Boyle v HM Revenue and Customs  UKFTT 723 TC03103Posted In: Case Law
Legal BodyOther Tribunals & Courts (OTAC)
Type of Claim / JurisdictionA-Typical Working
The scheme, in question, was marketed by consulting Overseas Limited to independent contractors as a remuneration package. The idea was that it would save them considerable amounts in relation to both income tax and national insurance contributions.
To allow for tax avoidance, the contractors signed up as employees of the Isle of Man Company Sandfield consultants Ltd. They then agreed to accept two thirds of their income as loans in Romanian lei, Byelorussional roubles or Uzbekistani soums. They then entered into currency trades that were meant to turn this income into non-taxable foreign exchange gains.
The judge held that the loans where in both substance and reality income from his
Already a subscriber?
Click here to login and access the full article.Log in now to read the full article
Don't miss out, start your free trial today!
Are you fully aware of the benefits of Legal-Island's Employment Law Update Service? We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact on your business.
Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
Ensure your organisation’s policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team at Worthingtons Solicitors
The information in this article is provided as part of Legal-Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article.