Consultation on extending remittance basis claim for non doms to three years
In our free article this week we look at the Government proposal to increase the minimum period for a remittance basis claim to 3 years (from the current 1 year).
Consultation on extending remittance basis claim for non doms to three years
The main benefit of being domiciled outside the UK is that one is thereby entitled to be taxed only on a territorial basis, i.e. in broad terms, the UK will seek to tax only those items which have a sufficient UK nexus. For income tax and capital gains tax purposes this translates into a basis of taxation known as the "remittance basis", which allows individuals, in broad terms, to pay tax only on income and capital gains made in the UK or brought to the UK from outside.
On 6 April 2008, a levy was introduced, requiring non-doms who had been resident in the UK for seven of the past nine tax years to pay £30,000 to access the remittance basis. Then, from 6 April 2012, non-doms who had been resident in the UK for 12 of the past 14 years were required to pay a higher charge of £50,000 for the privilege.
Following the Chancellor's announcement in the December 2015 Autumn Statement, non-doms who have been resident in the UK for 12 of the past 14 years will, from 6 April 2015, have to pay £60,000 to be taxed on the remittance basis and non-doms who have been resident for 17 of the past 20 years, will have to pay £90,000. Those who have been resident for seven of the past nine years, will still have to pay £30,000.
The introduction of a £30,000 charge initially caused non-doms to think twice about the financial benefits of claiming the remittance basis. In order to warrant a £30,000 outlay, one has, in order to make an overall saving, to have significant income and capital gains outside the UK which would thereby remain untaxed. This is an even sharper concern when one is considering the financial sense in paying a levy three times the size of that which was originally introduced.
The requirement to pay an annual levy had been mitigated by the ability, each tax year, to opt in and out of the remittance basis. If it was worth paying the charge one year, then the claim would be made. If it was not worth doing so the following year, the claim would not be made. This seemed a fair quid pro quo.
However, a more insidious announcement -- not included in the Chancellor's speech but instead found lurking in the Autumn Statement documents -- was that the Government is considering limiting this ability. The Government has now consulted on making the election to pay the remittance basis charge apply for a minimum of three years. So, if this change is introduced, one may have to commit, in year one, to a £270,000 outlay on the basis of an expected return over a three year period without a clue as to investment performance in year three (or in the latter part of year two).
This is a huge change because, at the moment, taxpayers prepare their tax returns after a tax year has ended and choose their reporting basis in light of their financial performance over that past year. It would be a rather odd requirement that taxpayers should carry out their tax reporting on the basis of imagined future performance and one hopes that, as such concerns emerge over the consultation period, the Government might re-think. The consultation has now finished and the Government is considering all the responses.
With the forthcoming election though they may well be other significant changes to the remittance basis irrespective of who wins the election. All the main parties are proposing significant changes (eg see Tax changes for non doms after the election ) and therefore there may well be further changes even if this 3 year requirement applies.
The solution
The first point to note is that it remains currently possible to claim the remittance basis without charge for the first six years in the UK.
Thereafter, the simplest response is to structure one's affairs so that one does not need to claim the remittance basis, or so that as few family members as possible need to do so. We had already noticed a growing interest in this before the recent changes and we predict that this will now grow further.
We outline some of the additional strategies available in this Practitioner Zone report:
Remittance basis claim to last for 3 years- UK tax planning options
You may also find the following recent articles of interest:
Tax changes for non doms after the election
Returning to the UK due to ill health and its impact on your domicile of choice
Special Offer: 10% Discount On All Subscriptions
Tax Question: Good morning, Could you please advise? A person sells a property in June 2024,pays the CGT as requested on the gain. Say the CGT rate changes to a higher rate in 2024/25 then may there be more tax to be paid? Thank you...keep reading
Tax Question: Good morning, Inheritance Tax. Could you please clarify a point for me? In your excellent book " How to save inheritance tax 2023/24" Page 43, it's mentioned under 4.3 PETS that "Exceptions". Any transfer that does not result in an increase in the value of the transferee's estate. On the other hand, a national newspaper answering a question from a person about paying for and joining a family holiday,states that " IHT is based on the principle of the loss to the donor ratherthan the benefit to the recipient" Thank you...keep reading
Tax Question Our company has surplus balance in our currency account. (US dollar) due to a slowdown. We get a far better return on a fixed term if the funds are placed abroad for a fixed period of one year. However The funds have to be placed in a personal name with an overseas bank. Is it possible to place the deposit in my personal name however on behalf of the company. The principal and interest will be transferred back to the company on maturity and reflect in the company accounts. The overseas bank is aware these are company funds and no tax will be charged abroad. We can make a private agreement, or even a trust deed from or solicitor or advise HMRC, which option you think is the best so they do not treat this as a loan given to the director....keep reading
Tax Question: Hi. This is a hypothetical situation where the Limited Company (Subsidiary) is incorporated in UK, having no Permanent Establishment and no clients in UK. And the Holding Company is situated in Bulgaria. In this case which country the Subsidiary Company will be considered as Tax Resident and what are taxes that the Subsidiary will be liable to pay. Also what will be tax liability of the Holding Company if it receives Dividend, Interest and Capital Gains from the subsidiary....keep reading
Tax Question: Can a UK Limited Company (a Subsidiary of a Bulgarian Holding Company) having no permanent establishment and no clients in UK be non-resident in UK for tax purposes (Explain Why). If yes, is there any kind of income on which it has to pay taxes in UK only?...keep reading