Print

In Centrica Overseas Holdings Limited v HMRC [2021] UKUT 0200, the Upper Tribunal allowed the cost of professional fees incurred on the disposal of a subsidiary by an investment company. The directors were acting on behalf of the company that incurred the expenditure and not for its ultimate parent when they approved the sale. The expenses were not capital in nature.

Centrica Overseas Holdings Limited (COHL) was an intermediate holding company within the Centrica Plc (Plc) group.

The Upper Tribunal (UT) allowed the appeal. COHL, and not Plc, was managing its own investment business and the FTT was wrong to conclude otherwise.

The Upper Tribunal went on to consider to what extent the different expenses were expenses of management and to what extent they were Costs of disposal of the subsidiary’s business, or expenses that were capital in nature, and therefore disallowable.

Useful guides on this topic

Management re-charges (holding companies)
A management charge made by one business to another will be subject to VAT when it is made in respect of an actual supply of goods or services.

Groups: At a glance
What qualifies as a group for tax? How do you form a group? Which definition of a group applies for different types of tax? How does group relief work?

Wholly and exclusively…toolkit 
Revenue expenditure in a trader's or company's accounts is disallowed for tax if it is not 'wholly and exclusively' incurred for the purpose of the business.

Tax adjustments to profits: Corporation Tax
What are the Tax adjustments that must be made to profits for Corporation Tax purposes?

External link

Centrica Overseas Holdings Limited v HMRC [2021] UKUT 0200


Oak ad
Are you enjoying our content? 

Thousands of accountants and advisers and their clients use www.rossmartin.co.uk as their primary TAX resource.

Register with us now to receive our unique FREE Tax Planning Tips and Advice Guide & our FREE OMB Newsletter.