[muhammadadil1]

Hi guys what about the link theory??? Did it work last time??

[muhammadadil1]

Please share the requirements of Question 1 as well, first part was about whether Hiruki should opt to disapply incorporation relief, the answer was Yes he should otherwise ER was not available on a later sale of shares. What were the other parts about I forgot? Lets share and discuss?

[muhammadadil1]

The first five marks on Question 2 were straight forward on ethical issues, can anyone tell me what the rest of the questions was about, I forgot and I need to discuss this with you.

[muhammadadil1]

The after tax cost of the two cars to the company was their purchase price of 7K something and related tax expense for the three years until sale that was none other than the related NIC. But wait one thing more there was writing down allowance as well for the three years at 8% being a high emission car on the purchase price I calculated. This would give you the net after tax cost to the company. Any objections friends?

[muhammadadil1]

The benefit provided to both shareholders had difference, one is caught by the employement income provisions while the other is not.
Hence for one is a taxable benefit equal to I guess it was 32% of 9100 and related NIC, for the other was equal amount of dividend income taxed accordingly.

[muhammadadil1]

BBP is available for trading companies if the company is an investment company, BPR is denied.

[muhammadadil1]

Yes you are correct, NUMA is subject to CYB rules and hence income from 1 August to 5 April 2018 would subject to tax in the tak year 2017/18

[muhammadadil1]

A degrouping charge would have arisen on the sale of the company which would have been added to the proceeds and would have qualified for substantial shareholding exemption and hence no tax consequence.

[muhammadadil1]

Many are talking about the Annual Investment Allowance, look fellows the company that joined on 1 January 2018 is related for the purposes of AIA from the following year. So there were only two related companies which could share the AIA of 200K in any way they can, both had expenditure of less than this amount on equipment so both can claim the max amount spent as AIA in the year 2018.

The other 3 companies each had their annual limit of 200k and all of them could claim all the expenditure on equipment as an AIA for the year.

Any Disagreements?

[muhammadadil1]

Hi there, I forgot most of the questions, if you start reminding me I would start sharing with you, how you were suppose to actually about every requirement.

[Author]

Posts