My client, an individual, is a shareholder in a company(alpha). The other shareholder is a company which is a subsidiary of a multi international company, I will call this the parent company, Beta.
The company is currently trading and has been trading for a long time.
The shareholding are: 45 B shares for my client, Trevor, the other shareholder, company Beta, has 55 A shares. Both A and B shares have the same rights, voting etc.
My client wants to retire and sell the shares to the other shareholder, company Beta ( he had the shares for a long time and has been a diretor, for over 10 years).
When the sale is complete, the company(Alpha) will cease trading and close. The parent company(Beta) does not wish to keep the company without Trevor,so will stop trading and close imediately after they purchase the shares from Trevor. Beta will employ someone directly to do the job, selling the products in the UK rather than operationg via this company Alpha. Alpha company was set up to sell the products of the parent company, Beta. The structure was as above with the shareholdings 45 for Trevor and 55 for parent company Beta.
On the face of it, it appers that when Trevor sells the shares to the corporate shareholder, Beta, the consideration will qualify as capital gain and ER can be claimed.
Client does not wish to go through MVL.
Are there any implications if the company will then cease to trade?
Is the company a personal company even if the other shareholder is a corporate shareholder, a company listed on the stock exchange?
Any other points to consider?
Thank you very much for any advice.
Replies (17)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
How does the amount being paid for the shares compare with the market value of those shares?
If retained earnings have been "artificially" inflated by a reduction in dividends, then TiS is a potential issue. Pretty remote though.
My MV point was about ERS, but it sounds like that's an irrelevance. As is what happens to the company following the transaction (finally to get round to your question! :))
I don't see any pitfalls. In theory, HMRC could try and apply either the TAAR or GAAR but provided your client can demonstrate - as clearly seems to be the case here - that there is no tax avoidance motive, all should be fine. The listed status of the other shareholder is of no relevance.
Edited - subject to the market value point referred to above
I suspect that it's because a straightforward sale of shares from one party to another, who are known to each other, would undoubtedly be the cheaper option.
And (this is a guess) because there isn't much in the company to take out; it's not unreasonable for a supplier to be happy for there to be an element of "thank you" in the settlement - you just need to take some care with the tax in that case.
Is "retained earnings" your way of saying "cash"?
HMRC could challenge ER. I doubt they'd challenge capital treatment.
I don't think ER will be challenged. Subject to what you haven't told us, I don't think any of this will be challenged. But you posted looking for issues; I have been trying to oblige.