life, sold his home near London on 22 March 2006 and, together with his wife (a French citizen), moved to live
in a villa which she owns in the south of France. Peter is now demanding that the tax deducted from his director’s
fees, for the board meetings held on 18 April and 16 May 2006, be refunded, on the grounds that, as he is no
longer resident in the UK, he is no longer liable to UK income tax. All of the company’s board meetings are held
at its offices in Cambridge.
Despite Peter’s assurance that none of the other companies of which he is a director has disputed his change of
tax status, Damian is uncertain whether he should make the refunds requested. However, as Peter is a friend of
the company’s founder, Linden Limited’s managing director is urging him to do so, stating that if the tax does
have to be paid, then Linden Limited could always bear the cost.
Required:
Advise Damian whether Peter is correct in his assertion regarding his tax position and in the case that there
is a UK tax liability the implications of the managing director’s suggestion. You are not required to consider
national insurance (NIC) issues. (4 marks)
参考答案
正确答案：
(b) Peter will have been resident and ordinarily resident in the UK. When such individuals leave the UK for a purpose other than
to take up full time employment abroad, they normally continue to still be so regarded unless their absence spans a complete
tax year. But, where someone intends to live permanently abroad or to do so for a period of at least three tax years, they may
be treated as non-resident and non-ordinarily resident from the day after the date of their departure, if they can provide
evidence to HMRC of that intention. Selling a residence in the UK and setting up home abroad will normally constitute such
evidence. However to retain non-resident status the intention must actually be fulfilled, and visits to the UK must not exceed
182 days in any tax year or average more than 90 days per year over a period of four tax years. Given that Peter would appear
to have several company directorships in the UK, it is possible that he might fail to satisfy the 90 day average ‘substantial
visits’ rule.
Even if Peter is classed as non-resident, any remuneration earned in the UK will still be liable to UK income tax, and subject
to PAYE, unless it is for duties incidental to an overseas employment, which is unlikely to be the case for fees paid to a nonexecutive
director for attending board meetings. Thus, income tax should still be deducted from the fees under PAYE. Where
PAYE should have been deducted from a director’s emoluments and it has not been, but the tax is nevertheless accounted
for by the company to HMRC, then to the extent that the tax is not reimbursed by the director, he will be treated as receiving
a benefit equivalent to the amount of tax.