Inheritance Tax, the great debate...

None of us like Inheritance Tax, even me who has carved a career out of helping people manage their exposure to it. It is one of the most unjust taxes on the statute book, which is one of the main reasons I have never had too much of a moral dilemma when it comes to helping people arrange their affairs so that they pay only as much as they need to. It was Roy Jenkins who famously said “Inheritance Tax, is broadly speaking a voluntary levy paid by those who distrust their Heirs more than they dislike the Inland Revenue.”

So, enter the news today our incumbent Prime Minister at a Q&A session with Age UK states that only the very wealthy should pay Inheritance Tax. A noble statement, but how does one define "the very wealthy", after all we have seen child benefit removed from households with one person earning over £50,000, but households with two people earning £49,999 each get to keep it. The prime minister said he would like to ease pressure on people who do not regard themselves as “in any way the mega-rich” but whose estates are subject to the tax. Again, a very nice political soundbite, but no real substance there I am afraid Mr Prime Minister.

Let us not forget that George Osborne transformed Tory fortunes at the party’s conference in 2007 – and spooked Gordon Brown into abandoning plans to call an early general election – with a proposal to raise the inheritance tax threshold to £1,000,000. This would have been doubled to £2,000,000 for couples. However, the pledge was quietly dropped after the 2010 general election in the coalition negotiations and tax is still due on estates worth more than £325,000, or £650,000 for couples. We do know that the nil rate band will not be raised before the next general election, as the Lib Dems would veto it, so where does Cameron's declaration leave us? Let us not also forget thatThe Tories ran into trouble during last month's conference unveiling their plans for tax cuts without initially explaining how they would be funded.

Well, I for one think it gives us the strongest indication yet that the Conservative Party, should they get re-elected will start to look at increasing the nil rate threshold. However, I very much doubt that we will see the dizzy heights of the £1,000,000 each mooted by Osborne in 2007. The reason for this is simple, earlier this week the Treasury declared that it's income tax take was significantly down on what it had forecast despite employment being up. The Government has already borrowed £3bn more than it had budgeted for this financial year. Inheritance Tax is one of the easiest taxes for our state to collect given the way the probate system works, as basically you cannot access the deceased assets without notifying HM Revenue & Customs of their value, it is a very simple system when compared to self-assessment for example. All of this against the backdrop of our national deficit means that we are unlikely to see any meaningful tax cuts for Middle England in the near future, although we may get a perfunctory gesture of goodwill from a new Tory Government in 2015.

Apprenticeships. The solution to the skills gap?

Yesterday I was part of an excellent open forum in our great city of Birmingham, talking with other people in the professional and commercial sectors about whether Birmingham had, and if it could continue to capitalise on the country's improving economy. As if to drive home the point of how much the city has changed over recent years it was held in the new and iconic Library of Birmingham. The library is a testament to that metamorphosis having won awards for architectural excellence, a far cry from the national stereotype of our great city. But, you ask, what on earth has this got to do with apprenticeships?

Out of our discussions yesterday came one key issue for me, and it was this that drove the debate on the other issues that were discussed too. From my own point of view, like most professions and industries Tax is facing a bit of a skills gap and with the changes to our education system one could be forgiven for thinking that this might yet get worse given the ever increasing cost of putting the next generation through further and higher education. It became clear that this was an issue across the board, largely put down to the ravages of the recent recession, but how could this be solved?

The answer it would seem (or at least to us yesterday) was that we as leaders in our respective sectors have a responsibility to look not just at how we recruit our new staff, but also how we interact with our societies and the next generation before they reach the workplace and hopefully to inspire them. Apprenticeships are a route that I believe have oft been maligned by poor understanding both by teachers, students, their families and society in general. However, in recent years we have seen the introduction of higher level apprenticeships opening routes into engineering, commerce and even my own beloved profession of Tax. Just last week I was in London celebrating the 25th Anniversary of the Association of Taxation Technicians, where we celebrated not just those who have been in the profession some time (yes, I know I don't look that old but it's amazing what you can do with photoshop!), but those new to it as well. Indeed we promoted our 25ATT25, being 25 young people who have already achieved great things in their short careers of which I would like to point out 3 had come through (or were coming through) the Tax Apprenticeship Scheme!

We left yesterday with a renewed sense of purpose about spreading this message amongst our peers, and doing what we can to involve ourselves in the promotion of alternative routes into work (there are more than just apprenticeships) not just to students and job seekers, but also to our peers who might otherwise disregard such initiatives. This blog post is my first attempt, and it won't be my last...

The Number 9 Bus...

A big part of me advising any of my clients is trying to keep them away from things that I have seen previous clients get wrong, and also some of life's more unexpected events like divorce and accident.

It is these aspects of advice that are vital to a client, especially one prone to delay in the face of a lengthy period of time before the circumstance they want to plan around is likely to hit. Over the years I seem to have developed what some friends and colleagues are starting to refer to as the "No9 Bus" doctrine. I have to thanks my friend @bddalton for the photograph, as he recently sent this to me after a meeting with a mutual client in which we had been discussing one of life's more terminal unexpected events...

A large part of the advice I give, particularly around inheritance tax and succession planning in business is (and there is no way to dress this up) death. This is a sensitive subject at best and I find very often best dealt with through use of a slightly macabre sense of humour (well at least in Britain, not sure it would work anywhere else). A common example of mine, (as no-one likes to think about death as a result of a terminal illness, or old age) is that of accident and for some reason many years ago the example I took was being knocked down by the ubiquitous "No9 Bus" as I was working in the Halesowen area at the time. This has stuck over the years and despite the humorous connotations, it does represent a very real example of life's unexpected events, and how they can affect our plans, particularly where they relate to tax.

This is another image (I am a very visual person) I use with clients, and is centered around their expectations, the reality of those expectations and how these can vary on the journey to the eventual end result. Now, I can take no credit for this image, it is one I found through social media and use with some clients during meetings, so to whoever developed this I am eternally grateful. It represents a very real illustration to a client between the difference in their perceptions once they are in full possession of all the facts that affect them and their situation.

Life is very rarely simple I am afraid, and tax even less so, so put the two together and you have a heady mix of things that can potentially go wrong. So through good, and more importantly experienced advice you can hope to iron out some of those kinks, or at least choose a better method of transport for the journey...

The 2014 Autumn Statement

The date for the Statement is announced and the Government invites views on what should be in it. The Government has announced that the 2014 Autumn Statement will be made on Wednesday 3 December. In a new move, the Government has invited views on what should be in the Autumn Statement. 

“In the interest of open and transparent policy-making, the Government welcomes original and innovative ideas, which will be considered by HM Treasury as part of the policy-making process.” 

Business, charities and members of the public can send views to the Treasury via email to autumnstatementrepresentations@hmtreasury.gsi.gov.uk – the deadline is 17 October. 

University fees and tax...

It's that time of year again when children are leaving the bosom of the family home and venturing off into the wider world for the next stage of their educational careers, and with the changes to university fees over the last few years that is becoming a more and more expensive endeavour for students and their family's. So, if I told you there was a more tax efficient way in which these costs could be met you'd be interested right?

Fortunately there is, and it's not complicated, or morally abhorrent in the eye's of HMRC either! However, unfortunately it's not something that all of us can do as the first requirement is for you hold shares in your own, or perhaps the family business. So for those of us who are employees (like me) this is a no go zone, but for many business owners (from those operating from their kitchen tables right up to those with multi-million turnovers) there is a solution, and it's all to do with shares.

The premise is fairly simple, as if you are taking additional dividend income from your company to meet the fees that university is charging your son or daughter then you have to pay tax on that. For most that will mean paying around 25% of the net dividend to the tax man, so to get £9,000 you have to extract £12,000. This means that you're actually paying tax to educate your children! So, how do we save that tax then?

Well, and we're making a large presumption here, your average student who is being supported by their family doesn't work whilst at university (by which I mean have a tax paying job), so their tax free personal allowance of £10,000 each year is being wasted. Yes, that's right over an average course £30,000 of tax free cash is being lost and you're not taking advantage of that.

Hopefully you've already guessed at where this is leading to, and yes you'd be right, but how do we make giving shares to our children from the family business safe? Well, that is possible with the use of trusts and other such vehicles to ensure that the funds/shares cannot be abused. There are also tax consequences that you'll need to be aware of, but provided your child isn't working you should be able to pay each year's university fees TAX FREE!

If this is of interest to you, and you want to learn more contact me at Haines Watts Chartered Accountants (the web-link is on the bar above).

Tax is optional, no really it is..........

Okay, so the title of this blog post might be a little misleading, but there are certain taxes and events upon which the payment of tax is completely optional. Primarily this applies to both Inheritance Tax (IHT) and Capital Gains Tax (CGT). Still I hear dissenters among my audience, well listen up as even a former Chancellor of the Exchequer held this same opinion...

Roy Jenkins famously said “Inheritance Tax, is broadly speaking a voluntary levy paid by those who distrust their Heirs more than they dislike the Inland Revenue.”

As we all know IHT is a tax levied on our death, and CGT a tax levied when we sell something for a profit. So how can we prevent payment of these taxes when we clearly have no (or at least little) control of our own personal demise, or an event that may cause us to sell an asset?

Well, as a tax adviser I like to think I'm pretty good, but I do lack any genuine messiah likeproperties so I can't offer the option of raising you from the dead like Lazarus! The one divinity that I would like to imbue however, in our current political climate where the words "tax" and "moral" are being bandied about, is that the word "avoid" simply means to "keep from happening" or "to move clear of" something.

Right, so how do we do this? There are a number of simple answers insofar as IHT is concerned. The first being to have given away (as gifts) sufficient of your estate to leave you under the IHT threshold (£325,000 or £650,000 of a married couple/civil partners). However, all gifts must have been made over seven years prior to death. Another is to hold property or investments that are exempt, such as a trading business or a farm. Finally there are a broad swathe of options out there from financial products and tax structured schemes that can remove the IHT burden. So, the reason that it is optional is that there are a plethora of things that can be done to avoid it.

Well, that's covered IHT (which I'm guessing you knew something about), so how do I avoid paying CGT you say? Well, the simple answer is not to sell something unless you absolutely have to. Another is that each of you currently have an exemption for CGT each year of £11,000, yes that's right you can make £11,000 completely tax free each and every year! Most of us aren't aware of this, and subsequently don't use it, so if over ten years for example you had used this exemption each year you could have mitigated £110,000 worth of gain in a share portfolio for example without paying any tax whatsoever!

However, if we are doing IHT planning above, the gifting of an asset, or its sale to convert into cash which you then gift is unavoidable. CGT would then arise and a tax bill would land on your doormat, right? So, have I come unstuck here, well no I haven't. Thanks to the use of a trust and a little known piece of legislation (even amongst those in the financial profession) it can be arranged that the gain and subsequent tax arising on a gift can be deferred until such time as the recipient sells the asset that has been gifted. This can be especially beneficial where the gift is of real estate or share portfolios.

Obviously this blog does not constitute tax advice, and is only intended to demonstrate that there are things you can do rather than pay tax where IHT and CGT are concerned.  All (well in terms of what I advise on at least) are perfectly legal and within the bounds of existing legislation, rather than being overly clever and attempting to exploit a loophole that Government later close. It is this that I hold as the primary reason for still being a successful tax adviser for almost 15 years now, and why I continue to help my clients arrange their tax affairs in a safe way. Hopefully I can help you too...

I've become a Fellow of the Association of Taxation Technicians! So, what's that about?

Anyone who's connected to me through LinkedIn or Twitter will have seen that I've been posting photos of my shiny new certificate and announcing to the world in general that I've become a Fellow of the Association of Taxation Technicians, as well as my recent appointment to Council of the same professional body. So, I can now put something new on my CV and business cards, but what does it actually mean?

Well, I'm better placed than most to explain this as I helped develop the Fellowship route for the ATT two or three years ago. The Association of Taxation Technicians is a professional body that provides a testing route to qualification for anyone wanting to enter the tax profession, some of you may also have heard of it's 'big brother' the Chartered Institute of Taxation. The ATT has been in place now for over 25 years (http://bit.ly/1u6dAQe) and as a body it was decided that something needed to be done to recognise those members who have been qualified to provide tax services over a long period of time. Hence the Fellowship scheme was born, and indicates not only a period of service to the tax profession of over ten years, but also the contribution and progression those members have made within the sphere of tax. So, it's not just a time served basis like some bodies, there is a little more to it. My personal story many of you know, but a short summary is about a guy who left Wolverhampton University, joined PwC completing corporate tax returns and after a few twists and turns ended up heading up the tax department of one of the fastest growing law firms in the country (www.hcbsolicitors.com) and helping run my professional body and have influence over tax policy. It's all been a lot of fun (and hard work) in the short space of fourteen years, so to get that recognition from ATT means a lot to someone like me.

So, that's what the Fellowship is, but what does it mean to me? Well, there's the shiny new certificate for a start which looks quite nice on the office wall. In all seriousness though, it does help in terms of marketing my service to potential partners, clients (and employers) as someone who is at the top of their game as there are, (last time I checked) less than 200 Fellows in the UK out of a membership of several thousand advisers. It is also a sense of pride at being able to shout out about my professional body, of which I am very proud, and help promote the qualification to people who are aspiring to enter the tax profession from perhaps a more mainstream background in accountancy or law, or like I did straight from university and into the exciting world of tax.

So, if you're looking for someone to help you with your taxes, or someone looking to enter the tax profession and wanting to understand the opportunities available to you I hope this article has helped explain what I've been shouting from the rooftops for the last couple of days, and for those of you who haven't seen it...

Take That! - Tax Avoidance and the Media

Well, according to the media another celebrity has been caught with their fingers in the Exchequer's till and should be punished accordingly.

There are time's when the press's response to such news relating to tax is a little more akin to Granville at Arkwright's till! One would, and should, expect better of our free, objective and independent news outlets in the UK, but alas it is not so.

Yes, I am of course talking about Mr Barlow and his chums (who indeed I myself have poked a little fun at on twitter).  

However, what the media seem to have lost sight of here is that Gary et al have not actually done anything wrong.

Yes they have invested (presumably upon advice) into a product that provided tax advantages, and believe it or not people do this every day, indeed certain forms of which the Government actually encourage you to invest in, such as the Enterprise Investment Scheme.

There have always been people who look to minimise their clients' tax bills, and some of those will go a little too far in creating schemes that really do push the envelope of what is acceptable to the world in general. However, it is rarely the investor who is at fault, and let us not forget here that this scheme, as with Chris Moyles and Jimmy Carr's recent outings, isn't actually illegal.  The courts have simply adjudged that the scheme does not work, and so the tax relieved under the scheme now has to be paid back to HM Revenue & Customs. Also, let us not forget that this was not a scheme set up purely for the Take That stars, many, many people would have invested in this (for various reasons of course). 

However, it is unfortunate that the facts get in the way of "selling" the news, and make for nowhere near as sensational a story. The real tragedy though is that stories like this put people off the idea of considering their own tax affairs as all forms of tax planning begin to be considered "immoral", and one would have to question whether this is indeed the central motive with such coverage.

Employers: Tax and Termination Payments

"What are termination payments?" I hear you ask.

Well termination payments are severance payments made to employees on termination of their employment. They can arise in a number of ways, for example:

• In the event of their dismissal (or constructive dismissal);
• Redundancy;
• Retirement;
• Departure because of medical reasons.

Quite often under the circumstances neither the employer or the employee pay sufficient attention to the tax implications of termination payments, as the focus is normally on securing the best possible terms for settlement.  This means that both parties often 'miss a trick' as the correct tax structuring can result in a higher "net" payment for the employee, and vice-versa a lower "gross" payment for the employer.

"Why do employers need to know about the taxation of termination payments?" you ask "Surely any tax due is the liability of the employee."

Well, termination payments must be taxed correctly by the employer as HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) can recover unpaid tax, national insurance contributions (NICs), penalties and interest from the employer! Consider both income tax and National Insurance Contributions (NICs). In addition to employee's NICs, employers have to pay employer's NICs on payments that constitute earnings from employment. This can significantly add to the costs of settlement.

If an employer does not deduct tax or NICs from a termination payment, it is, generally, liable for the tax and NICs not deducted, plus interest and penalties.

Both the employer and former employee will want the termination payment to be legitimately structured to reduce the tax liability and will also want certainty that no future tax liability will arise. How much of a termination payment is taxable will depend on the nature and amount of the payment. Accordingly, it is important to ascertain why the payment is being made and all the background facts.

Payments usually fall into a number of defined categories, including:

• Sums that the employee was contractually entitled to or which relate to past or future service. These are generally taxable in;
• Consideration for entering into restrictive covenants. This is taxable in full also;
• Payments where termination results from a disability or from a discrimination claim not connected to the termination. These are tax-free without limit;
• Share options and share awards. Employees may be entitled to exercise share options and receive share awards either before or at some point after termination;
• Employer contributions to registered pension schemes. These may be made tax free subject to the annual allowance and lifetime allowance limits.

NICs are generally payable for all termination payments that the employee is entitled to under the employment contract. HMRC may argue that NICs are payable where there is an established practice of making termination payments, even where there is no express contractual right.

There are also certain tax-free benefits can be provided to employees upon termination, and provided that payment is made directly to the provider of the service, the following services can be made available to the employee without attracting tax:

• Legal fees in connection with the settlement agreement;
• Outplacement counselling;
• Re-training.

The taxation of termination payments is a complex topic and this blog post is only a brief overview. For more information please contact me at HCB Solicitors Ltd to discuss your personal circumstances.

TOP Client Tax Problems

This post won't be what you might expect at first glance, given the title that is. As some of you will know, I volunteer for the tax charity Tax Help for Older People, or TOP as it's affectionately known.

TOP is a charity providing free, independent and expert help and advice for older people on lower incomes who cannot afford to pay for professional tax advice. With over 450 volunteers and a national call centre, it doesn't matter where you live. They provide a caring and friendly help and advice service on personal tax issues through their own expert advisers that is jargon-free, independent, confidential and individual to your needs. More details of the charity, and what they do can be found here www.taxvol.org.uk

There are two main issues that I come across time and time again when I am volunteering my services for TOP clients and both relate to tax coding issues.

Married Couples Allowance (MCA) is an amount that is taken off your tax bill - so it only applies if you pay tax. If you don't pay tax, or if your tax bill isn't high enough to use up all of your MCA, you can transfer any unused allowance to your spouse or civil partner if they pay tax.If you are married and living together and at least one spouse was born before 6 April 1935, the husband can claim MCA. HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) reduces your tax bill by 10 per cent of the MCA to which you're entitled.

The problem here arises where the spouse of the person claiming MCA passes away, and either their state pension alone, or with other personal pensions exceeds the Personal Allowance for income tax (currently £10,660 for those qualifying for MCA).  In most circumstances HMRC will update their records correctly and remove the MCA from the surviving spouses tax code in the following year, but I have seen a number of cases where this is not done.  The result is that the surviving spouse continues to benefit from MCA, and so doesn't pay the correct income tax.  Now, although this is a HMRC error, they will still ask you to pay the tax due as it is your responsibility to challenge anything that may be wrong.  So, if your spouse (or civil partner) has recently passed away and you were in receipt of MCA, get it checked out!

The second problem, which is far more common, usually arises in the year in which you start to receive your state pension.  Now this can occur as a result of a number of issues, mainly centered around ceasing (or in some cases continuing) employment, or drawing a personal pension alongside the state one.  Again, this is an issue caused by errors in tax coding. Unfortunately, a lot of people are oblivious to the fact that state pension is actually taxable. However, this will never affect most people, as their income (including state pension) will be below the personal allowance in retirement.  Where people can get caught out is upon the receipt of an enhanced widow's pension following the death of a spouse, or upon state retirement age when their tax status changes. The message here is, if something has affected your state pension, either by drawing it, or an increase related to the death of your partner, get someone to look at your coding for you.

Both of these problems are easily remedied (usually over the phone these days), so don't worry about them, but do take action.