HMRC wins big in “tax on gifts” case
Bernie Ecclestone’s lawyer faces a massive tax bill following the First-tier Tribunal’s (FTT’s) ruling that sums he received as gifts were income. What made the FTT decide the payments were taxable?
-
Loan Charge settlement offers begin to land
HMRC has begun sending formal settlement offers to individuals and employers with outstanding Loan Charge liabilities, alongside detailed new guidance explaining how offers will be calculated and how long recipients have to respond. What’s the full story?
-
The hidden income tax benefit of marriage
You recently got married and a relative joked that you can save lots of money because of the tax breaks for married couples. As a newlywed are you entitled to a reduction in your income tax bill?
-
September deadline to opt out of winter fuel payment
Pensioners whose income is over £35,000 have only days left to opt out of the 2026/27 Winter Fuel Payment and avoid having it recovered through the tax system. What do you need to know?
Over a period of 14 years Bernie Ecclestone’s former wife, Slavica, made payments totalling around £37 million to Stephen Mullens, Ecclestone’s lawyer. He claimed these gifts resulted from their "personal relationship of friendship and affection" and that they were wholly outside and distinct from any business relationship. Despite hearing evidence of Mrs Ecclestone’s generosity and a document purporting to be a deed of gift relating to a payment in 2006, the FTT considered all the payments, apart from one, were actually a reward for professional services provided by Mullens.
It is possible for a payment to be a gift, and so not taxable as income, even where a business relationship exists between the payer and the recipient, but the burden of proof is high. Mullen’s case was hindered because neither Bernie Ecclestone nor his former wife gave evidence. The FTT judges said they had no hesitation in deciding that Mullens had acted fraudulently in not declaring the payments and then representing them as gifts.
The FTT also ruled that because of Mullen’s deliberate action to hide the payments HMRC was entitled to make back-assessments under the rules of discovery. These give HMRC more time (up to 20 years) in cases of tax lost because of fraud compared with that lost from carelessness.
This website uses both its own and third-party cookies to analyze our services and navigation on our website in order to improve its contents (analytical purposes: measure visits and sources of web traffic). The legal basis is the consent of the user, except in the case of basic cookies, which are essential to navigate this website.