| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Blizzard, Mr. Bob
Blunkett, rh Mr. David
Bradshaw, Mr. Ben
Brennan, Kevin
Brown, Lyn
Brown, rh Mr. Nicholas
Browne, rh Des
Bryant, Chris
Buck, Ms Karen
Burden, Richard
Burgon, Colin
Butler, Ms Dawn
Byers, rh Mr. Stephen
Byrne, Mr. Liam
Caborn, rh Mr. Richard
Cairns, David
Campbell, Mr. Alan
Campbell, Mr. Ronnie
Challen, Colin
Chapman, Ben
Chaytor, Mr. David
Clapham, Mr. Michael
Clark, Ms Katy
Clark, Paul
Clarke, rh Mr. Charles
Clarke, rh Mr. Tom
Clwyd, rh Ann
Coffey, Ann
Cohen, Harry
Connarty, Michael
Cook, Frank
Cooper, Rosie
Cooper, Yvette
Corbyn, Jeremy
Cruddas, Jon
Cummings, John
Cunningham, Mr. Jim
Cunningham, Tony
Curtis-Thomas, Mrs. Claire
Darling, rh Mr. Alistair
Davidson, Mr. Ian
Dean, Mrs. Janet
Devine, Mr. Jim
Dhanda, Mr. Parmjit
Dobbin, Jim
Dobson, rh Frank
Donohoe, Mr. Brian H.
Doran, Mr. Frank
Dowd, Jim
Durkan, Mark
Eagle, Angela
Efford, Clive
Ellman, Mrs. Louise
Engel, Natascha
Etherington, Bill
Farrelly, Paul
Fisher, Mark
Fitzpatrick, Jim
Flello, Mr. Robert
Flint, Caroline
Flynn, Paul
Follett, Barbara
Foster, Mr. Michael (Worcester)
Foster, Michael Jabez (Hastings and Rye)
Gapes, Mike
Gardiner, Barry
Gerrard, Mr. Neil
Gibson, Dr. Ian
Godsiff, Mr. Roger
Goodman, Helen
Griffith, Nia
Griffiths, Nigel
Grogan, Mr. John
Gwynne, Andrew
Hain, rh Mr. Peter
Hall, Mr. Mike
Hall, Patrick
Hamilton, Mr. Fabian
Hanson, Mr. David
Harris, Mr. Tom
Healey, John
Henderson, Mr. Doug
Hendrick, Mr. Mark
Heppell, Mr. John
Hesford, Stephen
Heyes, David
Hill, rh Keith
Hillier, Meg
Hodge, rh Margaret
Hodgson, Mrs. Sharon
Hoey, Kate
Hood, Mr. Jimmy
Hope, Phil
Hopkins, Kelvin
Howarth, rh Mr. George
Hughes, rh Beverley
Humble, Mrs. Joan
Hutton, rh Mr. John
Iddon, Dr. Brian
Illsley, Mr. Eric
Jackson, Glenda
James, Mrs. Siân C.
Johnson, rh Alan Johnson, Ms Diana R.
Jones, Lynne
Jowell, rh Tessa
Joyce, Mr. Eric
Kaufman, rh Sir Gerald
Keeble, Ms Sally
Keen, Alan
Keen, Ann
Kemp, Mr. Fraser
Kennedy, rh Jane
Khabra, Mr. Piara S.
Khan, Mr. Sadiq
Kidney, Mr. David
Knight, Jim
Kumar, Dr. Ashok
Ladyman, Dr. Stephen
Lammy, Mr. David
Laxton, Mr. Bob
Lazarowicz, Mark
Lepper, David
Levitt, Tom
Linton, Martin
Love, Mr. Andrew
Lucas, Ian
MacDougall, Mr. John
MacShane, rh Mr. Denis
Mactaggart, Fiona
Mahmood, Mr. Khalid
Mallaber, Judy
Marris, Rob
Marsden, Mr. Gordon
Marshall, Mr. David
Martlew, Mr. Eric
McAvoy, rh Mr. Thomas
McCabe, Steve
McCafferty, Chris
McCarthy-Fry, Sarah
McCartney, rh Mr. Ian
McDonnell, John
McFadden, Mr. Pat
McFall, rh Mr. John
McGovern, Mr. Jim
McGuire, Mrs. Anne
McIsaac, Shona
McKechin, Ann
McKenna, Rosemary
Meacher, rh Mr. Michael
Meale, Mr. Alan
Merron, Gillian
Michael, rh Alun
Milburn, rh Mr. Alan
Miliband, Edward
Miller, Andrew
Moffat, Anne
Moffatt, Laura
Mole, Chris
Moon, Mrs. Madeleine
Morden, Jessica
Morgan, Julie
Morley, Mr. Elliot
Mountford, Kali
Mudie, Mr. George
Mullin, Mr. Chris
Munn, Meg
Murphy, Mr. Denis
Murphy, rh Mr. Paul
Naysmith, Dr. Doug
Norris, Dan
O'Brien, Mr. Mike
Olner, Mr. Bill
Osborne, Sandra
Owen, Albert
Palmer, Dr. Nick
Pearson, Ian
Plaskitt, Mr. James
Pope, Mr. Greg
Pound, Stephen
Prentice, Bridget
Prentice, Mr. Gordon
Primarolo, rh Dawn
Prosser, Gwyn
Purchase, Mr. Ken
Raynsford, rh Mr. Nick
Reed, Mr. Jamie
Riordan, Mrs. Linda
Robertson, John
Robinson, Mr. Geoffrey
Rooney, Mr. Terry
Roy, Mr. Frank
Ruane, Chris
Ruddock, Joan
Russell, Christine
Ryan, Joan
Salter, Martin
Sarwar, Mr. Mohammad
Seabeck, Alison
Shaw, Jonathan
Sheerman, Mr. Barry
Sheridan, Jim
Simon, Mr. Siôn
Simpson, Alan
Singh, Mr. Marsha
Skinner, Mr. Dennis
Slaughter, Mr. Andrew
Smith, rh Mr. Andrew
Smith, Ms Angela C. (Sheffield, Hillsborough)
Smith, Angela E. (Basildon)
Smith, rh Jacqui
Snelgrove, Anne
Soulsby, Sir Peter
Southworth, Helen
Spellar, rh Mr. John
Starkey, Dr. Phyllis
Stewart, Ian
Stoate, Dr. Howard
Strang, rh Dr. Gavin
Straw, rh Mr. Jack
Stringer, Graham
Stuart, Ms Gisela
Tami, Mark
Taylor, Ms Dari
Taylor, David
Thornberry, Emily
Timms, Mr. Stephen
Tipping, Paddy
Todd, Mr. Mark
Touhig, Mr. Don
Truswell, Mr. Paul
Turner, Dr. Desmond
Turner, Mr. Neil
Twigg, Derek
Ussher, Kitty
Walley, Joan
Waltho, Lynda
Wareing, Mr. Robert N.
Watts, Mr. Dave
Whitehead, Dr. Alan
Wicks, Malcolm
Williams, rh Mr. Alan
Williams, Mrs. Betty
Wills, Mr. Michael
Winnick, Mr. David
Wood, Mike Woodward, Mr. Shaun
Wright, Mr. Anthony
Wright, David
Wright, Mr. Iain
Wright, Dr. Tony
Wyatt, Derek
Tellers for the Noes:Mr. Ian Cawsey and
Huw Irranca-Davies
Question accordingly negatived.
Ed Balls: I beg to move amendment No. 99, in page 181, line 2, at end insert—
‘Repeal of rent factoring provisions
A1 (1) Sections 43A to 43G of ICTA (rent factoring) shall cease to have effect.
(2) The amendment made by this paragraph has effect in relation to transactions entered into on or after 6th June 2006.’.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: With this it will be convenient to discuss Government amendments Nos. 16, 100, 17 and 101 to 106.
Ed Balls: These amendments cover two similar areas. They deal with changes to the legislation on “repos”—the name for agreements for the sale and repurchase of securities—and introduce legislation on the factoring of income generally, replacing existing legislation on the factoring of rents from land. Both these areas involve anti-avoidance rules.
Amendments Nos. 99 to 101 deal with factoring of income generally and are more substantial, so I will describe them first. The ideas behind the rules for structured finance arrangements are not new; they build on, extend and replace legislation introduced in 2000 called rent-factoring. However, the structures that Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs has seen recently are new: they take rent-factoring ideas and extend them to types of receipts other than rents.
Before turning to the detail, it may be helpful to start by outlining why the amendments are being introduced at this stage of the Finance Bill cycle, rather than on Budget day. The context is that, earlier this year, the HMRC became aware that a major corporation had entered into the new type of factoring scheme to avoid paying tax on significant amounts of income. At that stage, the HMRC was not aware of the detailed mechanics of the scheme, so the Government were not in a position at Budget time to introduce properly targeted legislation. Work continued to ensure that the scheme was properly understood and then on developing a legislative solution.
3.45 pm
On
6 June, my right hon. Friend the Paymaster General announced to
Parliament that the Government would introduce amendments to the
Finance Bill on Report to ensure that the new type of factoring
arrangement would be properly taxed, and that the legislation would
have effect from 6 June. On that day, HMRC published draft legislation
and a detailed explanatory statement on its website identifying the
types of scheme that the legislation would affect. It also invited
interested parties to attend a longer open day later in June, with HMRC
and Treasury officials, with the object of clarifying the new rules and
identifying any areas where they might need to be amended. As I said,
this is, in essence, anti-avoidance legislation. The Government do not
usually consult about anti-avoidance
legislation.
Mr. Hoban: Will the Minister explain to the House the principal differences between the draft legislation that was published on 6 June and the provisions in front of us today? What types of transactions were taken out?
Ed Balls: I was just coming on to explain how the consultation had affected the initial proposals and how consultation had helped us to make better tax policy.
I was saying that, normally, one would not consult on this kind of anti-avoidance legislation, but because we are talking about a difficult area, we thought that it would be helpful for there to be a period of consultation and discussion about the detail—as long as it was always clear that the legislation would have effect from the date that it was announced, 6 June, and provided that the House was content for these amendments to be introduced on Report. As I said, we held an open day discussion on 20 June, which was attended by about 30 representatives of business and the advisory professions, to go through the legislation and, in particular, to consider whether the exclusions that had originally been built in were sufficient. Those exclusions were to make sure that we did not inadvertently capture appropriate behaviour as we tried to deal with the particular form of tax avoidance relating to this complex way of providing loan finance.
The consultation process has been constructive and beneficial in identifying areas where changes to the original proposals were needed in order to exclude cases that could be inadvertently caught. The process has been welcomed by business as a way of striking the right balance between protecting tax revenues and making sure that we get legislation right. The main exclusions are for transactions that are already taxed in the way that the amendments propose. That includes finance leases and other similar arrangements such as repos, stock lending and some types of Islamic finance. To put the point beyond doubt, ordinary loans are also excluded. In essence, the new legislation for structured finance arrangements will bring other types of financing arrangements into line with the new finance leasing rules, and so remove what would otherwise have been an anomaly from the tax system.
I want to confirm in particular
that, following discussions, the finance leasing industry is content
with the exclusions in the amendments. In response to the hon. Member
for Fareham (Mr. Hoban), I should say that it was around those issues
of finance leasing that most of the detailed changes to the original 6
June announcement were made. Following those consultations with the
industry, we understand that it is content that the exclusions in the
amendments provide the right outcome, particularly in relation to any
overlap between the leasing rules and the structured finance rules. We
think that these measures are a proportionate response to complex
arrangements. Had we not acted, several hundreds of millions of pounds
of tax would have been at risk. The provisions do not penalise, but put
all finance arrangements on a level
playing field so that a company’s decision on
how to finance itself is not driven by tax considerations, but by
commercial ones.
Amendments Nos. 16 and 17 are changes to the tax treatment of sale and repurchase—or, as they are commonly known, repo—transactions. These amendments are the Government’s prompt reaction to a recent adverse decision of the special commissioners—the first instance tax tribunal—in a case where there was what is known as a three-legged repo. Clearly, in this case, there was no question of consultation because we were responding to that decision.
Repos are used widely in the financial markets as a form of a secured loan. They typically involve one party agreeing to sell securities to another, with a related agreement to buy back the securities at an agreed future date at a price agreed at the outset. Ordinary repos involve only two parties: the original holder and the interim holder. The special commissioners held that the legislation for taxing repos did not work properly in a three-legged repo situation and upheld a company’s claim to a deduction when, overall, there was no net loss to the group of companies involved. It is very likely that the HMRC will appeal that decision, but it opens up the possibility of companies trying to enter into similar schemes in the hope that the special commissioners’ decision will be upheld. The possible cost of that could run into hundreds of millions of pounds.
The amendments on repos will ensure that such a scheme will not succeed in the future, whatever the outcome of the appeal. The changes will not have any wider effect on genuine commercial repo transactions. This is another example of us acting quickly and fairly, but properly, to deal with tax avoidance without damaging legitimate transactions. I hope that I have assured the hon. Member for Fareham that the consultation has been well handled, and I commend the amendments to the House.
Mr. Hoban: I thank the Minister for his explanation of these complex and technical changes. He was right to suggest that the consultation process has been thorough and effective. Given that many of the issues on which we have had conflict during the passage of the Bill have been areas on which there has not been proper consultation, that is something on which we can agree. The Minister has taken on board fully the remarks made by tax advisers. On that point, may I put on record my thanks to the advisers who have helped us throughout the passage of the Bill? PricewaterhouseCoopers has helped us to tackle some of the complexities of the Bill, but it was not alone in providing us with guidance, support, suggestions and help.
The Minister is right to clamp down on the problem. I understand that taxpayers are trying to obtain tax relief on both the interest and the principal. The example given in the explanatory notes demonstrates the extent to which people will structure such transactions simply to acquire tax relief on them. The amendments are thus valid. My discussions have shown that the industry is broadly content with them. Things such as finance leases were in the original scope of the draft legislation and the fact that they have been taken out is welcome. There is provision in the legislation that when other genuine commercial transactions could be caught by the changes, there is a mechanism for ensuring that they will fall outside the scope of the anti-avoidance provisions.
May I ask several questions about repos? The Minister was right to point out that such transactions are ordinarily straightforward. However, the transactions that came to the Government’s attention through the case considered by the special commissioners involved three parties. The original owner sold securities to an interim purchaser, who sold them to someone else, who then sold them back to the original owner—that is quite a complex loop. When considering such transactions, did the Treasury or HMRC do any research to determine whether any valid commercial transactions involved three parties in a tri-party repo arrangement?
I understand that there are frequently occasions on which a third party will act as an agent between the two parties to a repo. Will the Minister confirm whether the use of agents will lead to transactions being classified as tri-party repos and thus fall under the terms of the amendments? Clarification on that would be useful because agents are widely used when such transactions are carried out.
The third issue is assignment and novation of the arrangements. There may be occasions when, for entirely commercial reasons, existing repos are assigned and novated to another party—for example, as part of a corporate reorganisation or a transfer or takeover of business. In those circumstances, since the assignee would not be the party to whom the securities were originally sold, one would not expect that they would be eligible for tax relief in respect of any deemed manufactured dividend or interest. There is some concern that the new rules might capture those transactions inadvertently.
I should be grateful if the Minister responded to those three concerns: has there been any research into the valid commercial use of tri-party repos; will it capture deals where an agent has facilitated the repo; and what will happen where there are assignments and novations as part of an ordinary commercial transaction or corporate reorganisation? Will the Minister clarify those three matters?
Ed Balls: I am happy to clarify those three issues. Having spent some time reflecting on these matters in recent weeks, it is clear that it is a highly complex area and that changes to legislation in respect of market developments over a number of years has led to very considerable complexity. In future, we will look to finding ways to make the legislation more user friendly, without at the same time losing any of the important protections that have been introduced in recent years and in the amendments today.
On the first point, I can confirm that protection of revenue is being put in place without affecting normal transactions in any way. We have been careful to ensure that standard repo contracts will not be affected. We are talking about a particularly contrived form of three-party repo—not the sort of transactions that one stumbles into inadvertently. They exist only where taxpayers are attempting to avoid paying tax by using artificial or contrived arrangements. Standard commercial or two-party repos will not be inadvertently affected by the changes.
The second question was about agency cases. I can confirm that they will not be caught by the changes, as we looked into that particular problem.
On the third question about novations, I can confirm that our understanding is that they will not be caught in that way. Following the special commissioner’s decision, we decided to act quickly. We do not want to open up a wider problem. As a result of the commissioner’s decision, the right thing to do was to act in a speedy manner and hopefully in a well thought out manner. I can assure the hon. Gentleman on all of his three points. More generally, because this is a complex area, we will keep it under review and if we can take further action in future Finance Bills to bring greater simplicity while at the same time keeping proper revenue protections in place, we shall certainly do so. For now, I urge hon. Members to support the amendments, which are necessary to protect the taxpayer from the potential loss of hundreds of millions of pounds. They will also help to ensure that the vast majority of people who go about their proper business in the financial markets will not be affected by the problem.
Amendments made: No. 16, in page 185, line 8, at end insert—
‘Multiple holders of securities subject to sale and repurchase agreement: no relief for deemed manufactured payments
3A (1) Section 737A of ICTA (sale and repurchase of securities: deemed manufactured payments) is amended as follows.
(2) In subsection (5) (application of Schedule 23A and dividend manufacturing regulations), after “apply” insert “, subject to subsection (5A) below,”.
(3) After that subsection insert—
“(5A) If the relevant person is not the person to whom the transferor agreed to sell the securities, the relevant person is not entitled, by virtue of anything in Schedule 23A or any provision of dividend manufacturing regulations, or otherwise—
(a) to any deduction in computing profits or gains for the purposes of income tax or corporation tax, or
(b) to any deduction against total income or total profits,
by virtue of subsection (5) above.
Where the relevant person is a company, an amount may not be surrendered by way of group relief if a deduction in respect of it is prohibited by this subsection.”.
(4) In subsection (6) (interpretation), for—
(a) “subsection (5) above”, and
(b) “that subsection”,
substitute “this section”.
(5) The amendments made by this paragraph have effect in relation to securities if—
(a) the agreement to sell them was made on or after 27th June 2006, or
(b) a person other than the person to whom the transferor agreed to sell them became the relevant person in consequence of any other agreement made on or after that date.’.
No. 100, in page 185, line, at end insert—
‘Structured finance arrangements: factoring of income receipts etc
3B (1) After section 774 of ICTA (transactions between dealing company and associated company) insert—
“Factoring of income receipts etc
774A Meaning of “structured finance arrangement” for purposes of s.774B
(1) For the purposes of section 774B an arrangement is a structured finance arrangement in relation to a person (“the borrower”) if the following condition is met in relation to the borrower.
(2) The condition is that—
(a) under the arrangement the borrower receives from another person (“the lender”) any money or other asset (“the advance”) in any period,
(b) in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice the accounts of the borrower for that period record a financial liability in respect of the advance,
(c) the borrower, or a person connected with the borrower, makes a disposal of an asset (“the security”) under the arrangement to or for the benefit of the lender or a person connected with the lender,
(d) the lender, or a person connected with the lender, is entitled under the arrangement to payments in respect of the security, and
(e) in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice those payments reduce the amount of the financial liability in respect of the advance recorded in the accounts of the borrower.
(3) For the purposes of this section, in any case where the borrower is a partnership, references to the accounts of the borrower include the accounts of any member of the partnership.
(4) For the purposes of this section and section 774B—
(a) references to a person connected with the borrower do not include the lender, and
(b) references to a person connected with the lender do not include the borrower.
774B Disregard of intended effects of arrangement involving disposals of assets
(1) If—
(a) an arrangement is a structured finance arrangement in relation to a person (“the borrower”), and
(b) the arrangement would (disregarding this section) have had the relevant effect (see subsections (2) and (3)),
the arrangement is not to have that effect.
(2) If the borrower is a person other than a partnership, the relevant effect is that—
(a) an amount of income on which the borrower, or a person connected with the borrower, would otherwise have been charged to tax is not so charged,
(b) an amount which would otherwise have been brought into account in calculating for tax purposes any income of the borrower, or of a person connected with the borrower, is not so brought into account, or
(c) the borrower, or a person connected with the borrower, becomes entitled to an income deduction.
(3) If the borrower is a partnership, the relevant effect is that—
(a) an amount of income on which a member of the partnership would otherwise have been charged to tax is not so charged,
(b) an amount which would otherwise have been brought into account in calculating for tax purposes any income of a member of the partnership is not so brought into account, or
(c) a member of the partnership becomes entitled to an income deduction.
(4) If—
(a) a person in relation to whom the structured finance arrangement would otherwise have had the relevant effect is a person within the charge to income tax, and
(b) in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice the accounts of the person record an amount as a finance charge in respect of the advance,
that person may treat the amount for income tax purposes as interest payable on a loan.
(5) If a person in relation to whom the structured finance arrangement would otherwise have had the relevant effect is a company within the charge to corporation tax—
(a) the advance is to be treated, in relation to the company, for the purposes of Chapter 2 of Part 4 of the Finance Act 1996 as a money debt owed by the company,
(b) the arrangement is to be treated, in relation to the company, for the purposes of that Chapter as a loan relationship of the company (as a debtor relationship), and
(c) any amount which, in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice, is recorded in the accounts of the company as a finance charge in respect of the advance is to be treated as interest payable under that relationship.
(6) For the purposes of this section, in any case where the borrower is a partnership,—
(a) references to accounts include the accounts of the partnership, and
(b) any deemed interest is treated as payable by the partnership (whether or not the finance charge is recorded in the accounts of the partnership).
(7) For the purpose of determining when any deemed interest in respect of the advance is paid—
(a) the payments mentioned in section 774A(2)(d) are treated as consisting of amounts for repaying the advance and amounts (“the interest elements”) in respect of interest on the advance, and
(b) the interest elements of those payments are treated as paid when those payments are paid,
and the deemed interest in respect of the advance is treated as paid at the times when the interest elements are treated as paid.
(8) In this section “deemed interest” means any amount which is treated as interest as a result of subsection (4) or (5).
(9) This section is subject to the exceptions contained in section 774E.
774C Meaning of “structured finance arrangement” for purposes of s.774D
(1) For the purposes of section 774D an arrangement is a structured finance arrangement in relation to a partnership (“the borrower partnership”) if condition A or B is met in relation to the borrower partnership.
(2) Condition A is that—
(a) a person (“the transferor partner”) disposes of an asset (“the security”) under the arrangement to the borrower partnership,
(b) the transferor partner is a member of the borrower partnership immediately after the disposal (whether or not a member immediately before the disposal),
(c) under the arrangement the borrower partnership receives from another person (“the lender”) any money or other asset (“the advance”) in any period,
(d) in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice the accounts of the borrower partnership for that period record a financial liability in respect of the advance,
(e) there is a relevant change in relation to the membership of the borrower partnership involving the lender or a person connected with the lender (see subsection (6)),
(f) under the arrangement the share of the lender or person connected with the lender in the profits of the borrower partnership is determined by reference (wholly or partly) to payments in respect of the security, and
(g) in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice those payments reduce the amount of the financial liability in respect of the advance recorded in the accounts of the borrower partnership.
(3) For the purposes of condition A, references to the accounts of the borrower partnership include the accounts of the transferor partner.
(4) Condition B is that—
(a) the borrower partnership holds an asset (“the security”) as a partnership asset at any time before the arrangement is made,
(b) under the arrangement the borrower partnership receives from another person (“the lender”) any money or other asset (“the advance”) in any period,
(c) in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice the accounts of the borrower partnership for that period record a financial liability in respect of the advance,
(d) there is a relevant change in relation to the membership of the borrower partnership involving the lender or a person connected with the lender,
(e) under the arrangement the share of the lender or person connected with the lender in the profits of the borrower partnership is determined by reference (wholly or partly) to payments in respect of the security, and
(f) in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice those payments reduce the amount of the financial liability in respect of the advance recorded in the accounts of the borrower partnership.
(5) For the purposes of condition B, references to the accounts of the borrower partnership include the accounts of any person who is a member of the partnership immediately before the arrangement is made.
(6) For the purposes of this section and section 774D there is a relevant change in relation to the membership of the borrower partnership involving the lender or a person connected with the lender if directly or indirectly in consequence of, or otherwise in connection with, the arrangement—
(a) the lender, or a person connected with the lender, becomes a member of the borrower partnership at any time, or
(b) there is at any time a change in the share of a member of the borrower partnership in the profits of the borrower partnership in a case where that member is the lender or a person connected with the lender.
(7) For the purposes of subsection (6)(b) the reference to a person connected with the lender includes a person who at any time becomes connected with the lender directly or indirectly in consequence of, or otherwise in connection with, the arrangement.
774D Disregard of intended effects of arrangement involving change in relation to a partnership
(1) This section applies if—
(a) an arrangement is a structured finance arrangement in relation to a partnership (“the borrower partnership”), and
(b) any relevant change in relation to the membership of the borrower partnership involving the lender or a person connected with the lender would (disregarding this section) have had the following effect.
(2) The effect is that—
(a) an amount of income on which a relevant member of the borrower partnership would otherwise have been charged to tax is not so charged,
(b) an amount which would otherwise have been brought into account in calculating for tax purposes any income of a relevant member of the borrower partnership is not so brought into account, or
(c) a relevant member of the borrower partnership becomes entitled to an income deduction.
(3) In this section “relevant member of the borrower partnership” means—
(a) in any case where condition A in section 774C is met in relation to the arrangement, the transferor partner, and
(b) in any case where condition B in that section is met in relation to the arrangement, any person other than the lender who is a member of the borrower partnership immediately before the time at which the relevant change in relation to the membership of the borrower partnership involving the lender or a person connected with the lender occurs.
(4) Part 9 of ITTOIA 2005 and section 114 above are to have effect in relation to any relevant member of the borrower partnership as if the relevant change in relation to the membership of the borrower partnership involving the lender or a person connected with the lender had not occurred.
Accordingly, the structured finance arrangement is not to have the effect mentioned in subsection (2).
(5) The following provisions of this section confer relief from tax the availability of which depends on which of the conditions in section 774C is met in relation to the arrangement.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |