Tax
Wealth Industry Hammers UK Capital Gains Tax Proposals

Proposals to change the UK's capital gains tax system will, private client advisors and academics claim, widen the tax net considerably, hitting entrepreneurs and inheritors, among others. It shows how measures to raise revenues for governments hit by the COVID-19 crisis are going to be major political battleground in coming years.
Earlier this week – as
reported here – the UK’s Office
for Tax Simplification proposed changes to the capital gains
tax regime. CGT could rise to align with income tax and hence
draw thousands more people into the tax net. As bills for
COVID-19 and the lockdowns roll in, we can expect governments to
try and increase revenues, even under the banner of “tax
simplification.”
Against that, governments know that raising tax rates when they
are trying to encourage economic growth after a pandemic might
seem perverse.
Here are comments about the CGT proposals from wealth managers,
lawyers and other advisors.
UHY Hacker
Young, the national accountancy group, said the OTS has
suggested these changes:
Reducing the annual tax-free amount for CGT to as little as
£1,000; making employee shares granted through share schemes
subject to higher levels of CGT – and therefore less attractive;
double-taxing heirs (both CGT and IHT) on some inherited assets
like second homes; potentially letting individuals write off
risky investment losses against their income tax bills – even
creating the opportunity for HNW individuals to pay no income tax
if they have lost money on speculative trades; and making capital
held in a company by entrepreneurs to fund their retirement
subject to CGT.
“Today’s OTS proposals would essentially upend much of the tax
system. Considering the amount of disruption, it’s hard to see
how this would create a more user-friendly CGT system,” Graham
Boar, Partner at UHY Hacker Young, said. “The proposals seem
designed to increase tax revenue and add complexity rather than
simplify CGT. They would also create some huge winners and
losers. We think the OTS proposals for changes to how employee
share schemes are taxed are a negative. This is a vital relief
that plays a big role in helping businesses retain their best
staff. Along with the suggestion of making entrepreneurs pay CGT
on capital saved in their business for retirement, these
proposals could easily be seen as an attack on business.
Institute
of Economic Affairs senior academic fellow, Professor Philip
Booth said: "It is a fundamental error and misunderstanding of
the principles of taxation to suggest that the rates of capital
gains tax and income tax should be aligned. Capital gains tax is
often a 'double tax.' For example, when share prices increase
because investors anticipate higher future profits, capital gains
tax is charged when the asset is sold and then when higher
profits are themselves taxed. The same happens when companies
retain profits.” (The IEA is a free market think tank.)
"Instead, the Treasury could look hard at the OTS's second option
- ensuring that income and profits are not disguised as capital
gains and thus taxed at lower rates. It should also look at those
economic activities which manage to fall outside the tax system
altogether. "Capital gains tax is a highly damaging tax; raising
rates would be a serious mistake and create more economic
damage,” Booth said.
Katharine Arthur, head of private client at accountancy firm
haysmacintyre:
“The Office for Tax Simplification’s (OTS) proposed changes to
CGT would involve a significant re-write of the existing
legislation. Bringing the current rate in line with income tax
rates could see business owners among those most affected by the
proposed changes, with the CGT rate potentially doubling, or in
some instances, quadrupling, on the sale of a business.”
“What’s more, the proposed removal of CGT uplift upon death could
see those who inherit second homes (or other assets) facing an
increasingly hefty gains tax bill should they sell the property –
perhaps a step from the OTS to encourage people to gift assets
earlier on in life, rather than hang onto them. While there is no
guarantee that the government would follow all or any of the OTS’
recommendations, it may be that given the strain the economy is
under, these steps could be deemed necessary. Like any tax, CGT
has evolved over the years, and it is important that it is as
simple and fair as possible. It will be interesting to see what
the second report of the OTS review will bring in due
course.”
Law firm Boodle
Hatfield said that the proposals on assets being inherited
could also lead to a large tax charge being imposed where no IHT
is currently due and to both CGT and IHT being imposed in some
cases. It said if a person inherited a home that was purchased by
their parents for £250,000 and had subsequently increased in
value to £1 million, the heir could be taxed on the entire
£750,000 gain if they sold the home. It said the OTS report does
not clarify how the proposals would interact with principle
private residence relief.
“These proposals could be terrible for anyone inheriting a
high-value asset like a home from their parents. The CGT bills
could be enormous for many of them. Under the proposals
entrepreneurs would also see their tax liabilities increase
dramatically. The Chancellor should think long and hard about the
effects on ordinary people before adopting these proposals,” Kyra
Motley, partner at Boodle Hatfield, said.