Large Brexit/Remain campaign donation IHT charges

Why is this obscure IHT law?

Didn't find your answer?

This seems pretty basic & uncontrovertial IHT law to  me, as opposed to what is said in the link below and they will be due an upfront 20% lifetime IHT charge presumably (on the excess gift over £325k or £331k possibly). If married they could have easily given (with their wife) up to £662k without IHT. Any decent accountant could have told them that and they should perhaps complain to their accountant rather than HMRC who are just doing their job properly here. 

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-daily-telegraph/20171223/281509341552241

 

Replies (10)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By Justin Bryant
23rd Dec 2017 14:46

Of course, the IHT lifetime charge here is likely to be grossed up per the link below (so the IHT rate is effectively 25% on the cash gift):

https://brandft.co.uk/top-tip-what-happens-if-the-donor-pays-the-iht-on-...

Again, this is very basic IHT stuff that gets taught in your first few IHT college lessons.

Thanks (0)
RLI
By lionofludesch
23rd Dec 2017 09:57

Maybe the wife didn't want to vote the same way.

Thanks (0)
By Ruddles
23rd Dec 2017 10:31

“The demands will disproportionately hit those donors that voted Leave”

Quite right, too.

Thanks (2)
Replying to Ruddles:
avatar
By andy.partridge
23rd Dec 2017 11:34

Stockholm syndrome

Thanks (0)
avatar
By kaff
23rd Dec 2017 14:50

What a marvellously rabid article, with so many quotes from people which suggest they don't know what they're talking about. How on earth can the application by the country's tax authority of a piece of tax law which Parliament has enacted into existence, possibly be considered "undemocratic" (as member of said Parliament Jacob Rees-Mogg is alleged to have claimed)?

Thanks (2)
avatar
By Justin Bryant
23rd Dec 2017 14:59

"The three Brexit-backing businessmen allegedly targeted by HMRC have said the taxman is acting undemocratically and the Chancellor, Philip Hammond, could come under pressure to intervene."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5208069/Brexit-backing-tycoons-f...

I think the comments by the Daily Mail readers in the above link are (refreshingly) quite sensible compared to the above comment.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Justin Bryant
07th Nov 2018 11:39

Predictably the taxpayer lost his appeal re a similar donation. See:

http://financeandtax.decisions.tribunals.gov.uk//judgmentfiles/j10730/TC...

How ironic is it that he argued EU (supremacy) law as a defence!

Thanks (1)
Replying to Justin Bryant:
avatar
By leeanthonyblackshaw
08th Nov 2018 11:47

Appealing the gift to UKIP tax treatment seemed hopeless, even if the grounds are amusingly ironic.

For the later donations to the referendum campaign, I wonder if they’ll try arguing s10 IHTA (with s268), on the basis that the intention was effectively spending on leaflets and adverts?

Thanks (0)
By Duggimon
07th Nov 2018 12:47

"It's undemocratic" say the people trying to ensure the side with the most money wins.

Campaign donations are undemocratic and should all be taxed under IHT, companies should be taxed on them and everyone being taxed should be taxed at a higher rate, IMO.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Justin Bryant
07th Oct 2021 11:48

Entirely unsurprisingly, the taxpayer has lost his appeal to CoA (I'm not aware of any successful HRA 1998 challenge re UK (non social security) taxes due to the wide margin allowed to countries to tax as they wish): https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2021/1439.html

Interesting and ironic also that his Brexit mate D Raab wants to severely curtail such HRA 1998 challenges.

Thanks (0)