GAAR I hear you ask – what on earth is that?

Well the Government has decided in its wisdom to close all of these tax  avoidance loop holes that have been in the Press in one fell swoop with a ‘catch all’ piece of legislation called …..

General Anti-Abuse Rule

The intention of this new law would be to target artificial and abusive tax avoidance schemes and counteract the tax benefit that the scheme gives to the tax payer.

So what does this really mean?

Let me explain by way of an example …

You have a new car. It has a valid tax disc, a certificate of motor insurance and a current MOT certificate. You are driving the car, within the speed limit, down the motorway.

So all legal and above board.

But you get pulled over by the police who fine you.

You haven’t broken the law but they do not like the fact that you have the cheapest (but legal) car insurance policy on the vehicle.

Poker Face

OK that is a bit of an extreme and  farfetched example but where does a law like GAAR stop?

Just how can a law reverse actions that you have taken that are within the law?

Surely the law should be changed to make the ‘legal action’ illegal?

Where does it all end? Who controls what becomes an ‘illegal legal act’? (Think about it!)

Just who would define what is “egregious”, “very aggressive” and “highly abusive contrived and artificial”.

Doesn’t personal preference, morals and attitude come into that?

Born this way

Yes of course I will think this way because I am an accountant but where we have a system of self assessment what we need is a clear set of rules for everyone to follow.

And let’s be clear the rules of GAAR say:

“taxpayers would be responsible for considering the application of the GAAR when filing their Self Assessment Tax return”.

So it seems that every individual would need to know the current scope of  GAAR.

Rather extraordinary given that the GAAR Advisory Panel, who should give a “quick and cost effective way of identifying where GAAR applies” have no legal standing and their given opinions would not be binding on HMRC.

The consultation paper for GAAR states that it should “lead to a simpler tax regime for the UK”.

Edge of Glory

I am not sure that I follow this logic – no clear rules, a law that can reverse your legal actions making them illegal and a Panel giving advice that can be ignored by HMRC doesn’t seem at all simpler to me.


Share

About the author

Copyright

The copyright of these blogs belongs to Elaine Clark of CheapAccounting.co.uk and MUST NOT be reproduced without her express permission.

I am seeing numerous copies of my blogs appearing on the web sites and blogs of other firms of accountants. I’m afraid that it is now time for me to take a tough stance on breaches of my copyright!

4 Responses to “Is GAAR Completely Ga Ga?”

  1. I believe GAAR will just make more work for the lawyers. I believe the current rules since Ramsay thirty years ago deal with artificial constructs as far as possible. In other respects we should only have to deal with the law as it stands; either something works or it doesn’t.

    Any consideration of whether an avoidance arrangement is “abusive” is always going to be subjective which is why there will be more litigation. We as practitioners must operate according to our own morality. Personally I don’t like artificial constructs, but if my client insists off his or her own bat to try one, I will go along with it while warning the client of the possible consequences. I am not anyone else’s moral judge; only my own.

    One confession: I fill up my car at the supermarket because the petrol is cheaper even though I knowingly deprive the Exchequer of the duty I would have to pay at the more expensive service station.

  2. I think we should sweep away the tax system as it currently stands. It’s far, far too complicated. No one person can understand it all, which is a recipe for disaster.

    Replace with a simple, flat rate tax on sales / earnings. No avoidance. No evasion. You earns your money, you pays your taxes.

    Simples!

    M

  3. Well said M – totally agree on that one

  4. Perhaps they can also retrospectively move the courtlines at Wimbledon so that Murray’s shots were in and Federer’s were out?

Leave a Reply

(required)

(required)

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Copyright

The copyright of these blogs belongs to Elaine Clark of CheapAccounting.co.uk and MUST NOT be reproduced without her express permission.

We are seeing numerous copies of our blogs appearing on the web sites and blogs. We’re afraid that it is now time for me to take a tough stance on breaches of my copyright!

Any breaches of copyright will result in a charge to the copier of £5,000, payable immediately for use of our content.


Click to find out more about joining the CheapAccounting.co.uk Accountancy Franchise
© 2012 Accountancy Franchise Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha
Copy Protected by Chetans WP-Copyprotect.