[236L Cases in which all-employee benefit requirement treated as met]
Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 (1992 c 12) | Legislation

[236L  Cases in which all-employee benefit requirement treated as met]

[(1)     A settlement which would not otherwise meet the all-employee benefit requirement at any time is treated as meeting that requirement at that time if—

(a)     the settlement was created before 10 December 2013,

(b)     on that date—

(i)     section 86 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (trusts for the benefit of employees) applied to the settled property,

(ii)     the trustees held a significant interest in C, and

(iii)     the settlement did not meet the all-employee benefit requirement (ignoring this section), and

(c)     the trustees of the settlement do not, during the period of 12 months ending with the time in question, do any of the following—

(i)     apply any of the settled property otherwise than for the benefit of all eligible employees on the same terms,

(ii)     apply any of the settled property by creating a trust,

(iii)     apply any of the settled property by transferring property to the trustees of any settlement other than by an authorised transfer, or

(iv)     make loans to beneficiaries

Powered by Lexis+®
 

Popular documents

LEXISNEXIS

Proprietary estoppel

Proprietary estoppelThis Practice Note considers proprietary estoppel from a generic standpoint.For industry specific guidance on proprietary estoppel, see Practice Notes:•Estoppel and property law•Mortgages by estoppelProprietary estoppel—what is it?Unlike the other forms of estoppel (see Practice

LEXISNEXIS

Common law offence of false imprisonment

Common law offence of false imprisonmentThe offence of false imprisonmentFalse imprisonment is a common law offence but it is more common as a civil action in tort (see Practice Note: False imprisonment).It is triable only on indictment. It may be classified in class 2A, 2B or 3 in accordance with

LEXISNEXIS

Money laundering offences—tipping off and prejudicing an investigation

Money laundering offences—tipping off and prejudicing an investigationTipping off and prejudicing an investigationIt would undermine the benefit to the authorities if, a suspicious activity report (SAR) having been made, the alleged offender were to be made aware of the interest in their activities

LEXISNEXIS

Negligence—key elements to establish a negligence claim

Negligence—key elements to establish a negligence claimNegligence—what are the key ingredients to establish a claim in negligence?For liability in negligence to be founded, four key ingredients must be present:•duty of care•breach of that duty•damage (which is caused by the breach)•foreseeability of