Nicholas Millican v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 5 July 2024

Neutral citation: [2024] UKFTT 618 (TC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

Short overview

This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.

AI confidence in this short overview: high

This appeal concerned whether a capital gain received in 2015–16 fell within the TCGA carried interest regime. The Tribunal found the appellant did perform investment management services and received a carried interest via a partnership, but those services were performed in respect of EPIC LLP (the partnership) not the Cheyne Funds, so section 103KA did not apply and HMRC's assessment was overturned. Permission to appeal was noted.

Ratio decidendi

This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.

AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: high

The tribunal's reasoning identifies that for section 103KA "in respect of" requires the services to relate to the entity (the fund or scheme) itself, not merely to benefit or be paid by its members; and that tax-transparency deeming provisions in sections 59/59A TCGA do not operate to treat services performed in respect of a partnership as performed in respect of its members for the purposes of section 103KA.

Obiter dicta

This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.

AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium

The judgment includes dicta that definitions employing "includes" in anti-avoidance tax provisions should generally be construed widely unless context shows exhaustiveness; that a member managing an LLP may amount to performing investment management services for Chapter 5 of Part III TCGA where activities fall within the ITA definition; and that deeming provisions operate only for their specific statutory purpose and should not be read across to extend other provisions.