The Commissioners for HMRC v Smartpay Limited (incorporated in the UK) & Anor

Decision date: 7 February 2022

Neutral citation: [2022] UKFTT 146 (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

HMRC applied for an order under FA 2004 s.314A that the "Optima Employed" contractor‑loan arrangements were notifiable and that Smartpay Ltd (UK) and Smartpay Ltd (IOM) were promoters. The First‑tier Tribunal found the arrangements met s.306(1) and the premium‑fee prescribed description, and it held both respondents were promoters. The tribunal made the order sought; parties have 56 days to seek permission to appeal.

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 treated "arrangements" broadly to include schemes or series of transactions and held a "relevant business" under s.307(2) need only include some element providing services relating to taxation (it need not be the dominant element). "Makes available" means putting an arrangement at a person's disposal without a requirement to ensure the user can deploy it. The premium‑fee hallmark is assessed objectively against a hypothetical promoter when applying the Regulations.

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 noted that having found the premium‑fee hallmark applied it was unnecessary to consider other prescribed descriptions. It also observed that a s.314A order is a preliminary step and it was not required at that stage to decide whether UK domestic legislation has extra‑territorial effect over an overseas promoter.

Warning

The chunk contains substantial repetition and duplicated passages, which can make navigation and extraction of discrete points less straightforward. The provided notes contain substantial repetition and duplicated passages.