax rates, companies will be taxed on higher profits. By 2022/2023 this is expected to raise over £525m.

62% of the businesses we polled before the Budget said they will be willing to pay more taxes in return for a simpler system. Yet, once again, the government has done nothing to tackle the issue of tax complexity. It is a huge obstacle to growth and businesses will be disappointed that there was no commitment to setting out a coherent tax strategy.

Craig Harman is a Tax Specialist at Perrys Chartered Accountants:

Although it was widely anticipated beforehand, the only real rabbit out of the hat moment for the Chancellor was confirming the abolishment of stamp duty for first time buyers. This equates to quite a generous tax incentive for those able to benefit resulting in a £5,000 saving on a £300,000 property purchase.

The Chancellor has also stood by his previous promises, by raising the personal allowance to £11,850, and the higher rate threshold to £43,650. This is in line with the commitment to raise them to £12,500 and £50,000 respectively by the end of parliament.

Small business owners will be pleased to note that speculation regarding a decrease in the VAT registration threshold did not come to fruition. It was anticipated the Chancellor would look to bring the UK in line with other EU countries, however this will be consulted on instead and may result in changes over the next couple of years. Any decrease in the threshold could place a significant tax and compliance burden on the smallest businesses.

Ed Molyneux, CEO and co-founder of FreeAgent

I don’t believe that this is a particularly positive Budget for the micro-business sector. Rather than actually offering real support or meaningful legislation to people running their own businesses in Britain, the Chancellor has simply kept the status quo.

While it’s pleasing to see that the VAT threshold has not been lowered - which would have added a significant new administrative burden to millions of UK business owners - this is hardly cause for celebration. Neither is the exemption of ‘white van men’ from diesel charges, which is the very least that the Government could have done to protect the country’s army of self-employed tradespeople.

It’s also disappointing that there are still a number of issues including digital tax that have not been expanded in this Budget. I would have preferred to see the Chancellor provide clarity on those issues, as well as introducing new legislation to curb the culture of late payment that is plaguing the micro-business sector and further simplifying National Insurance, VAT and other business taxes.

Rob Marchant, Partner, Crowe Clark Whitehill

The Chancellor announced that the VAT registration threshold will not be changed for the next two years while a review is carried out of the implications of changing this (either up or down).

Having a high threshold is often regarded as creating a ‘cliff edge’ for businesses that grow to the point of crossing that line. However, keeping a significant number of small businesses away from the obligations of being VAT registered allows them to focus on running their operations without additional worry. Many small businesses will welcome the retention of the threshold.

The consultation should look at ways to help smooth the effect of the “cliff edge”, while continuing to reduce administrative obligations for small businesses.

Jane Mackay, Head of Tax, Crowe Clark Whitehill

The tax avoidance debate has centred around large multinationals and their corporate tax bills. High profile cases have eroded public trust in how we tax companies. By maintaining the UK’s low corporate tax rate, currently 19%, and reducing it to 17% from 2020, the Chancellor accepts that corporate tax is only of limited relevance in our UK economy. It accounted for around just 7% of UK tax revenues last year.

The Budget announces changes to extend the scope of UK withholding taxes to tax royalty payments in connection with UK sales, even if there is no UK taxable presence. There will be computational and reporting challenges, but this measure may pacify those who feel the UK is not getting enough tax from international digital corporates which generate substantial sales revenues from the UK

 

Healthcare & Retail

 

Hitesh Dodhi,Superintendent Pharmacist at PharmacyOutlet.co.uk

With a focus on Brexit, housing and investment into digital infrastructure, it was disappointing to see a many healthcare issues overlooked in today’s Budget. The additional £2.8 billion of funding for the NHS in 2018-19 is a undoubtedly a step in the right direction, but it falls short of the extra £4 billion NHS chief executive Simon Stevens says the organisation requires.

What’s more, the Budget lacked substance and specifics; it did little to progress digitalisation in the healthcare sector – an absolute must – while the opportunity to promote pharmacy to play a greater role in delivering front-line services to alleviate the burden on GPs and hospitals was also overlooked. These are both items that should feature prominently on the Government’s health agenda, but the Chancellor did little to address either in today’s announcement.

Jeremy Cooper, Head of Retail Crowe Clark Whitehill:

There is little in this Budget to bring cheer to the struggling retail sector.

The changes to bring future increases in business rates into line with the Consumer Price Index in 2018, two years earlier than previously proposed, is welcome, but is it enough for hard-stretched shop owners?

The National Living Wage will increase for workers of all ages, including apprentices, which is excellent news for lower paid employees. Retailers would not begrudge them this increase, but retail tends to have a higher proportion of lower paid employees and the impact on store profitability and hurdle rates for new stores should not be underestimated.

There is more positive news for DIY, home furnishings and related retailers in the form of the abolition of Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) for first time house buyers. This should help stimulate the first time buyer market and free up the wider housing market which in turn should boost retail sales for DIY and home furnishings retailers from buyers decorating and furnishing their new homes.

 

Property & Real Estate

 

Paresh Raja, CEO of bridging specialist MFS

After an underwhelming Spring Budget that completely overlooked the property market, this time around the Chancellor has at least announced some reforms that will benefit homebuyers. While stamp duty has been cut for first-time homebuyers, the amount of money this will save prospective buyers is in reality still limited – the average first-time buyer spends £200,000 on a property; abolishing stamp duty for them will save them just £1,500.

Importantly, homeowners looking to upgrade to another property still face the heavy financial burden of stamp duty, which will ultimately deter them from moving house. I fear this will have significant implications in the longer term, decreasing the number of people moving from their first property purchase, and thereby reducing the number of properties available for first-time homebuyers, and reducing movement in the market as a whole.

Fareed Nabir, CEO and founder of LetBritain

“Having acknowledged the growing number of Brits stuck in rental accommodation, it’s pleasing to see the Government deliver a Budget heavily geared towards the lettings market. With 7.2 million households likely to be in the rental market by 2025, the Chancellor has seized the opportunity to continue with the recent wave of reforms by offering tax incentives for landlords guaranteeing tenancies of at least 12 months. This should hopefully have a trickle-down effect on rental prices, offering more financial manoeuvrability for tenants saving to buy their own house – something the Chancellor has made easier – while also providing additional security for renters.”

Richard Godmon, tax partner at Menzies LLP

We should to see house price increases almost immediately on the back of this announcement. His commitment to building an extra 300,000 homes a year is not going to happen until 2020s, so this measure could lead to market overheating in the meantime.

The removal of indexation allowance will come as a further blow to buy-to-let landlords, many of whom have been transferring their portfolios into companies since interest the restriction rules were introduced. This will mean paying more tax on the future sale of properties.

Now that all sales of UK investment property by non-residents after April 2019 will be subject to UK tax, it effectively means one of the incentives to invest in UK property by non-residents has been removed.

Jason Harris-Cohen, founder of Open Property Group 

There was a lot of speculation before the Budget that the Chancellor would reduce or temporarily suspend stamp duty for first-time buyers, in a bid to help young people get on the property ladder. What we got was the complete abolishment of the tax on first-time house purchases of up to £300,000, effective from today, and in London and other expensive areas, the first £300,000 of the cost of a £500,000 purchase by first-time buyers will be exempt from stamp duty. This is arguably the biggest talking point of today’s announcement and as the Chancellor says will go a long was to "reviving the dream of home ownership".

It was equally refreshing to hear that the Government is committed to increasing the housing supply by boosting construction skills and they envisage building 300,000 net additional homes a year on average by the mid-2020s. However, I was surprised that local authorities will be able to charge 100% premium on council tax on empty properties, though I appreciate that this is a further stimulus to free up properties sitting empty and bring them back to the open market to increase supply. Conversely this could result in falling house prices if there is further supply and lower demand following a period of political and economic uncertainty.

What was disappointing, however, was the absence of any mention to reverse the stamp duty change that were introduced in 2016 for buy-to-let and second homes, which is currently deterring people from investing in the private rented sector. The longer it is around the more of a knock on effect it will have on the growing homelessness crisis, a problem the Government plans to eliminate by 2027 - a bold statement from Mr Hammond!

 

We’d love to hear more of Your Thoughts on Phillip Hammond’s Autumn Budget.  Will it benefit Britain and will the reduced growth forecasts have an impact?  Let us know by commenting below.

From diesel tax penalties and calls to rule out a further rise in insurance premium tax, to housing ambitions and planning laws, UK Chancellor Philip Hammond has faced a lot of pressure this week, ahead of the announcement due tomorrow.

Below Finance Monthly has heard from a number of source in the industry on what they expect, predict and would like to see come from the announcement, in this week’s Your Thoughts.

Adam Chester, Head of Economics, Lloyds Bank Commercial Banking:

Tomorrow’s budget will have to strike a difficult balance. Improvements to the public finances had given some room to ease policy, but that will be squeezed when the Office for Budget Responsibility revises down its growth forecasts on Wednesday.

The commitment to reducing the so-called structural budget deficit to below two% of national income by 2020-21, gives us a framework to assess how much room there is for any giveaways.

At the March Budget, the structural deficit was forecast to undershoot the two% target by £26bn. It’s now set to fall £6-8bn short of the March forecast, mainly due to stronger-than-expected tax receipts.

However, the OBR warned it will dial down its productivity forecasts, and we estimate a 0.4% downward revision would increase the structural budget deficit by around £15-£20bn.

On top of this, new funds are being sought for areas including Northern Ireland, public sector pay and the NHS, which would likely mean breaching the two% cap.

However, we suspect any available wiggle room would be used to fund a modest fiscal giveaway in order to keep borrowing and debt projections on track.

Matthew Walters, Head of Consultancy & Data Services, LeasePlan UK:

Fleets have been subjected to a lot of change in 2017. April saw the introduction of a new Vehicle Excise Duty system and new rules for Optional Remuneration Arrangements. July saw the publication of the Air Quality Plan, with its promise of Clean Air Zones around the country. And now it’s the turn of the Chancellor’s first Autumn Budget.

This Budget cannot add to the uncertainty facing fleets and motorists. In fact, it should provide clarity. The Chancellor must take the opportunity to reveal the rates of Fuel Duty for next year, as well as the rates of Company Car Tax for 2021-22 – and preferably beyond.

We’d like to see the Chancellor maintaining the freeze on Fuel Duty rates for another year – or perhaps even cutting them for the first time since 2011.

In addition, the UK Government is working hard to encourage the uptake of Ultra Low Emission Vehicles (ULEVs). We will have to see what incentives the Chancellor has up his sleeve.

Stephen Ward, Director of strategy, the Council for Licensed Conveyancers (CLC):

An Englishman’s home may be his castle, but purchasing that castle, family home or two bed flat is an archaic process that needs to be updated. The conveyancing market has never been in more need of attention and next Wednesday’s autumn budget presents Philip Hammond with a real opportunity to let the genie out of the lamp and demonstrate a real commitment to innovation in the property transfer process. We have three wishes for next week, namely:

James Hender, Partner, Saffery Champness:

Stagnating productivity means that any rabbits which the Chancellor wishes to pull out of his budget hat are not looking too healthy. OBR forecasts have eaten into the £26bn headroom the Chancellor thought he had, and though the expectation may be that Mr Hammond will spend to win some political capital, any tax gift will come at a price, and is likely to be subsidised at someone else’s expense.

The government is arguably stuck between a rock and a hard place on corporation tax. A fine balance will need to be struck between ensuring the UK demonstrates that it is open for global business, and being publicly seen to tackle any perception of big business not paying its way.

In this climate, the 2020 commitment to 17% Corporation Tax may be looked at again, and we can certainly expect rhetoric, if not concrete action, to further reinforce the government’s position in taking a central role on international tax transparency and anti-avoidance.

On appealing to younger voters: This is perhaps one of the most politically-charged Budgets of recent years, with many predicting that the Chancellor will use the occasion to try and appeal to a younger generation of votes. If Phillip Hammond is as bold as some have called for him to be, the implications of this political move on taxpayers could be significant.

Michael Marks, CEO, Smoothwall:

After Philip Hammond’s pledge in last year’s Autumn Statement to invest £1.9bn in cybersecurity, we can expect further funding (or at least reference) to this issue as the cybersecurity landscape heats up. Following a year that included the biggest cyberattack on the NHS and the Petya malware attack across the continent, cyber security needs to be an absolute priority for investment; without extra funding and protection, the Government risks undoing a lot of the hard work. So far, the near £2bn cyber windfall doesn’t seem to have had quite the desired impact.

Along with cyber security, I would like to see continued investment in the Enterprise Investment Scheme (EIS). It’s thought that the EIS investment may be reduced from 30% to 20%, thereby reducing entrepreneurial growth, and the UK could suffer consequently in the long term. As a country with a great track record of innovation, reducing investment in this scheme will have a detrimental impact on driving technology and business growth at a time when we need more people to ‘take that step’.

Stuart Weekes, Tax Partner, Crowe Clark Whitehill:

We would welcome a simplification of the rules and the removal of one of the two sets of Patent Box incentive rules as part of tomorrow’s announcements.

Very few companies are taking advantage of Patent Box incentives, which tax the profits from patented products at 10%, a nine-percentage point discount on the current 19% rate of tax. Many companies do not know about this and, for those that do, the complexity of the legislation has been a major barrier to making a claim. Once the UK exits the EU, will the government improve the benefit of the Patent Box, especially as the UK Corporation Tax rate will drop to 17%, making the margin for the Patent Box less attractive than it might otherwise be? Will this prompt a cut in the applicable Patent Box tax rate from 10% to 8%?

Chris Wood, CEO, Develop Training:

The UK Government has recently published an independent review concerning the increasing applications for artificial intelligence (AI). Its recommendations focus largely on the provision and development of training and education in academia and for master-level and PhD students. Support is recommended for organisations such as, and amongst other, the Royal Academy of Engineering, the Alan Turing Institute, and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council. AI is likely however not only to influence academia but, over the next 10-30 years, affect almost all of the current activities we perform at work and at home.

The current skills shortage, felt most keenly in the utilities, construction and engineering sectors is the end-result of under-investment on the part of both government and industry over the last 30-40 years. It is inconceivable, and somewhat terrifying, that this will continue into the mid-21st century particularly against a backdrop of such monumental change. Therefore the 2017 budget should include provision not only for a greater understanding of AI from an academically-driven research perspective but also from that of every individual. Children, school-leavers and those who will be in employment for the next 30-40 years must be educated in how AI is likely to affect their jobs, careers and lives. To achieve this the government would do well to establish a national institute for the promotion, understanding and application of AI for the benefit of all.

Mark Palethorpe, CFO, Cox Powertrain:

There are Government incentives for small innovative businesses like ours, but the Patient Capital Review has promised to address the need to encourage long-term investment in step-change innovation. For some people, the investments required by smaller innovators are just too small to get excited about and, for others, investment levels are too big for the risk. You can get caught out whatever size you are. Results of the Patient Capital Review are expected to be announced as part of the Autumn Budget and we’d like to see more opportunities for investment in innovation. We’d welcome an increase in the cap that exists for tax relief investment schemes like EIS, which has worked really well for us but does limit the amount an individual company can invest.

Nigel Wilcock, Executive Director, the Institute of Economic Development:

For the good of the economy, in tomorrow’s announcement on the UK Autumn Budget we need clarity on the structures and budgets for elements of the Industrial Strategy; clarity on how Structural Funds will be replaced for regions and clarity on local authority funding – how the business rate retention mechanism and re-allocation system will work. Specifically, we are seeking commitments from the Chancellor to transport infrastructure that equalises expenditure per head between regions, greater recognition of the social care costs falling on local authorities and funding for state aid interventions for business. We also recognise that National Insurance contributions from employers need to be looked at – it is an important economic issue that variations in different types of employment contracts are allowing corporations to be avoiding contributions when the economy is at full employment. The tax take of the economy is increasingly disconnected from the level of activity.

Damian Kimmelman, CEO, DueDil:

The abnormally low level of interest rates could be weighing on productivity growth by allowing weak and highly indebted firms to survive for longer than they normally would, by alleviating the burden of servicing their debts. Better information is needed to identify these firms, understand their business and support those with potential.

We have seen the government put their full weight behind opening data initiatives, such as Open Defra, to huge effect. DueDil would like to see the government put their full weight behind Open Banking and ensure that all of the CMA 9 banks (and beyond) open up as much banking data as possible to stimulate innovation in financial services and put the UK at the fore-front of Open Banking globally.

The UKEF committee has pledged to continue supporting exports and export finance. More interestingly, they have pledged that they will digitalise and standardise the application and on boarding process for businesses applying for export financing. DueDil would like to see the government to fund a competition to build a solution that would support the digitalisation of UKEF, in order to ensure that SMEs can painlessly and efficiently access a market of export financing and to ensure the ongoing success of SMEs following Brexit.

William Newton, President & EMEA MD, WiredScore:

The UK has the largest digital economy of any G20 nation, but it is important that technological skills and innovation continue to be employed across a range of industries. The service sector, for example, currently accounts for the greatest share of hours worked at lower productivity levels in the UK. Therefore, digitising existing processes in this sector presents a massive opportunity to address this productivity concern.

If the Government is to enable increased productivity, it must ensure that the existing generation has the necessary skills to meet the demands of modern industry. We would like to see a policy on business rates incentives for organisations who can prove they are investing in their workforce's digital skills.

Earlier this year, the Government announced its intention to support business rate reliefs on new 5G Mobile and full fibre broadband in the Telecommunications Infrastructure Bill. This proposal was received favourably by network providers, and we are now witnessing commitments such as that made by Openreach chair Mike McTighe confirming a plan to bring fibre to 10 million premises before Christmas. As such, the impact of business rates incentives has already been shown to be successful in spearheading improvements to the country’s digital infrastructure. We now need to see digital skills getting the same treatment.

Katharine Lindley, Chartered Financial Planner, EQ Investors:

It could be a tricky Budget for the Chancellor with limited legislative time due to ongoing focus on Brexit. But first one of current Parliament so generally Chancellors like to increase taxes and hope people forget by the next general election. However, minority government makes controversial changes difficult:

Mark Tighe, CEO, Catax:

The UK’s reputation as a world leader in Research and Development is essential to the welfare of the British economy as the Brexit process gathers pace.

In order for these smaller firms to compete on the world stage they must be innovating - which can be expensive. As it stands, current R&D tax credit legislation allows SMEs to take the risk of developing a new product, service or process - without undue worry over the financial impact if it fails or is never used. This creates a fertile environment for businesses to experiment and grow and supports the economy moving forward.

Mrs May used her speech at the CBI earlier this month to call on business to innovate more. She’s absolutely right to do so. The key now is making sure Philip Hammond follows through and makes sure the Government properly supports the firms that do.

Ed Molyneux, CEO and co-founder, FreeAgent:

Assuming that the VAT threshold is lowered - as some reports are suggesting - a huge number of contractors, freelancers and micro-business owners would be faced with a significant new administrative and financial burden.

It’s very unfair to position freelancers and contractors as not being on a level playing field with those who are employed. These business owners have none of the employment rights or the security that employed workers have and there must be some recognition for that - unless the government wants to slow the growth of this very important part of the UK economy - representing more than 95% of the UK’s 5.5 million businesses.

We would like to see some positive news in the Budget for the micro-business sector; whether it’s new legislation to help them overcome the chronic issue of late payment, easier tax rules to navigate or simply recognition of the recent Taylor Review and the ongoing status of those working in the gig economy. Freelancers and micro-businesses play a huge role in our economy - it’s time the government started supporting them.

Steven Tebbutt, Tax Director, MHA MacIntyre Hudson:

There’s a growing expectation that Entrepreneurs’ Relief will be attacked as part of the Autumn Budget 2017, which will prove an unpopular move with business owners and aspiring entrepreneurs. Such a change might appeal however to younger generations who feel that wealthy business owners shouldn’t benefit from such a generous tax saving measure.

The Government has already introduced “anti-phoenixing” rules to combat business owners abusing the relief by extracting profits through liquidation, only to resume the same business, sometimes multiple times or even ad infinitum. However, there remains a number of planning opportunities which the Government could still look to limit or close.

For example, it would be relatively simple for the Government to amend the legislation so that qualifying conditions have to be met for, say, five years, rather than the current one year which generally applies. This would immediately make it more difficult to structure disposals in advance of a sale to secure Entrepreneurs’ Relief, as business owners looking to sell would have far less opportunity for eleventh hour planning. Such a change would help ensure that only business owners meeting the conditions over a substantial period qualify for relief.

Robert Gordon, CEO, Hitachi Capital UK:

We know that clean air is on the agenda, as we have seen the Government proactively move towards legislation aimed at tackling the UK’s pollution problem, therefore we fully expect that tomorrow’s announcement will include some form of punitive measure towards diesel vehicles.

Growing uncertainty from consumers around the future of diesel vehicles has already fuelled a rapid decline in the market, with October sales falling by nearly a third compared to last year and any additional deterrent could prove to be decisive, in encouraging a phasing out of diesel vehicles altogether.

If this happens, the Government must be prepared to outline how it plans to fund the infrastructure improvements required, to give businesses and consumers the confidence to make the transition to vehicles powered by alternative fuels at a faster pace than we have seen to date.

Jonquil Lowe, Senior Lecturer in Economics and Personal Finance, The Open University:

The Chancellor is expected to follow an Office of Tax Simplification (OTS) recommendation to reduce the VAT threshold, currently £85.000, possibly as low as £25,000. This must look tempting since it could bring up to £2 billion into the government coffers, sucking 1.5 million business minnows into the VAT system. Depending on whether traders can pass the tax on to customers and who their customers are, this extra tax will be paid partly by firms and partly by households through higher charges for their plumbers, builders, taxis and hairdressers.

Quite apart from paying the tax, HMRC has estimated the cost per business of dealing with the VAT admin is £675 a year. Moreover, if there is no change to the exemption level for Making Tax Digital, currently set at the VAT threshold, from April 2019 those small businesses will also suddenly find themselves sucked into mandatory quarterly digital accounting.

By extending the VAT base, cutting the threshold narrowly skates around the Conservative Manifesto promise not to raise the level of VAT. And, no doubt, it will be dressed up as a tax avoidance measure aimed at traders operating in the informal economy. But make no mistake: this will be a stealthy and substantial tax rise.

Martin Ewings, Director of Specialist Markets, Experis:

As we await the Chancellor’s Autumn Budget with anticipation, the focus must be on driving growth in key areas and ensuring the long-term economic prospects of a post-Brexit Britain. Increased infrastructure spending is expected to be one of the pillars of the budget, injecting regions around the country with much-needed jobs and investment. But we must have the skills in place if the nation is to deliver on such projects, both now and in decades to come. The recent announcement of £21m to boost regional tech hubs around the country is a positive step, but more needs to be done if we are to close the ever-widening skills gap.

Digital investment will be an important component of this, and new technologies could hold the key. Philip Hammond is poised to focus on AI (£75m investment), electric cars (£440m investment) and 5G (£160m investment), while also pledging £76m to improving digital and construction skills more widely. With so many different priorities, it’s important not to lose sight of nurturing future talent. The Cyber Discovery programme is a great example of what needs to be done. The £20m government initiative, announced on Saturday, will aim to encourage and inspire 15-18-year-olds to enter the cyber security industry via a comprehensive curriculum. There will be three million unfilled jobs in cyber-security by 2021, but investing in programmes like this could go a long way to help ministers and businesses plug the UK skills gap, both now and in the future.

Craig Harman, Tax Specialist, Perrys Chartered Accountants:

Following the introduction of the help to buy ISA, first time buyers could once again be one of the winners from the budget as the chancellor is expected to announce changes to Stamp Duty Land Tax. This could include either a reduction in the rate for first time buyers or even a ‘holiday’ period providing a complete exemption for those able to benefit. It has even been suggested that there could be a fundamental overhaul by making the seller liable for Stamp Duty instead of the purchaser. This would benefit any individuals moving to a more valuable property as the liability would be based on the lower value of their current home.

Tax relief on pensions has been a bit of an easy target over the past few years with both the annual and lifetime allowance significantly reduced. It is likely that we will see a further cut in the tax relief available on funding for retirement. Some have even suggested a complete change to an ‘ISA’ like system, however this may be a step too far.

Individuals with significant dividend income have been penalised heavily over the past couple of years and this may be set to continue with many predicting either a cut in the tax-free dividend allowance or an increase in the tax rate.

Aziz Rahman, Founder, Rahman Ravelli:

The Paradise Papers have placed the issue of non-payment of tax back on the news agenda at a time when the Chancellor is announcing his tax priorities.

A large part of the Chancellor’s job is to assess and determine what taxation can be brought in from business. And in the current climate, everyone in business is under scrutiny to ensure they are paying what they should. This scrutiny can only increase if new or heavier taxes are announced tomorrow.

This may seem alarmist. But the Criminal Finances Act, which only came into effect two months ago, makes companies criminally liable if they fail to prevent tax evasion by anyone working for them; even if they were unaware it was happening. They can face unlimited penalties.

If businesses are to avoid prosecution, they must be able to show they had reasonable measures in place to prevent such wrongdoing. To ensure this is the case, they must review their practices and procedures to minimise risks.

This means ensuring staff are aware of the legislation regarding tax offences, having procedures in place for monitoring workplace activity and introducing procedures so that suspicions of wrongdoing can be reported in confidence.

The government is under huge pressure to tackle the non-payment of tax. At a time when the government is outlining its tax priorities, it would be foolish for those in business to fail to make sure their tax affairs are legal and above board.

We would also love to hear more of Your Thoughts on this, so feel free to comment below and tell us what you think!

Below David McDonnell, VAT Director at MHA MacIntyre Hudson provides insight into the question, Is HMRC set to tackle the VAT cliff edge?

HMRC could be on the verge of making far reaching changes to the VAT system. The UK has far and away the highest VAT registration threshold of all EU Member States at £85,000. This is more than four times the EU average of £20,000 and a stark contrast to countries like Italy, Spain and Sweden where there’s no threshold whatsoever and VAT registration is effectively compulsory.

The high UK threshold relieves the administrative burden of VAT compliance for small businesses. It also creates very real net savings in not having to charge and account for VAT on income. However, this in itself can cause a problem.  Although many small and start-up business begin life outside the VAT “net”, as they grow they will likely need to register. They must then decide whether they can pass the VAT cost on as part of their existing pricing structure, or whether it needs to be adsorbed. This is the VAT “cliff edge” – one day your income is all your own and the next a sizeable chunk is payable across to HMRC.

One of findings of a review by the Office of Tax Simplification (OTS) was that, perhaps unsurprisingly, there are a large number of business “bunched” just below the VAT registration threshold, with a significant fall off in businesses trading just above the threshold. The review stopped short of making firm recommendations to address this, but options include dramatically increasing the threshold to take more businesses out of the VAT net. This obviously reduces Treasury revenues, so much more likely is a dramatic reduction in the threshold, bringing it in line with the EU norm, tipping more businesses over the VAT cliff edge and generating more money for Treasury coffers.

The OTS also made suggestions to “smooth” current VAT registration issues, including a tiered system of registration and changes to the administrative process. It’s difficult to see how these options would achieve anything other than add further layers of complexity and confusion, flying in the face of the stated aim to simplify taxes across the board.

Which way will the Government jump? In the challenging pre-Brexit environment they may decide to keep the status quo, for now at least.  But the issue is now firmly on the agenda and we shouldn’t be surprised if the Chancellor acts quickly to shake things up.

(Source: MHA MacIntyre Hudson)

The Paradise Papers have revealed secret boltholes for many firms and individuals around the world, from sportsmen and the Queen to giants like Apple. But what are people’s thoughts on tax avoidance, which is very different from the illicit tax evasion? Tax avoidance has a large range of angles to consider, from investment to the moral dilemma of national tax, the spirit of the law, and of course financial protection.

Below Finance Monthly hears Your Thoughts on tax avoidance and offshore tax law loopholes, referencing the latest leaks and the information found therein, with experts from all round, covering various sectors.

Simon Browning, Partner, UHY Hacker Young:

The net is continuing to close in on a variety of tax planning and more information from the Paradise Papers will no doubt fuel HMRC’s efforts of collecting the tax gap.

In my opinion, there are two types of taxpayers who are getting caught up in the headline of ‘tax avoidance’:

We are seeing many more arguments in the press about the moral position of taxpayers and it is clear the landscape has changed over the past five years or so, with tax avoidance appearing to be as abhorrent as tax evasion.

However, it is the courts that decide on tax matters and not the press, so we need to be careful not to tar everyone with the same brush and to allow informed decisions to be made through the correct channels.

The continuing change in landscape makes it very difficult for taxpayers and advisers to know where the line now is between acceptable tax planning and abusive avoidance.

It will be very interesting to see how HMRC and international tax authorities deal with the information from the Paradise Papers and whether they can successfully filter their way through commercial tax saving arrangements as compared to abuse of apparent loopholes.

Karl Pemberton, Managing Director, Active Chartered Financial Planners:

First and foremost, we must stress that we’re not ‘tax advisers’, albeit we do have a remit to consider taxation when advising clients on their investments.

The issue for us here is morality, as Tax Avoidance (or mitigation) is not illegal. Every client that invests within an ISA does so for the taxable benefits it brings. Similarly, so does a pension. If the tax breaks were not there, I doubt people would use them as they do. Investing offshore has always been a legitimate way of investing too, however some of the more complex schemes raised of late raises a question of morality, rather than legality.

I believe it’s the amounts involved that make it feel immoral to the majority of the general public. If, for example, we see someone who is taking home a large pay packet not paying the tax man the ‘fair’ amount, it makes people feel angry, as they’re already winning the lottery, as it were. The problem is, if it’s immoral to ‘legally avoid tax’ at all, the amounts should be irrelevant. This issue of morality, therefore, makes it impossible to police, as everyone has differing views.

If we’re saying that ‘avoiding tax’ at any level is wrong, then that should also mean the end to ISAs, pensions, and every accountancy business in the country, as this is their purpose in the end. It would become an absolute minefield.

Miles Dean, Managing Partner, Milestone International Tax:

It would be very surprising if the affairs of those individuals concerned were illegal or nefarious. It is the theft of the papers that is illegal.

Some of the documents relate to matters 75 years ago when the world was a very different place. Recent developments have made a significant impact on the use of tax havens, namely the common reporting standard (CRS) and FATCA. Both FATCA and CRS are automatic exchange of information protocols that mean privacy is no longer what it used to be.

Just because an individual makes an investment that is based offshore does not mean that they have done anything wrong – if they fail to disclose it (and the return they make) on their tax return then that’s tax evasion. But to make the quantum leap and suggest that everyone from the Queen to Bono is dodging tax because some of their investments are made via Bermuda, Cayman or Malta is stupidity on a grand scale.

Regarding Lord Ashcroft, if he is non-UK domiciled then he will benefit from the remittance basis of taxation. The fact that he took steps to mitigate his UK liability (legally) is a matter for him and his conscience, not the media.

The comments this morning by Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell are wide of the mark – imposing a withholding tax on dividends will not stop tax abuse - it would simply make the UK less competitive as a jurisdiction for large multinationals, at a time when we need to be more competitive than ever.

John McDonnell’s comments illustrate just how magnificently out of touch he is with reality. A worrying thought given he’s likely to be our next Chancellor.

Dr Daniel Cash, Lecturer in Law, Aston University:

Offshore investing, in very general terms and in order to provide a realism check, is legal. The ability to invest one’s funds offshore, traditionally in a small jurisdiction that does not have the most sophisticated regulatory structure, is noted as being a viable and useful investment strategy for a number of reasons. Whether it is to diversify one’s exposure to risk, to protect one’s assets from political variabilities (like war or political instability, for example), or to protect against market volatility, there are a number of benefits to investing offshore. However, ‘investing offshore’ masks a number of variances which really should be revealed: offshore investing may relate to an investment fund being ‘domiciled’ abroad, which is legal, but offshore investing is sometimes cited when people attempt to remove their income from tax authorities, which is not legal. Whilst some who are caught in the crosshairs of this latest scandals have not, necessarily, been accused of operating illegally, it is really the close connection between the business and political elite and these tax-avoiding schemes which is causing the scandal to have such an impact. Whilst allegations of illegality will likely be forthcoming, at the moment the focus is on both a. proximity between the scheme and the elite, and also b. the issue of declaration, as witnessed by the story enveloping Lord Ashcroft at the moment. Yet, the proximity-issue points to a much larger issue, and one which, rather regrettably, is difficult to paint in a positive manner.

The former British Prime Minister, David Cameron, once opined that tax avoidance – in relation to the comedian Jimmy Carr being outed as using an aggressive tax-avoidance scheme – is ‘morally wrong’, with his successor, Theresa May, vowing to combat tax-avoidance almost immediately after taking office. However, the first point to note is that it will be incredibly interesting to hear Theresa May’s responses to this latest leak, one which puts some of her Party’s most revered figures in the centre of the scandal (one doubts she will be as forthcoming this time). The second point is more abstract; the absolutely incredible amount of people and corporations caught up in this scandal can only tell us one thing: tax avoidance, or at least doing everything possible to reduce one’s tax burden, is inherent within society (particularly, rather obviously, for those with large reserves of funds). This should not really be revelatory, but the response to the Paradise Papers suggests that maybe it is. This latest instance of proof that influential people systematically ‘game the system’, should be the spark that initiates deep-rooted reform of the market-centred society we live in, but one should be able to realise how fanciful that thought is when looking at the impact of the Panama Papers; that is quite a way to end on the back of what, to all intents and purposes, should have been an era-defining revelation in its own right, but now represents par-for-the-course.

Nigar Hashimzade, PhD. Professor of Economics, Durham University Business School:

The recently leaked documents yet again brought to light offshore investments by firms and individuals, many of whom are politicians and celebrities. Most of the tax-reducing arrangements mentioned in these documents, however, are perfectly legal. Among many questions this may raise, two are “Is investing abroad a bad thing?” and “Do tax laws favour the rich?       “

Investment in global financial markets is similar to global trade. Both remove territorial constraints to economic activities and bring benefits. Investing abroad should be thus no more objectionable than buying imported cars or imported vegetables. However, offshore opportunities are not available to the majority of taxpayers, - typically, they are for very large investments, - so the issue here is the underlying inequality of opportunities, rather than an evil nature of global markets.

According to the official statistics, in 2017/18 tax year the top one percent of UK taxpayers earned 12% of the total pre-tax income and paid 27.7% of the total income tax revenue. The bottom fifty percent earned 25.3% of total pre-tax income and contributed 9.7% of the total income tax revenues. In 1999-2000 these numbers were 11% and 21.3% for the top one percent, and for the bottom fifty percent they were 23.8% and 11.6%, respectively. This reflects growing progressivity of the UK personal income tax, which also appears to have outpaced the growth in income gap.

The pattern is even stronger in the United States. There, in 2014 the top one percent of taxpayers earned 20.58% of total income and paid 39.48% of all income taxes. The bottom fifty percent earned 11.27% of total income and contributed 2.75% of all income taxes. For each dollar earned, the top one percent taxpayers paid 27.1 cents in tax, whereas the taxpayers in the bottom fifty percent paid 3.5 cents, - a more than seven-fold difference.

Thus, a highly progressive income tax system in the UK and in the US leads to the highest burden of income tax falling on the richest taxpayers. What these numbers also tell us is that the income distribution in both countries is highly unequal. This is why rich taxpayers have opportunities unavailable to many, - in particular, they can afford incurring high costs of offshore investments that give them higher net returns. The task for the governments is to address the roots of inequality, and this goes far beyond changes in the tax law.

We would also love to hear more of Your Thoughts on this, so feel free to comment below and tell us what you think!

Grandstanding politicians are misinformed, hypocritical and “demonstrate monumental naivety” on the Paradise Papers debate, affirms the boss of one of the world’s largest independent financial services organisations.

The comments from Nigel Green, the Founder and CEO of deVere Group, come as the British leader of the opposition party, Corbyn, and the veteran US Senator and former presidential hopeful, Sanders, amongst others, speak out publicly in the wake of the leak of more than 13.4 million documents, dubbed the Paradise Papers.

Nigel Green explains: “The heightened level of sensationalism is out of control, masking the reality of the situation, and is being fuelled by misinformed, politicians out to score cynical political points.

“Corbyn implies the Queen, rock stars, and multinational firms, amongst others, must apologise for benefitting from legal, tax-efficient schemes.  Meanwhile, Sanders maintains that money in offshore accounts illustrates the movement towards an ‘international oligarchy’.

“This hyperbole is unhelpful, misleading and demonstrates their monumental naivety.

“It’s time to set the record straight.”

He continues: “The murky world that these and other politicians and others are inaccurately describing is not one that I recognise.

“In the vast majority of international financial centres are now transparent and appropriately regulated. They provide a sought-after service for individuals – and not just the uber rich ones– and organisations across the globe.

“Indeed, they are an important, legitimate and beneficial cog in the global economy.”

Mr Green goes on to say: “Internationally-mobile individuals and firms typically find that offshore accounts are a sensible option because of their convenience. They offer centralised, safe, flexible and worldwide access to their funds no matter where they live and no matter to which country the person or firm might relocate in the future.  Also, they provide a greater selection of multi-currency savings and investment options.

“Other, often ignored, benefits also include that they can assist firms from to avoid double taxation on the same income, and that they offer legitimate financial refuge for those in countries where there is economic, social and political turmoil.”

Mr Green adds: “For high-profile politicians to complain - and to take the moral high ground – on this, when it is they who have the powers to change tax laws and regimes, smacks of political opportunism and hypocrisy.

“The notion that the majority of individuals and firms in these allegations are ‘getting away’ with mitigating their taxes liabilities legally is absurd. It is akin to someone ‘getting away’ with driving at 50mph in a 50mph zone.”

“Tax is a legal impost and it is individuals and corporations duty to comply within the laws and organise their financial affairs in order to pay what they are required legally.”

The deVere CEO concludes: “Whilst the ‘Paradise Papers’ do indeed highlight that more needs to be done to increase efficiency and cooperation in some regards and jurisdictions, the current furore is distracting attention and resources away from the serious global issue of tax evasion.”

(Source: deVere Group)

As the traditional saying goes: In life, only two things are certain – death and taxes. Whilst death is inevitable, there are those who unfortunately try to avoid paying tax. This is evident from the ‘current list of deliberate tax defaulters’ collated by the Government (Gov.uk). It details 209 separate cases of businesses/individuals who have deliberately made errors in their tax returns or failed to comply with their tax obligations.

Turnerlittle.com, who provide financial services, assessed the governmental data by breaking it into eleven defined categories:

Manufacturing/wholesale, property, construction, transport, professional, retail/grocery/convenience, other, individual’s in multiple ventures, hospitality and health/animal health.

By breaking it into categories, the data revealed the following:

James Turner, Managing Director of Turnerlittle.com commented: “The findings from this research are certainly fascinating. The amount of tax purposely avoided is astronomical. It’s certainly unfair on those who pay their fair share of tax. From a greater perspective, tax revenue is now more important than ever to the government. With the uncertainty of Brexit lurking and the government struggling to effectively manage their resources, greater tax revenue would allow them to allocate more funding to improve essential public services such as the NHS. It’s therefore essential every business/individual be prudent with their accounting and lawfully adhere to their tax obligations.”

(Source: Turnerlittle.com)

Catriona Coady provides tax and financial planning services to a wide variety of clients within Goodbody Stockbrokers. Her client base includes several HNW individuals and her role involves assisting those clients with their domestic and overseas tax affairs and addressing their tax planning needs. This tax technical expertise is on hand to assist with the financial planning and investment process.

Goodbody, part of the Fexco Group, is Ireland's longest established stockbroking firm with roots dating back to 1877. As well as being one of the leading institutional brokers and corporate finance houses, it is one of the largest wealth management firms in Ireland. Here Catriona tells us more about the company and her role.

 

What is your previous experience and how do you draw on this in your current role in Goodbody?

Prior to joining Goodbody I worked for a Big 4 firm. I started out my training with PwC and up to two years ago had spent a number of years working for EY. Although I was trained to understand all tax heads, my specialism has always been tax for HNW individuals and the specific tax issues affecting individuals working across multiple jurisdictions.

In my current role, my experience has proved invaluable to clients wishing to understand the tax implications of their financial plans and goals. This covers a wide range of issues which tax impacts such as clients’ succession plans, business exit plans, tax issues for entrepreneurs and cross border tax planning. It is an important service as it assists clients with understanding the tax implications of their financial plans and to enable clients to determine where further advice may be needed.

The tax implications of specific investments is also an area that I assist clients with. For example, not dissimilar to the UK, Ireland has a tax regime for investments in non-Irish funds which can be complex. The input I provide into the tax implications of investments helps clients to design their portfolios with tax efficiencies in mind while also aiming to achieve their desired investment return.

 

As a Private Client Tax & Pension Specialist, what are the typical challenges that clients approach you with?  What are the most common day-to-day challenges that you are faced with?

Clients typically approach me initially with perhaps one or two specific investment objectives, but after discussing their personal circumstances in more detail, it becomes very clear that they have several more financial goals that they require assistance with or wish to achieve. These can range from wishing to retire early, involving detailed cashflow planning and target retirement funding to asset protection via trusts and family partnerships and suitable investments for those not domiciled in Ireland.

Pulling clients goals and objectives together into a clearly defined plan, which identifies overall net worth, detailed cashflow analysis, attitude to risk, overall asset allocation and a strategy for achieving their goals is an invaluable exercise and one that provides a guided path through the financial and investment process. While the initial challenges are in driving awareness of the full extent of our service offering and gathering the information required to compile a financial plan, the end product is a comprehensive document containing all the salient information related to the client’s financial plans and goals. This is a document that can be consulted and updated on an ongoing basis.

 

In your opinion, are there financial planning and investment issues relevant to both Irish and UK tax resident clients?

Given our close proximity there are numerous issues relevant to both Irish & UK tax resident clients. While not exhaustive, the following are examples of the issues that can arise:

Dual tax residence status

Many clients have dual tax residence status, meaning they are both Irish and UK tax residents. For example, Irish nationals can spend the working week living and working in the UK while also returning to Ireland every weekend and while doing so, accumulating wealth along the way. Navigating the two tax systems can be difficult, but with the right assistance and advice, it is possible to develop a financial plan which takes account of the tax regime of both jurisdictions. In several ways Ireland’s tax regime is similar to the UK - for example we have a tax regime for non-domiciled individuals for Income Tax and Capital Gains Tax (CGT). We also have similar rebasing rules for CGT purposes on certain events e.g. death. While expected to be improved, Ireland has a favourable CGT regime for entrepreneurs and an Enterprise & investment Scheme.

UK & Irish pension assets

Many clients have both Irish and UK private pensions, which can be defined benefit and/or defined contribution. They are also likely to have built up entitlements to both Irish and UK State Pension. The issues relevant to defined benefit pensions in the UK are just as much of an issue in Ireland with clients being offered enhanced transfer values (ETVs) in respect of their defined benefit entitlements. The decision whether to accept this offer is one that requires careful consideration and is an area in which we provide detailed planning and advice to clients.

There are also decisions for clients to make around whether to transfer a UK pension fund to Ireland or vice versa.

Estate Taxes

Cross-border estate taxes also play a large part in the advice provided to clients. This is because many hold assets in both jurisdictions and may be unaware that estate taxes can arise in both countries. As this is often overlooked, it is important to review a client’s asset base to determine the extent of the estate tax liability in both Ireland and the UK. Where taxes may be due in both countries, the Estate Tax Treaty should be consulted to determine whether any exemption or credit is available to mitigate the double tax charge.

 

When you first joined Goodbody, what were your goals in driving change within the company?

When I first joined, there was a definite need amongst the client base to have their financial plans and goals structured and delivered in a coordinated manner. This led to driving change in how we provide this service to clients. Clients respond very well to having a fully developed plan in relation to their evolving financial plans and to having a trusted advisor who is with them every step of the way in achieving their financial goals.

 

How would you evaluate your role and its impact over the last two years?

My role has deepened the tax expertise within Goodbody and as a result the service offering that we provide.

Seeing the benefit of the service to clients and colleagues is also very rewarding.

 

What do you hope to accomplish in the future?

I would like to continue to enhance the client experience at Goodbody. Many clients accumulate wealth in a variety of different ways and very often do not have access to or obtain fully rounded advice. It would be my desire for clients to have a single provider experience in relation to meeting their personal financial and investment needs.

 

“I think in times of significant global economic change it is vital for clients to closely monitor their financial plans and goals and to work closely with their financial advisor. It is also important to have an advisor that can provide an investment and tax offering to ensure that both are appropriately aligned.”

 

 

 

 

Website: https://www.goodbody.ie/

Written by Philippe Neefs, KPMG Luxembourg Transfer Pricing Leader

Since 1 January 2015, Luxembourg’s transfer pricing regime has been based on article 56 of the Luxembourg Income Tax Law (LITL), which introduced the arm’s length principle into local Luxembourg law. In addition, the Luxembourg tax authorities could also refer to article 171 of the Abgabenordnung, modified by the Law of 19 December 2014, which essentially states that taxpayers should be able to provide transfer pricing documentation sustaining the arm’s length character of all intercompany transactions.

On 27 December 2016 article 56bis was introduced, together with the publication of a new transfer pricing circular for companies principally performing intra-group financing activities. This new article, applicable as from 1 January 2017, gives taxpayers and Luxembourg tax authorities more guidance on how to apply the arm’s length principle in the context of a wider value chain analysis. It focuses on the comparability analysis based on the OECD’s five comparability factors approach. The comparability factors to be taken into account are the following:

  1. Contractual terms of the transaction: the contractual terms should be found not only in the legal documentation, but should also be reflected in the accounting statements.
  2. Functional analysis: a wider value chain analysis, as well as the ability to control the risks, should be outlined.
  3. Characteristics of goods and services: differences in quality or availability of a product or a service should be considered.
  4. Economic circumstances: product life cycle, market size, and the extent of competition should be taken into consideration.
  5. Business strategies: risk diversification and innovation strategies that have a possible impact on transfer pricing should be examined.

The commercial rationale behind each intercompany transaction is also of outmost importance. If the commercial rationale is lacking, then a transaction could be disregarded. This has a critical impact as taxpayers must now be prepared to be able to document the commercial rationale as part of the transfer pricing documentation. Attention will need to be paid to pre-structuring documentation. Therefore a description of the Luxembourg value chain should take any no-tax reasons into account.

The circular published on the same day as article 56bis clarifies the transfer pricing rules applicable to entities principally performing intra-group financing activities (Circulaire du directeur des contributions LIR n° 56/1-56bis/1 of 27 December 2016). The scope of the application of the circular remains the same as under the 2011 transfer pricing circulars previously applicable in Luxembourg. Notably, it applies to all entities realising intra-group financing transactions, while holding activities remain out of its scope. The definitions of “intra-group financing transactions” and “associated enterprises” remain unchanged.

In this new circular, strong emphasis is put on the analysis of the risks assumed by the companies. In that regard, different factors need to be taken into account such as the solvency of the borrower, the potential guarantees for specific financing transactions, the costs in relation to the financing transactions, and the actual value of the underlying assets.

The circular further provides that if a company has a similar functional profile to the entities regulated under EU Regulation n° 575/2013 that transposes the Basel Accords, and the company has an amount of equity complying with the solvency requirements under this regulation, then it is considered to have enough capital to support the risks assumed. Moreover, as a safe harbour, it is considered that such a company complies with the arm’s length principle if its remuneration corresponds to a return on equity equal to 10% after taxes. In practice, it is not expected that many Luxembourg companies will fall into this category due to the particular nature of the required functional profile.

All other companies should perform an analysis to determine the necessary capital at risk using the widely accepted methodologies in this area. These companies must have the financial capacity to assume such risks. The level of capital at risk should correspond to the functional profile under review, meaning that the required capital at risk should decrease when the risks borne become more limited. It must be noted that there is no reference anymore to the minimum required capital at risk of 1% of the financing volume (capped at €2 million) that could be derived from the application of the 2011 transfer pricing circulars.

Furthermore, the circular provides that in order to be able to control the risks (i.e. the decision-making capacity), the company performing the intra-group financing transaction should comply with the following substance requirements:

  1. The members of the board of directors, or the managers empowered to engage the entity in particular, must be residents of Luxembourg; the majority of the board members should also be Luxembourg resident or, if non-Luxembourg resident, should be taxable for at least 50% of their income (listed in the circular) in Luxembourg.
  2. The company should have qualified personnel to control the performed transactions. However, the company could outsource some functions that do not have a significant impact on the control of the risks. This latter item still under debate.
  3. The entity must not be considered a tax resident of a foreign jurisdiction.

The circular additionally provides for a measure of simplification, which a taxpayer can opt for should the following conditions be fulfilled:

  1. No transfer pricing study has been prepared.
  2. The intra-group debt receivables are financed by intra-group debt payables.
  3. The company fulfils the substance requirements (as outlined above).

It will be considered that these taxpayers comply with the arm’s length principle if their remuneration corresponds to a return on the financed assets of at least 2% after taxes. However, these cases will be subject to exchange of information.

The circular specifies that it remains possible to obtain an Advanced Pricing Agreement based on the facts and circumstances of each case if the conditions outlined in the circular are respected. It further stipulates that any Advanced Pricing Agreement issued before the entry into force of article 56bis LITL should not be binding by the Luxembourg tax authorities as from 1 January 2017 for the fiscal years following 2016.

Although it is not indicated, it can be interpreted that a Luxembourg entity carrying out an intra-group financing activity that does not have the so-called organisational and economic substance would be considered a conduit entity and that this information can be exchanged spontaneously with concerned jurisdictions. It can be anticipated that tax audits in source jurisdictions may be initiated and that the beneficial owner status of the Luxembourg entity may be questioned.

In light of these developments, previous Advanced Pricing Agreements and defensive transfer pricing documentation need to be reviewed and possibly updated.

Additionally, on 27 December 2016 the law on non-public country-by-country (CbC) reporting transposing the EU Directive 2016/881 of 25 May 2016 into domestic law was published. This measure reflects OECD/G20 BEPS Action 13. On 12 July 2017 the Luxembourg tax authorities acknowledged and explicitly referred to the OECD’s guidance on the implementation of the CbC reporting. Nevertheless, it is important to note that Luxembourg has not yet implemented any measures that would transpose the Master File and the Local File requirements under OECD/G20 BEPS Action 13. The author hopes that Luxembourg will transpose these measures into its domestic law in order to fully comply with the multi-tier transfer pricing documentation standard. This would further confirm Luxembourg’s commitment to the greater transparency that is required today.

Notably, CbC reporting requirements apply to multinational enterprise (MNE) groups whose total consolidated group revenue exceeds €750 million (or an amount in local currency approximately equivalent to €750 million) during the previous fiscal year.

As a result of this legislation, constituent Luxembourg entities must notify the Luxembourg tax authorities as to whether they are an ultimate parent entity, surrogate parent entity, or constituent entity. If the constituent entity is not the reporting entity that will be filing the group's 2016 CbC report, they must provide the identity and tax residence of the actual reporting entity to the tax authorities. MNE groups with a fiscal year-end in 2016 had to provide this notification by 31 March 2017 (instead of 31 December 2016, which was originally the deadline). This notification procedure is performed online on a specifically dedicated website of the Luxembourg tax authorities. Luxembourg's new law requires the first CbC reports to be filed for fiscal year 2016 within 12 months of the last day of the reporting fiscal year of the group (e.g. 31 December 2017 if the 2016 accounting year of the MNE group ends on 31 December 2016). Failure to do so may entail a fine of up to €250,000!

As a conclusion, the above mentioned measures are welcome on the Luxembourg market, as they provide additional guidance on the application of the arm’s length principle. The new article 56bis LITL can be seen as a transposition of OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (“BEPS”) Actions 8-10. These developments mirror international and European ones, putting Luxembourg on a level playing field. The author, however, anticipates an increase in tax audits and would advise the preparation of agile transfer pricing documentation. In this respect, readers must ask themselves the following questions with respect to their Luxembourg investment structures:

 

Bermuda has won world approval of its tax information exchange practices with other jurisdictions.

A global body said this week that those practices comply with international standards.

Premier and Minister of Finance the Hon. David Burt JP MP responded to the announcement by thanking Bermuda government officials who have worked hard to make this a reality.

The Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes (the Global Forum) said that Bermuda was among the countries screened under a new and enhanced peer review process aimed at assessing compliance with international standards for the exchange of information on request between tax authorities.

Bermuda, Canada, Australia, Cayman Islands, Germany and Qatar were deemed to be “largely compliant”.

The new round of peer reviews – launched in mid-2016 – followed a six-year process during which the Global Forum assessed the legal and regulatory framework for information exchange (Phase 1) as well as the actual practices and procedures (Phase 2) in 119 jurisdictions worldwide.

Today’s result means that Bermuda maintains the rating obtained through Phase 1 as a jurisdiction largely compliant.

Premier Burt said, “This is tremendous news and excellent for Bermuda. My thanks to all involved in securing this important outcome.

“This result is a testament to the hard work of the team in the Ministry of Finance.

“It is good news for local industry, boosting confidence in Bermuda as an international business centre.”

The 144-member Global Forum is a leading international body for ensuring the implementation of the internationally agreed standards of transparency and tax information exchange.

The Global Forum’s new peer review process combines the Phase 1 and Phase 2 elements into a single undertaking, with new focus on an assessment of the availability of, and access by, tax authorities to beneficial ownership information of all legal entities and arrangements, in line with the Financial Action Task Force international standard.

Global Forum members are working together to monitor and review implementation of the international standard for the automatic exchange of financial account information, under the Common Reporting Standard (CRS), which will start in September 2017. The monitoring and review process is intended to ensure the effective and timely delivery of commitments made, the confidentiality of information exchanged and to identify areas where support is needed.

The Global Forum is the continuation of a forum which was created in the early 2000s in the context of the OECD’s work to address the risks to tax compliance posed by non-cooperative jurisdictions. The original members of the Global Forum consisted of OECD countries and jurisdictions that had agreed to implement transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes. The Global Forum was restructured in September 2009 in response to the G20 call to strengthen implementation of these standards.

(Source: The Government of Bermuda)

About Finance Monthly

Universal Media logo
Finance Monthly is a comprehensive website tailored for individuals seeking insights into the world of consumer finance and money management. It offers news, commentary, and in-depth analysis on topics crucial to personal financial management and decision-making. Whether you're interested in budgeting, investing, or understanding market trends, Finance Monthly provides valuable information to help you navigate the financial aspects of everyday life.
© 2024 Finance Monthly - All Rights Reserved.
News Illustration

Get our free monthly FM email

Subscribe to Finance Monthly and Get the Latest Finance News, Opinion and Insight Direct to you every month.
chevron-right-circle linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram