This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more about cookies on this website and how to delete cookies, see our privacy notice.

Payment To Settle Litigation Was Not Wholly And Exclusively For The Trade

By Mark McLaughlin, April 2016
An individual member of a limited liability partnership was not entitled to deduct a payment to settle litigation relating to a previous firm, as the payment was not incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the trade. 

The respondent was a partner in a law firm (SSD) during the tax year 2007/08. Previously, he worked for another law firm (HH), which had ceased to trade and owed money to a bank (BL) and other banks. The respondent considered that if the banks’ claims were successful, he could be made bankrupt (and would therefore have lost his position as a partner in SSD). The respondent therefore agreed to pay BL €300,000 to release him from all claims to the bank.

The respondent’s payment to BL was made in January 2008. In October 2009, he amended his tax return for 2007/08, claiming a deduction of £215,455 against his professional income from SSD. Following an enquiry into the return, HM
Subscribe to the McLaughlin’s Tax Case Library to get instant access
to the Tax Case Library.
14 day free trial , 90 day money back guarantee
Subscribe

Related or similar articles

First-tier Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to consider validity of PPN in a penalty appeal
By Mark McLaughlin, July 2020
Assessments of additional income relating to suppressed takings confirmed
By Mark McLaughlin, April 2020
Film and video production LLPs were not trading
By Mark McLaughlin, November 2019
Payment To Settle Litigation Was Not Wholly And Exclusively For The Profession Or Trade
By Mark McLaughlin, May 2018
Expenditure On Rights To Income From Films Was Capital
By Mark McLaughlin, October 2017