bulletRELATED ARTICLES

 

bulletEDITOR'S PICKS

 

The offshore adviser's A to Z

From Analysis May 21 2012 @ 15:38

In the first of a two-part series, Standard Life International’s Julie Hutchison, takes us...
view article

Baker Tilly: ‘HMRC guidance cannot be relied upon’

From Tax & Regulation May 18 2012 @ 11:51

Accounting and tax specialist Baker Tilly’s Sue Moore has called into question whether guidance...
view article


bulletRDR beneficiaries

 

Who will reap the greatest financial gains from RDR?



Simon Danaher

STEP: Guernsey ‘principal target’ of new QROPS legislation

From Retirement Dec 20 2011 BY: Simon Danaher , Online News Editor , International Adviser

Add to My News Comments (2)

Print

Add to My News


The STEP Journal, the official magazine for the Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners, has said Guernsey is the “principal target” of recent QROPS legislation targeting tax avoidance.

Earlier this month as part of the UK Government’s Autumn Statement, HM Revenue & Customs published draft legislation aimed at preventing abuse of QROPS.

In a statement released at the time, HMRC said: “The Government has found that QROPS are being marketed extensively as a way of paying amounts or enabling the payment of amounts that are not allowed under UK rules (in particular 100% lump sums) once the UK tax rules no longer apply.

“This is contrary to the policy rationale for allowing transfers of UK tax-relieved pension savings to be made free of UK tax to QROPS.”

There is no suggestion by either HMRC or STEP that the practice of taking 100% lump sum payments from a pension is prevalent in Guernsey, rather New Zealand is the targeted jurisdiction in this respect. However, STEP points out that a rule which requires pensioners who are not resident in the same jurisdiction as their QROPS to be taxed at the same rate as residents of that jurisdiction, seems to be aimed “squarely at Guernsey”.

STEP said: “This clause appears to be aimed squarely at Guernsey, and to some extent the Isle of Man, whose financial services industries market QROPS products to non-residents on the basis that their pension payments are made free of tax.”

STEP added that the new Finance Bill means these jurisdictions will either have to tax QROPS pension payments to non-residents, or stop taxing their own residents' pensions, with the only exception being if the pension recipient is living in a jurisdiction with a double taxation treaty with the QROPS provider's jurisdiction.

However, STEP also points out that, while the official consultation period on the proposed legislation closes on 31 January 2012, Guernsey has until 6 April to “persuade the UK government not to impose the new legislation”.
 

Add to My News Comments (2)

Add to My News Print

Add to My News

add to twitter

add to linkedin



COMMENTS


Have your say

Have your say!

Please sign in or register here to leave a comment. Registration is free and only takes a few moments.

Clive Davison

Opinion Former

Posted by Clive Davison
on Dec 20 2011 @ 15:17


Ironic that Guernsey, which has always abided by HMRC's rules on maximum benefits, should be targetted in this way, while New Zealand (which promoted 100% tax free lump sum commutations) will remain QROPS compliant under the proposed new legislation.


Stephen Ward

Opinion Former

Posted by Stephen Ward
on Dec 20 2011 @ 15:17


Interesting view from STEP.

However I suspect that the catalyst for the uniformity of benefit taxation provison was not Guernsey but the Isle of Man.

The introduction of "Section 50C" ( an amendment to 1970 legislation) was greeted by a lengthy HMRC review. The legislation reviewed ran to an entire page.

A key result of Section 50C was to enable IOM to compete with Guernsey by exempting non IOM residents from IOM tax on pension income from IOM QROPS.

HMRC may have taken umbridge at legislation introduced ( in part at least) to overcome the tax disadvantage that earlier IOM schemes approved under the 1989 legislation suffered from - 18% (later 20%) tax deducted from income benefits.

It is apparent that HMRC expected transfers to take place to QROPS in the members country of residence rather than around the globe generally, although it is not the fault of the QROPS market that HMRC were wide of the mark with this expectation.

New "condition 4" seems to be an attempt to replicate the HMRC expectation so that the non resident of the QROPS jurisdiction is taxed in the same way as a resident.

Quite why this should be of any concern as it relates to non UK taxpayers is a debate for another day. On this occasion however I think it is right to defend the honour of Guernsey as a jurisdiction, something which I am not always inclined to do.




Follow us on Twitter

FOLLOW US ON TWITTER
Get the latest news

Join us on Linked In

SHARE ON LINKED IN
Inform your colleagues

Switch to our mobile site

SWITCH TO MOBILE SITE
News on the go

Back tot he top of the page

BACK TO TOP OF PAGE
Just click here...