Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

Kwik-Fit Group Limited & Ors v The Commissioners for HMRC

3 May 2024
[2024] EWCA Civ 434
Court of Appeal
Kwik-Fit shuffled its debts to use up old tax losses, saving money. The taxman said this was a tax dodge. The court agreed, because Kwik-Fit's main goal was tax avoidance, even though the interest rates were fair.

Key Facts

  • Kwik-Fit group companies reorganized intra-group debt in 2013 to utilize Speedy 1's £48m non-trading loan relationship deficits.
  • Interest rates on debts owed to Speedy 1 were increased to LIBOR + 5%.
  • HMRC disallowed tax relief on interest, arguing the reorganisation engaged the unallowable purpose rule in s.441 Corporation Tax Act 2009.
  • The FTT found an unallowable purpose but allowed partial deduction of interest on pre-existing loans.
  • The UT upheld the FTT's decision.
  • The Appellants appealed to the Court of Appeal.

Legal Principles

Unallowable purpose rule in s.441 CTA 2009: Loan relationships debits are disallowed if attributable to a purpose not amongst the company's business or commercial purposes. A tax avoidance purpose is unallowable if it is the main or one of the main purposes.

Corporation Tax Act 2009, sections 441 and 442

Tax advantage (s.1139 CTA 2010): Includes relief from, repayment of, or avoidance/reduction of tax.

Corporation Tax Act 2010, section 1139

Transfer pricing rules (Part 4 TIOPA): Tax calculations should be based on arm's length provisions. If actual provision confers a potential tax advantage, profits/losses are recalculated as if arm's length provision was used.

Taxation (International and Other Provisions) Act 2010, sections 147, 148, 152, 155, 174

Interaction between transfer pricing and loan relationships: Amounts imputed under transfer pricing rules are treated the same as actual profits, losses, or interest under Part 5 CTA 2009.

Corporation Tax Act 2009, section 446

Determining unallowable purpose: Focuses on the company's subjective purposes; considers the intentions of relevant decision-makers (typically the board). Effects, even if inevitable, are not necessarily purposes; however, some consequences are so inextricably involved they must be a purpose.

BlackRock Holdco 5, LLC v HMRC [2024] EWCA Civ 330 and Travel Document Service v HMRC [2018] EWCA Civ 549

Tax advantage in Sema: A better position vis-à-vis the Revenue, covering situations where liability is reduced or a payment is due from the Revenue.

IRC v Sema Group Pension Scheme Trustees [2002] EWCA Civ 1857

Just and reasonable apportionment (s.441(3) CTA 2009): Objective exercise based on relevant purposes; fact-specific.

BlackRock Holdco 5, LLC v HMRC [2024] EWCA Civ 330

Outcomes

Appeal dismissed.

The Court of Appeal found the FTT correctly applied the unallowable purpose rule. The Appellants' purpose in participating in the debt reorganization was to secure a tax advantage by generating interest deductions offset by Speedy 1's existing losses, effectively creating 'net' deductions and reducing the overall group tax liability. The transfer pricing rules were not relevant as they were not considered in the decision-making process. The FTT's apportionment was also correct.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.