BlueCrest Capital Management (UK) LLP v HMRC is the first case on the ITTOIA 2005 ss 863A–863G salaried members rules relating to the treatment of partners in limited liability partnerships. It is also the first judicial consideration of the term ‘significant influence’ in tax legislation. The case will have implications for the taxation of the asset management industry and other limited liability partnerships, including solicitors’ firms and accountants. The FTT agreed with the taxpayer on the construction of the term ‘significant influence’ and found that BlueCrest had successfully demonstrated that the majority of the appellant’s portfolio manager partners were outside the salaried members rules. That influence need not be managerial or extend to every aspect of the LLP’s business: it can be financial influence and limited to a part of the LLP’s wider business.
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content.
BlueCrest Capital Management (UK) LLP v HMRC is the first case on the ITTOIA 2005 ss 863A–863G salaried members rules relating to the treatment of partners in limited liability partnerships. It is also the first judicial consideration of the term ‘significant influence’ in tax legislation. The case will have implications for the taxation of the asset management industry and other limited liability partnerships, including solicitors’ firms and accountants. The FTT agreed with the taxpayer on the construction of the term ‘significant influence’ and found that BlueCrest had successfully demonstrated that the majority of the appellant’s portfolio manager partners were outside the salaried members rules. That influence need not be managerial or extend to every aspect of the LLP’s business: it can be financial influence and limited to a part of the LLP’s wider business.
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content.
.tmb-editorspic.jpg?sfvrsn=df04ab27_1)
