In the news

Exactly. Gift aid is a form of tax avoidance, but it's hardly immoral/unethical.

(Unless the charity in question shouldn't really have charitable status in the first place, like most private schools.)

I’m taking a holistic view and objecting to ‘mental health’ being called a cop out.

I don't think that's true - avoidance is defined in legislation. There are several specific anti avoidance rules etc which deny the benefit of reliefs, exemptions etc where actions are part of arrangements with a main purpose of avoiding tax.

Absent anything else, claiming a relief wouldn't be viewed as avoidance (at least not as that term is used in law)

I'm pretty sure no one said that but do explain.

.

Absent anything else, claiming a relief wouldn't be viewed as avoidance (at least not as that term is used in law)

I think that's a fair summary of HMRC's attitude, but the way these things get reported in the press is very different - Lewis Hamilton / Ian Cameron spring to mind.

Maybe - press coverage of this is usually awful. I'd say it goes further than HMRC's view though - it's the law

It was the unintended consequence of a scheme designed to stimulate
investment in the UK film industry. Sort of like an IRL “The
Producers”.

https://www.triplem.com.au/story/the-inxs-investment-that-went-horribly-right-55922

So... funny story. When we actually started to make some money after
the Listen Like Thieves album and tour, we were told to "write off"
some of it on a bad investment. One of our accountants recommended a
movie with no chance of success called Crocodile Dundee. Mike and Andy
flew up to the Northern Territory to meet Paul Hogan and the crew and
came back saying that it would be a good Aussie film but that's about
it.. So needless to say it was the biggest thing since sliced bread
and we made our "problem" bigger.. Great film..

Centrist dad in me always goes back to this clip of David Mitchell ranting about the moral mess the tax system creates.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2q-Csk-ktc

I'd say it goes further than HMRC's view though - it's the law

It's the law but it has to be interpreted and applied by a court, not by HMRC. They obviously have their view but they have lost high profile cases on this in the past.

Which goes back to my point that it's a sub-set of avoidance and people are generally in favour/against based on their own personal biases.

E.g. Non-dom = bad because I'm not a rich foreigner with a load of assets outside of the UK

SEIS = good because I'm helping a fledgling business, and anyway why shouldn't I reduce my income tax a little bit as I work really hard, and you know what I should be rewarded for taking the a risk so 0% CGT on exit is fair, regardless of how big a multiplier that could be.

I think this stretches avoidance beyond any useful meaning though. If you are a business and you deduct cost of stock when you make a trading profit is that avoidance? It's using the legislation as intended but it makes a tax bill lower - why is that different to an exemption?

To be avoidance, don't you need something more than that?

Gift aid is a form of tax avoidance, but it's hardly immoral/unethical.

It depends doesn't it.

Imo there is a strong moral argument against tax deductions for charitable giving. Not least because as highlighted by your eg it's normally totally subjective based on your bias.

I think we agree - my point was about what the law is (i.e. as a court should decide) and that this definition of avoidance wasn't just an HMRC opinion but had backing in law itself

To be avoidance, don't you need something more than that?

There are a load of cases that are marginal, though. Take a multinational business that chooses to HQ in Ireland. It's tax-influenced but probably not solely tax-driven. There is some level of substance below which the Irish operation looks like a sham, but you can't exactly codify that in law.

Meanwhile Mr and Mrs Howard get fined £700 for £150 of unpaid tax because in 2019 the lower earner paid the HICBC.

Also, the comedic situation whereby the one fucking year capital gains on property need to be declared within 30 days of incurring them happens to be the year that Howard - guess what - earns CGT on property but hasn't read the fucking tax rulebook.

Guess all this shit keeps tax advisors and accountants in business thank goodness

Agree there will be marginal cases but I don't think this is one of them - there were clear steps taken to achieve an outcome which was contrary to what the legislature intended (from memory they basically had UK operatives who transferred just the conclusion of contracts overseas, didn't they?) and they enacted a whole new tax to prevent it working in the future.

I'm not sure that's a close analogy to a business using a tax relief in the normal circumstances that relief is available.

This looks to be a weird case
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/feb/07/insulate-britain-activist-david-nixon-jailed-for-eight-weeks-for-contempt-of-court
Is it usual that a defendant can't talk about their reasons for the offence or is it just in this instance?

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/has_there_been_a_change_in_guida

this would indicate that it is unusual

He and three others had been on trial for causing a public nuisance by blocking a busy junction in the City of London

I'm guessing it's because they are in court to determine whether or not he caused a public nuisance and the climate isn't really relevant to that question. Probably some jury nullification thing (see also Coulston Four, Extinction Rebellion, etc.)

I'm referring to a common situation that loads of companies and investment funds find themselves in (check where your S&S ISA or pension is based if you don't believe me). The "inversion" transactions you are referring to were a little more abusive.

Meanwhile Mr and Mrs Howard get fined £700 for £150 of unpaid tax because in 2019 the lower earner paid the HICBC.

Yeesh. Loan shark rates of interest and penalties on that.

Meanwhile Mr and Mrs Howard get fined £700 for £150 of unpaid tax because in 2019 the lower earner paid the HICBC.

Can you appeal this? I had a similar thing happen and said it was a genuine oversight and they just charged me the outstanding tax (£80)

You often read about mitigating circumstances in other cases though, it's not normally (I don't think) just a black or white on whether the law is broken.