Budget March 2011 – Olswang Analysis

The Government presented its 2011 Budget, intended to be a “budget for growth” aimed at reinforcing the message that Britain is “open for business”.

Olswang’s award-winning tax group have commented on the Budget proposals in our blog below. The blog is interactive, so please do post your thoughts.

Our consolidated analysis on General Business Taxation, Real Estate, Enterprise & Innovation and Residence & Domicile is posted on the right-hand side of this page.

Corporation tax reform

Mark Joscelyne, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

Whilst it will be the unexpected 2% cut in the main rate of corporation tax which will no doubt feature in the headlines, the radical reform of the tax treatment of foreign profits is perhaps more significant to the international tax competiveness of the UK.  The Chancellor was reportedly hoping to announce that at least one of the companies which had left the UK for a more tax competitive climate would now be returning, but it seems that he still has some persuading to do.

In today’s Budget, it was announced that the Government would be proceeding with the reforms to the CFC regime and new exemption for foreign branch profits announced in December, with some changes mainly in response to points raised during the consultation process. A summary of the draft legislation published in December was set out in our earlier Briefing. The revised draft legislation has not yet been published, but it was announced today that there will be a number of amendments.

Implementation of the CFC interim reform measures has been brought forward and will now apply for accounting periods beginning on or after 1st January 2011, except for the transitional rules for holding companies which will be deemed always to have had effect.

The CFC measures include a three year period of grace for foreign companies which were previously not CFCs but subsequently come within the CFC regime, typically following acquisition by UK shareholders or a group reorganisation. This was intended to apply only to companies coming within the CFC rules for the first time, but will now also apply to companies which were previously CFCs but ceased to be so before becoming UK controlled once again. Presumably the legislation will contain anti-avoidance provisions to prevent groups removing their subsidiaries from the CFC regime temporarily in order to benefit from this three year CFC exemption.

It was previously announced that the threshold for the de minimis exemption would be increased to £200,000 for large groups and that there would be a switch to an accounts-based measure of profits from the current tax-based measure. Today’s Budget notes refer to this as an “alternative” to the current de minimis exemption, suggesting that companies may be able to satisfy either the old or the new minimis test. We may need to wait for the revised legislation to see if this will be the case.

The more radical reforms to the CFC regime are still expected to come into force in 2012. The Budget confirms that the partial exemption for group finance companies will result in an effective CFC tax rate equal to one-quarter of the main rate of corporation tax, 5.75%, by the time corporation tax is reduced to 23% in 2014.

The corporation tax exemption for foreign branch profits will be available for accounting periods commencing on or after Royal Assent to the Finance Act 2011. It will now be extended to some life insurance companies. There will be revisions to the rules preventing diversion of profits from the UK to the exempt branch, the transitional provisions for companies which have previously claimed relief for branch losses and the application of capital allowances.  Details of these changes have not yet been published.

One aspect of the foreign branch legislation that does not appear to have changed is the fact that the election to opt into the regime is irrevocable (subject to a short cooling off period).  The requirement for a company to commit irrevocably to the regime (when there are downsides to doing so such as the fact that foreign branch losses will not be allowable and the election cannot be revisited after a change of control) will undoubtedly make the election less popular than it might otherwise have been.

SDLT reform for bulk residential purchases

Natasha Kaye, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

Today’s Budget contains details of a new SDLT relief which will benefit purchasers of residential property who acquire more than one dwelling.  The relief will be introduced in Finance Bill 2011 with effect from Royal Assent.

Where this relief is claimed the rate of SDLT will be determined by the mean consideration for the dwellings (i.e. the consideration for each dwelling will be aggregated, divided by the number of dwellings and then this figure used to determine which rate of SDLT will be applicable to the whole transaction). 

In most cases, particularly where a large number of dwellings are acquired, this new relief will result in a significant SDLT saving, as under the existing rules the SDLT rate is determined by the total consideration for all the dwellings.   This follows the relief’s stated aim of strengthening demand for and reducing a barrier to the investment in residential property.

The relief cannot be used to reduce the SDLT rate below 1%.   There is however no upper limit on the number of dwellings which may be included in a transaction and so the relief will override the existing rule that the acquisition of six or more dwellings is treated as the acquisition of non-residential property.

Interestingly, the previous Labour Government had consulted on introducing this relief in March 2010 and the current Coalition Government had ruled out taking any further action when it responded to the consultation in September 2010 on the basis such a change would be likely to carry a significant cost to the Exchequer at a time when deficit reduction was the Government’s main priority.

Bank Levy

Hartley Foster, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

The Government announced a further increase in the bank levy and indicated that this was, in effect, to offset the 2% reduction in corporation tax from next year. In his speech, the Chancellor also made reference to some of the initiatives that will be funded by the projected £2.5 billion  that will be generated annually from the levy: £250 million will fund the new shared-equity scheme, First Buy; and £100 million is to be invested in new science facilities.

The bank levy was introduced with effect from January 2011. It is based on the balance sheets of UK banking groups and building societies; the aggregated subsidiary and branch balance sheets of foreign banks and banking groups operating in the UK; and the balance sheets of UK banks in non-banking groups. Initially, it was stated that the rate of the levy would be charged at a rate of 0.07% with a reduced rate for wholesale funding with more than one year remaining to maturity of half the main rate.  However, those rates were amended subsequently. The levy only applies where the aggregate long and short-term liabilities of the institution or group were at least £20 billion, excluding Tier 1 capital, insured retail deposits, repos secured on sovereign debt, and policyholder liabilities of retail insurance businesses within banking groups.

The bank levy will increase to 0.078% for short-term chargeable liabilities and to 0.039% for long-term chargeable equity and liabilities from 1 January 2012.  The rates of the levy are:

(i)                   0.05% and 0.025% between 1 January 2011 to 28 February 2011;

(ii)                 0.1% and 0.05% between 1 March 2011 to 30 April 2011;

(iii)                0.075% and 0.0375% between 1 May 2011 to 31 December 2011; and

(iv)               0.078% and 0.039% thereafter

for short-term and long-term chargeable liabilities respectively.

Incentives Update

Michael Deeks, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

From an Incentives perspective, the only real substantive points from today’s Budget relate to entrepreneurs’ relief and the eagerly awaited release of the controversial draft legislation on “disguised remuneration”. 

As Natasha has already blogged, whilst the increase in the entrepreneurs’ relief lifetime limit to £10m is welcomed, the Chancellor’s decision not to remove or decrease the 5% shareholding requirement, or to include EMI options within the regime, will come as a blow to many companies.  Many lobbied hard on this point in the hope that employees who participate in HMRC approved share plans and other more “standard” share plans could more easily benefit from entrepreneurs’ relief.  I understand that discussions had taken place with HMRC/The Treasury and a proposal put forward that either EMI options would, from the date they are granted, count towards the 5% threshold or that the 5% requirement would be removed in its entirety and the holding period instead increased from 12 months to 3 years.  These proposals obviously fell on deaf ears. 

In relation to disguised remuneration, even before the Budget, we were looking forward to the publication of the final legislation which is due to be released on 31 March 2011 following a detailed consultation exercise and the subsequent release of FAQs on 22 February.  Today’s announcement by HMRC confirms what we were expecting.  The earmarking of cash or assets for employees by trusts or other intermediaries will be treated as PAYE income (and also NIC-able) as will the making of loans to employees by such persons.  We are looking forward to reviewing the proposed specific exemptions to these charges when the revised legislation is released to enable us to analyse the exact impact this new legislation will have on our clients.

Stealth tax?

Natasha Kaye, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

The Government has announced that from April 2012 the measure of inflation used to calculate increases in NICs rate bands, the CGT annual exempt amount and the annual ISA subscription limit will be changed from the retail prices index (“RPI”) to the consumer prices index (“CPI”), and that the default indexation assumption for all direct taxes will be CPI as opposed to RPI.

Although this is a technical change, as RPI tends to rise more quickly than CPI, this means that the thresholds at which individuals will pay tax will rise at a slower rate than was previously the case.  The Government has itself estimated the aggregate increase in revenue due to these changes up to the end of the 2015/16 tax year to be in excess of £2 billion.

Enterprise Zones

Graham Chase, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

Up to 21 zones are proposed to be created, but there is no detail regarding the availability of enhanced capital allowances. The Budget report simply states that the Government will work with individual LEPs to consider the scope for introducing enhanced capital allowances to support zones where there is a strong focus on high value manufacturing. Whilst capital allowances benefits are uncertain, advantages should include business rate discounts, simplified planning and superfast broadband. All very different from the 1980s.

Income tax and NICs to become one ?

Natasha Kaye, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

The Chancellor announced plans to consult on the merger of income tax and NICs on the basis that operating two completely different systems “imposes totally unnecessary costs and complexity on employers, and costs the taxpayer in the extra burden it places on HM Revenue & Customs”.   A consultation document will be published later this year setting out proposals to achieve this.  

 This is one of a number of measures recommended by the Office of Tax Simplification,  which was established by the Chancellor in July 2010 to identify areas where complexities in the tax system can be reduced.  Clearly, reform of this area will require careful consideration to ensure the changes do not result in the income tax system becoming even more complicated for both taxpayers and HMRC!

Gambling duties – no news is good news!

Stephen Hignett, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

There’s precious little in the Budget concerning gambling duties.

The way in which machines are taxed is due to change in 2012/13, with the banded licence fee regime of Amusement Machine Licence Duty (AMLD) being abolished and machine takings no longer being subject to standard rated VAT.  Under the new regime – of “Machine Games Duty” – machine takings will be subject to a gross profits tax and will be exempt for VAT purposes (with the related blocking of input VAT recovery being the most contentious issue, since this is what determines what the true cost of the new regime will be).  But we knew all of that already.

The big question re machines is what will be the new rate of MGD.  There are no answers to this question in the Budget.  We are, however, told that a technical consultation on the draft MGD legislation for Finance Bill 2012 is expected to be launched in autumn 2011.  So perhaps we will find out more then?

In the interim, and as usual, the bands of AMLD are to be increased in line with inflation.  Likewise the gross gaming yield bandings for gaming duty (being the duty which applies to bricks and mortar casinos), will also be increased in line with inflation.

“Is that it? ”,  I hear you say.  Well,” yes”. 

But the big news is that there isn’t anything else relating to online sportsbooks or casinos …. not yet, at least.  Will the UK government look to change the status quo – that we’ve now had since 1 September 2007 – and introduce a secondary licensing regime with duty arrangments which mirror those adopted by the the French or the Italians?  Or will they perhaps opt for a “place of consumption” duty regime as announced by the Irish?  Well, if they are thinking about either of these (or something else), they’re not letting on just at the moment.

So, if you’re sitting in your deck chair in Gibraltar, sit back, relax, and enjoy the sun – while it’s still shining.

A mixed bag for games companies

Cliona Kirby, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

A lot of mixed messages in today’s Budget for the games industry.

The proposal to significantly improve EIS and VCT reliefs, in particular, by increasing the annual investment limit to £10 million from £2 million (albeit with effect from 6 April 2012) should assist games companies in obtaining development finance.  EIS relief becomes much more interesting at this level.  We are currently lobbying for other beneficial changes to make the rules more flexible.   Similarly, the increase in Entrepreneur’s relief from £5 million to £10 million may persuade business angels to invest in games.  Perhaps the changes announced today will go some way towards improving the funding gap and enabling games companies to retain their valuable intellectual property.  But more is needed here -  a meeting of minds between the games developers and VCs/business angels.

Whilst the changes to the R&D rules to increase the SME scheme rate of R&D relief  to 200% from 1 April 2011 and 225% from 1 April 2012 will be welcomed, we would like to have seen further simplification in the claims procedure and an extension of the definition of qualifying spend to apply to more games development expenditure.   

Disappointingly, there was no extension of the patent box to apply to games companies (although a further consultation paper is expected in May).   Whilst we can understand that extending the patent box to apply to all IP may be too costly for the UK, we would favour an R&D or “innovation” box enabling games companies to benefit and to encourage them to hold their IP in the UK.   As ever, due to our previous lobbying, we would have welcomed a targeted games tax relief but it seems that the Chancellor has for now not changed his view that this is “poorly targeted”.

Income tax rates and high earners

Graham Chase, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011
There was no change to income tax rates, which remain at 2010/11 levels.  Whilst high earners will be disappointed by retention of  the 50% rate, the Chancellor did stress that it was a temporary measure and acknowledged that it could do lasting damage to the British economy. Realistically, it is difficult to see what else the Chancellor could say.
The proposed increase in personal allowances (£7,475 for 2011/12 as announced last year and £8,015 for 2012/13) does not, of course, benefit all.  This is because the allowance is reduced for those with taxable income over £100,000 and wiped out entirely for those with taxable income of (broadly) more than £115k (pension contributions reduce taxable income for the purposes of the calculation). 

Residence and domicile

Stephen Hignett, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

On balance, the Budget contains mostly good news for non-doms.

Higher remittance basis charge for long term residents

Non-doms who have been UK resident for 12 years or more will, from April 2012, pay an annual charge of £50,000 (up from £30,000) in order to be taxed on the remittance basis.  Whilst this is obviously unwelcome, it is a relatively small price to pay in the circumstances; we assume it is a token gesture offered to the Liberal Democrats by their coalition partners to avoid the need to make more radical changes to the non-dom regime which the Lib Dems had proposed.

Tax relief for remitting to invest in the UK

Non-doms will welcome a new relief which will allow them to remit amounts to the UK without triggering tax liabilities provided that they use those funds to invest in UK businesses. We will be interested to see the details of this new relief but, on the basis that the idea behind retaining the UK’s generous remittance rules is to attract wealth to the UK, this seems like a very sensible idea.

Simplifying the administrative burden

The Government has acknowledge what has been plain to advisers and taxpayers for some time – that the rules introduced in 2008 have created an administrative burden on non-doms which is almost impossible to comply with.  It will introduce reforms to remove the undue administrative burden, although it has not indicated which areas will be targeted.  It will have a broad range of areas to choose from and any simplification of the way in which these rules operate will be welcomed by taxpayers and HMRC alike.

New statutory residence rule

The Government has also acknowledged wide-spread criticism of the current rules on the residence of individuals which are based primarily on case law. It will consult in May of this year with a view to introducing a statutory residence test in April 2012 to provide greater clarity and certainty to individual taxpayers.  While this aim is commendable, achieving it is likely to prove difficult.

Stability of the tax regime for non-doms

Whilst the changes announced in this Budget follow wide-spread changes to the remittance rules for non-doms made in 2008, we would appear to have confirmation from the Government that no further changes will be made during the term of the Government.  Being able to assure clients that there will be no further changes to this regime for the next three years is very welcome indeed.

Supporting innovation – next Patent Box consultation May 2011

Natasha Kaye, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

As part of its programme to deliver a more competitive corporate tax regime and to support innovation in the UK, the Government has confirmed its previously stated intention to introduce the Patent Box, which is a 10% corporation tax regime for net profits derived from patents and patented products.   The regime is still intended to come into effect from April 2013.

The first consultation on this regime closed in February this year.  A further consultation document will be issued in May 2011.   The details of this regime will be keenly awaited by those in high-tech innovative industries as a number of key issues relating to its design are yet to be finalised by the Government.

We submitted a response to the last consultation having sought representations from a wide range of interested parties.  Click  here: www.olswang.com/pdfs/patentbox_pharma_mar11.pdf (Life Sciences/Pharma) or here: www.olswang.com/pdfs/patentbox_tech_mar11.pdf (Technology) for a summaries of Olswang’s response.

Tackling tax avoidance

Hartley Foster, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

In June 2010, “Tax policy making: a new approach” was published by HMRC and the Treasury. This consultation paper set out the Government’s approach to maximising the prevention of avoidance. Following on from that paper, the Government has proposed a number of measures, and provided further explanation of the four categories of work that it has described as “legislative defences” to avoidance. These are:

  • a new proposal to reduce the cash flow benefits that it considers taxpayers can gain from using high risk avoidance schemes;
  • a rolling programme of reviews on high risk areas;
  • evaluating whether a General Anti-Avoidance Rule (a “GAAR”) should be introduced; and
  • the introduction of specific anti-avoidance measures.

A study group (led by Graham Aaronson QC) to advise on whether a GAAR should be introduced was set up in December 2010. It has been indicated that the group will report its conclusions by 31 October 2011, and that, in the event that the Government decides that a GAAR should be introduced, there will be further formal consultation. As the introduction of a GAAR is an issue that divides the tax profession (and, indeed, HMRC), it is anticipated that this would lead to significant debate. This is, of course, by no means the first time that the introduction of a GAAR  in the UK has been considered. In 1997, the Tax Law Review Committee, in their report on Tax Avoidance, recommended a GAAR. Since then, the tax system has become significantly more complex, the Disclosure of Tax Avoidance Schemes rules have been introduced and expanded, and there has been much specific anti-avoidance legislation introduced. Watch this space …

The Government considers that a minority of tax avoiders exploit the cash flow advantage of retaining tax during a dispute over liability; and it considers that this bestows a systemic advantage on ‘tax avoiders’. The way in which the Government intends to reduce this behaviour is by “encouraging” users of schemes that it has listed to pay the disputed tax earlier than is currently required or face an additional charge for late payment of the tax when it is found to be due. A consultation document will be published in May 2011 with the aim of introducing legislation in Finance Bill 2012. It is considered that the number of businesses and individuals who behave in this way must be small. Assuming that the dispute is allocated to the complex track, a taxpayer who loses his appeal before the First-tier Tribunal has to pay HMRC’s costs (and their own professional and legal costs), the tax at stake and interest. Also, taxpayers have to engage in the litigation process. In my view, few taxpayers deliberately take hopeless cases to the tribunal purely as a delaying mechanism against paying the tax when it fell due.

A further boost for high tech Britain with improved R&D tax relief

Cliona Kirby, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

The announcement that the SME scheme rate of R&D relief will increase to 200% from 1 April 2011 and 225% from 1 April 2012 will be welcomed by the technology and life science industries who incur significant research and development expenditure.  It should also ensure that the UK becomes a more attractive jurisidiction in which to undertake R&D.  The existing R&D tax rules have been criticised for their complexity and the Government has taken a first step today towards simplification.  Certain restrictive elements such as the rule limiting a SME company’s payable R&D tax credit to the amount of PAYE and national insurance contributions it pays and the £10k minimum expenditure condition will be abolished.  We would welcome further simplicity in terms of the claims procedure to ensure greater access to such beneficial R&D reliefs by smaller companies. 

The detail of the proposed changes to enable relief for work done by sub-contractors under the large company scheme is as yet unclear although the ability to sub-contract was a key issue under the existing rules which needed to be addressed.

REITs update

Graham Chase, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

An informal consultation is announced with a view to reducing barriers to entry and investment for existing and future REITs. Legislation is proposed to be included by Finance Bill 2012.

Few details are provided but overall this looks to be good news for the sector. Of particular interest are:

1. the suggestion that institutional investors might establish REITs;

2. greater flexibility regarding cash assets;

3.  relaxation of the listing requirement , which might perhaps allow private REITs to be established; and

4. abolition of the entry/conversion charge.

Reference is also made to technical changes to the legislation. I hope that the opportunity will be taken to get rid of a number of technical requirements which serve no useful purpose. For example, the three properties rule and the single property value rule.

The consultation is awaited with interest.

VAT and LVCR (the £18 rule) – “Big deal!”

Stephen Hignett, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

We’ve all heard the reports of small CD  retailers (and the like) going out of business due to LVCR (or “low value consignment relief”).  This is the rule which exempts from VAT goods (such as CDs) imported into the UK from outside the EU with a value of £18 or less.   Following the Budget, the threshold will now be reduced to …. wait for it ….. £15.  Well, big deal!

Since those traders who import goods into the UK from places such as the Channel Islands (which are outside of the EU) package products such that, where they can, no single package has a value of more than £18 (i.e. if you order £25 of CDs they will arrive in two separate packages, each with a value of less than £18), this will only catch products which are individually priced between £15 and £18.

There is, of course, some logic behind the rules, being the balancing of the additional VAT revenue on one side against the costs involved in collecting many small amounts of VAT on the other side.  However, this logic will be of little comfort to those small businesses who are going, or have gone, out of business.

If , however, you are an importer of CDs or other goods with a value below £18, you can now breathe easy – they could have reduced the rate to £9 (€10).

SDLT anti-avoidance

Graham Chase, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

Notwithstanding the introduction of a general anti-avoidance rule in 2006, opportunities to avoid SDLT continue. To counter this three changes are announced:

Sub-sales  Where the sub-sale provisions apply there is normally a single charge, payable by the sub-purchaser. However, if the sub-sale rules apply and the sub-purchaser can take advantage of an exemption then no charge arises. This analysis is at the heart of avoidance using alternative finance. Far from being reserved for the highest value transactions on a bespoke basis such structures risked becoming commonplace in relation to higher value residential conveyancing. In practice this was commonly achieved by having a normal acquisition contract in favour of the purchaser, who in turn agrees to a sale and leaseback with a “financial institution”. This second transaction is exempt, by combining it as part of a sub-sale the entire arrangement is then anticipated to be exempt.

 The vendor would not know, the downside for the purchaser comprise fees (which might be a percentage of the anticipated savings) and the risk that HMRC would not accept the position. Litigation on such structures is understood to be in hand, but the general perception amongst practitioners is that HMRC have been slow to counter this avoidance. The draft legislation released today prevents it by excluding all alternative property finance reliefs from the the sub-sale rules. It remains to be seen whether pre-Budget planning is effective (I suspect that only a small proportion of cases are being contested), HMRC’s note states that the changes “ensure or put beyond doubt that certain SDLT avoidance schemes are ineffective” so presumably HMRC will continue to litigate.

Alternative finance and meaning of “financial institution” Holders of Consumer Credit Licences are to be excluded from the definition of financial institution and so will not be able to benefit from the alternative finance exemption. In practice it was relatively straightforward to obtain such a licence and hence access relief, including relief in conjunction with sub-sales.

Market value rule An exchange of land (involving a major interest) triggers a charge by reference to market value. The proposed change involves taking the higher of the market value of the interest acquired and the chargeable consideration given for it.

It is difficult to criticise any of the above, although I wonder whether the new market value rule might have unintended consequences.

The changes are effective from tomorrow subject to the usual grand-fathering.

 

A good day for high risk start ups?

Cliona Kirby, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

We are delighted that the Government has recognised the need to encourage investment in high risk start up companies through proposed improvements to the EIS and VCT rules but the question is does it go far enough ?  The proposed changes should be beneficial for the creative and technology industries for whom access to finance continues to be challenging.   Whilst these measures alone will not solve the funding gap, this policy change fits neatly alongside the Government’s intention to create Digital Shoreditch. 

From 6 April 2011, individual investors will be entitled to 30% income tax relief on investments made into EIS companies (an increase from 20%) and able to invest from 6 April 2012 up to £1 million (double the current £500k limit).  Perhaps more importantly, from 6 April 2012, the amount of money that can be invested in an EIS or VCT company will increase from £2 million to £10 million which should have a significant impact.   It also appears that both schemes will be available for companies with up to 250 employees and with gross assets of £15 million before investment. All of this is of course subject to state aid approval which is why the EIS and VCT rules had been restricted to such low levels in the first place !

We would advocate further changes are made to reduce the current holding periods for qualifying shares (3 years for EIS and 5 years for VCT) and bring them more in line with other tax reliefs such as substantial shareholding relief and entrepreneur’s relief which only require a 1 year qualifying period.   Currently, some high tech start ups are discouraged from securing EIS  investment because they wish to have the flexibility to achieve an exit within three years.    Hopefully such issues will be addressed in the proposed consultation.    

Bad news (as expected) though for those EIS/VCTs looking to invest in certain renewable enegy projects such as  solar power (which involve the receipt of Feed-In Tariffs) which will be excluded from 6 April 2012.

No more retrospective tax law changes?

Hartley Foster, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

Whilst the Government has not indicated that it will never introduce tax changes on a retrospective or retroactive basis, under the Protocol, changes to tax legislation where the change is effective from a date earlier than the date of announcement will be “wholly exceptional”. Such changes to tax law normally will be announced only by the Budget. Outside the Budget, changes to tax law will be made on a retroactive or retrospective basis only where: (i) there would otherwise be a significant risk to the Exchequer; (ii) significant new information has emerged to identify the risk (a change in HMRC’s interpretation of the law will not be regarded as significant new information unless it is prompted by a Court ruling; and (iii) changing the law immediately is expected to prevent significant losses to the Exchequer.

Whilst there is uncertainty as to what is meant by ‘significant’ and the scope for making such announcements could have been narrowed further, nonetheless, the draft Protocol is to be welcomed. It will help in terms of improving the predictability and stability of the tax system whilst maintaining the Government’s freedom to make changes to protect tax revenues.

Entrepreneurs’ relief – £10 million lifetime limit

Natasha Kaye, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

The Chancellor announced that the entrepreneurs’ relief lifetime limit will be doubled from £5 million to£10 million.

This change must be positive for business but, as this is the only change to entrepreneurs’ relief, some will disappointed as there was some hope that the arbitrary requirement to hold 5% of ordinary share capital in qualifying companies would be removed to allow incentivisation of a wider class of employees and directors.

Corporation tax rate 26% from April 2011

Natasha Kaye, Tax Partner, Olswang - March 23rd, 2011

As part of a number of measures intended to improve the competitiveness of the UK for multi-national companies, the Chancellor has announced that the corporation tax rate will be reduced by 2%, rather than 1% from April 2011.  It will continue to decrease by 1% for the following three years until it reaches 23%.

A number of other headline grabbing measures, with encouragement of investment in the UK as the stated aim, have been announced.  These include doubling entrepreneurs relief, widening the EIS scheme and improving the R&D tax credit.

Keep watching and we’ll give you the pertinent details!