Does anyone understand this tribunal ruling as reported in the press -
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f7a01bfa-90a5-11e2-a456-00144feabdc0.html#axzz...
It seems as though the painting sold for £10m but is treated as exempt as a wasting asset because it was plant in a stately home business. But I thought this exemption did not apply to assets used in a trade as per TCGA 1992 s.45.
Can anyone clarify this ruling?
Replies (3)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
Yes
The person disposing of the painting wasn't the same person that carried on the trade, but because it was used in the other persons trade it was considered plant, and therefore had a deemed useful life of less than 50 years.
Because the owner DIDN'T USE IT IN THEIR OWN TRADE, it fell outside ss 45(2)-(3) though.
It's a rogue decision, I think. There will inevitably be one or more appeals. So we're going to have to wait and see.
The link...
... is HERE. Sorry, I hadn't noticed that sijolees' link was to the FT.
Also a brief summary in the STEP Journal.