Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.
AIA

At a glance: Examples of winners and losers under the new CGT regime

by
28th Jan 2008
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

It's a lottery? A quick guide to illustrate who will be the winners and losers under the proposals for the new CGT regime in 2008/09.

Winners

Disposal of a non-business asset

Second home/ personal holiday cottage purchased 1995 2007/08 2008/09
£ £
Proceeds 250,000 250,000
Cost 100,000 100,000
Gain before taper 150,000 150,000
Taper relief (40%) 60,000 -
Gain after reliefs 90,000 150,000
Annual exemption 9,200 9,200*
Taxable gain 80,800 140,800
Tax payable (40% / 18%) 32,320 25,344
Decrease in tax (6,976)

* Will increase in line with inflation

Disposal of a non-business asset

Second home / personal holiday cottage purchased 1981 2007/08 2008/09
£ £
Proceeds 250,000 250,000
Cost / March 1982 19,000 20,000
Indexation 19,892 -
Un-tapered gain 211,108 230,000
Taper relief (40%) 84,443 -
Gain after reliefs 126,665 230,000
Annual exemption 9,200 9,200*
Taxable gain 117,465 220,800
Tax payable (40% / 18%) 46,986 39,744
Decrease in tax (7,242)

* Will increase in line with inflation

Losers

Disposal of a business/non-business asset* - Office building let to a partnership

Disposal of asset 2007/08 2008/09
£ £
Proceeds 650,000 650,000
Cost (1993) 85,000 85,000
Improvements 175,000 175,000
Indexation 110,000 -
Gain before taper 280,000 390,000
Taper relief 210,000 -
Gain after reliefs 70,000 390,000
Annual exemption 9,200 9,200**
Taxable gain 60,800 380,800
Tax payable 40% / 18% 24,320 68,544
Increase in tax 44,224

* Definition of a business asset changes for 2008/09 – an asset leased to a business which is not run by the asset's owner will not qualify for entrepreneur's relief.
** Will increase in line with inflation

Disposal of a business asset*

Disposal of a whole business 2007/08 2008/09
£ £
Gain 450,000 450,000
Taper relief (75%) 337,500 -
Entrepreneur’s relief (4/9ths) - 200,000
Gain after reliefs 112,500 250,000
Annual exemption 9,200 9,200**
Taxable gain 103,300 240,800
Tax payable 40% / 18% 41,320 43,344
Increase in tax 2,024

* Definition of a business asset changes for 2008/09
** Will increase in line with inflation

Disposal of a business/non-business asset* - Employee shares (employee owns < 5% of voting shares)

Disposal of employee shares 2007/08 2008/09
£ £
Gain 36,800 36,800
Taper relief (75%) 27,600 -
Gain after reliefs 9,200 36,800
Annual exemption 9,200 9,200**
Taxable gain 0 27,600
Tax payable 40% / 18% 0 4,968
Increase in tax 4,968

* Definition of a business asset changes for 2008/09 – an employee shareholding of less than 5% of voting rights will no longer be classed as a business asset.
** Will increase in line with inflation

Useful links
News items: Darling announces major CGT relief

Features:
Relieve me - I'm an Entrepreneur All things considered, Simon Sweetman is quite pleased that the Chancellor has changed his mind about CGT.
The new CGT regime Nichola Ross Martin summarises the proposals for 2008/09

Link to HMRC guidance:
Draft CGT legislation
Entrepreneur's relief

Tags:

Replies (10)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By Taxi
06th Mar 2008 15:49

Not unless indexation is banked with an interspouse transfer.
Indexation otherwise is, like taper, lost come 6 April 2008

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Stats696
11th Feb 2008 13:33

Holiday cottage
Would the holiday cottage not qualify for indexation from 1995-1998?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
30th Jan 2008 16:22

Points for clarification
Holiday cottage v. furnished holiday let
I can see that I should have called the holiday cottage a "second home" in order to distinguish it from a furnished holiday letting business. My apologies for any confusion.

If you are considering the treatment of furnished holiday letting businesses, then look at the business asset example, as this type of asset qualifies for entrepreneur's relief. This leads me to wonder what the situation will be whereby a number of furnished holiday lets are owned and the owner decides to wind down over a period of years and sells them off piecemeal - perhaps they are jointly owned and this also enables the annual exempt bands to be maxed out over a period of years. One assume that selling part of the business will qualify for the relief, or maybe it will not and it could then be more akin to the previous retirement relief. We will have to wait and see on that point.

EMI: Yes, a very good point, but then again, as you say EMIs are planned around exit strategies and by obtaining the capital treatment once still avoids NI on what might otherwise be employment related securities.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
30th Jan 2008 15:59

Winners?
In regard to winners example , I thought furnished holiday lets were treated as a trade and would therefore qualify for full BATR?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By michael.x.bell
30th Jan 2008 12:09

EMI Optionholders - losers
Nichola

Useful thought on exercise of EMI options or other options, understand from HMRC that there is NO present intention to provide access to the Entrepreneurs Relief based on the date of the grant of the options (as with taper relief which accrued from date of grant). Therefore to benefit from the Entrepreneurs Relief, options would need to be exercised at least 12 months prior to a disposal; ie the shares must be held and the remaining presecribed conditions met for 12 months.

Therefore seems likely that most of the gains arising on the sales of shares derived from the exercise of options under EMI schemes are likely to be taxed at 18% simply because the majority of EMI schemes are established as exit schemes (ie the option holders can only exercise in the event of a sale - subject to the 10 year backstop date).

Any one got any useful comments to add on this as I think we will now spend a lot of time explaining to those who have set up schemes why employees with more than 5% will still get taxed at 18%.

Mike Bell.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
29th Jan 2008 09:43

Thanks for the input.
I shall put up an ex-rental commercial property example later today (I happen to be just checking a comp as it goes).

Re. the 31.3.82 cottage example, I was trying to show that the March 82 value would be set automatically, so showed what if no rebasing election was made. With hindsight not the best illustration.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Michaelr205
28th Jan 2008 17:09

Business Relief
What is the difference between an "entrepreneur" who spends 25 years building up a business which she then sells for £2m and an person in an average job who saves and shrewdly invests, maybe in shares, art, property etc over 25 years and then sells all that for £2m? Capital is capital after all.

Some people might go on about the "sacrifices" the entrepreneur has made, maybe taking reduced remuneration over the years to build up the business or maybe working longer hours but surely this is flawed reasoning. The entrepreneur is making a large "Capital Gain" on the sale of the business as a result of their employment/self-employment and so maybe this gain should be taxed as income tax?

The point (I think) I am making is that in the current and previous CGT regime's fairness has always been an irrelevance, it has been used as a tool of Economic Policy, it being believed that it would encourage the development and growth of new businesses. Other economists might equally have believed that giving more incentives to the accumulation of "capital" by non-entrepreneurs might have increased the historically low savings ratio and had a desirable effect on the economy. Has it been shown that entrepreneurs become such due to the CGT breaks?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By tim hervey
28th Jan 2008 15:42

Winner example 2 - 31 March value
Useful at-a-glance examples, thanks.
But wouldn't the holiday cottage bought in 1981 have used the 31 March 1982 value in the current regime (or a comp comparing the two and the lower gain taken, unless a rebasing election had been made)? Principle is still the same just the decrease in tax is a bit less.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Malcolm Veall
28th Jan 2008 15:25

Roy, I agree
You seem to be the first person who has said what I have been thinking.

My fairly recently acquired client, owner of a hotel, run years ago by client & spouse, then over intervening years, (ie the periods when "business assets" were variously defined), by variety of tenants, some trading as Ltd Cos & some not. Trying to put a handle on that in time to give her advice on whether to sell pre 6.4.08 - I think I might as well give up.

I had hoped that the rumoured relief might somehow have been a transition from taper relief but no, as owner of commercial premises she just loses out.


Thanks (0)
avatar
By roymacfarlane
28th Jan 2008 15:07

Losers
Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems to me that people holding commercial property let to a qualifying company of which they are not shareholders or officers will be amongst the most adversely affected due to the withdrawal of BATR. (Similarly prejudiced if property let to a qualifying trader.)

Thanks (0)