Trusts & Trustees Advance Access originally published online on April 13, 2009
Trusts & Trustees 2009 15(4):231-234; doi:10.1093/tandt/ttp025
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© The Author (2009). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.
The Trustees of the Nelson Dance Family Settlement v The Commissioners for HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC)1
Correspondence: *Elizabeth Wilson, Pump Court Tax Chambers, 16 Bedford Row, London, WC1R 4EF, UK. Tel: +44 20 7414 8080; Email: ewilson@pumptax.com
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
This case concerns IHT business property relief (BPR) and how it applies to a lifetime transfer of an individual asset used in the business of a sole proprietor. Put shortly, it confirms that the transfer of value which is made by reason of such a gift is eligible for 100% BPR so long as (and to the extent that2) the gift also effects a reduction in the net value of the business. This is what it means for a transfer of value to be attributable to the net value of the relevant business property (which is the relevant statutory test). One might have thought that this was the only possible interpretation of the BPR provisions. However, HMRC and the textbooks took the opposite view, the Manuals stating that the transfer of an individual asset used in a sole proprietor's business was not eligible for BPR unless it was itself
| Background |
|---|
| BPR |
|---|
| Proceedings before the Special Commissioner |
|---|
| Proceedings in the High Court |
|---|
| Implications |
|---|