James Scott v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 4 April 2023

Neutral citation: [2023] UKFTT 360 (TC)

Overall AI summary confidence: medium

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: medium

This appeal concerned whether the Finance Act 2019 s36A 12-year offshore assessment limit applied to 2013-14 and 2014-15 where the taxpayer was not careless, and whether para 26 Schedule 18 FA 2017 (“requirement to correct”) remained available to extend time to assess. The Tribunal held s80(5) FA 2019 restricts s36A so it only reaches those years where loss was brought about carelessly, and that para 26 Schedule 18 was not impliedly repealed and remained available to make the assessments in time. The appeal was dismissed and the discovery assessments were held to be validly raised.

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: medium

The Tribunal’s ratio is that the commencement/“have effect” provision in s80(5) FA 2019 limits the temporal and behavioural reach of the later-enacted s36A so that its 12-year assessment window applies to 2013-14 and 2014-15 only where the loss was caused by carelessness; where s36A would not otherwise operate, the separate, time-limited para 26 Schedule 18 FA 2017 can still extend the assessment period and is not impliedly repealed by s36A.

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 Tribunal observed (obiter) that s36A’s purpose was to lengthen time to assess offshore matters without retrospective effect, citing parliamentary material; it also noted it did not decide an alternative purposive interpretation advanced by HMRC because HMRC did not pursue that argument.

Source links

Judgment page Judgment PDF Judgment XML