1&2 are indistinguishable. Certainly the PAC seem to be of the opinion that anything to reduce liabilities is 2 (note comments on patent boxes).
There is no means to determine what is "approved" and what is not without being psychic. And, more importantly, not psychic as to what parliament was thinking but as to what an appointed (i.e. not democratically elected) judge thinks parliament was thinking. (Frankly, I take the view that parliament thinking would have been unlikely, but...)
Britain is a common law jurisdiction, which, as I understand it, means that anything that is not proscribed is legal (cf a civil law jurisdiction - such as most of Europe - which prescribes what is legal.
My answers
In the High Wycombe area there is at least one station where Diesel is actually cheaper...
S.
And what will happen where the taxpayer goes bust?
As HMRC is no longer a preferential creditor, will they pay back any amount in excess of their entitlement?
S.
3 is clear.
1&2 are indistinguishable. Certainly the PAC seem to be of the opinion that anything to reduce liabilities is 2 (note comments on patent boxes).
There is no means to determine what is "approved" and what is not without being psychic. And, more importantly, not psychic as to what parliament was thinking but as to what an appointed (i.e. not democratically elected) judge thinks parliament was thinking. (Frankly, I take the view that parliament thinking would have been unlikely, but...)
Britain is a common law jurisdiction, which, as I understand it, means that anything that is not proscribed is legal (cf a civil law jurisdiction - such as most of Europe - which prescribes what is legal.
S
Client notes
We had one client who sent in a schedule of expenses with some annotated "stole"...
He was a clergyman, but it took a moment to work out what he meant...
S.