Simon Hackett & Anor v The Commissioners for HMRC
[2024] UKFTT 749 (TC)
Interpretation of 'prize' and 'won' in the context of the Remote Gaming Duty (RGD) legislation.
Finance Act 2014 (FA14), sections 157, 160, and Gambling Act 2005, section 6.
Statutory construction, focusing on the purpose and context of the legislation.
Various case laws cited including Aspinalls Club Ltd v HMRC [2013] EWCA Civ 1464, Fowler v HMRC [2020] UKSC 22, R (oao Shropshire and Wrekin Fire Authority and others) v Secretary of State for the Home department and the Police and Crime Commissioners for Cambridgeshire and West Mercia [2019] EWHC 1967 (Admin), Pinner v Everett [1969] 1 WLR 1266, Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd [2019] UKSC 27, Barras v Aberdeen Steam Trawling & Fishing Co Ltd [1933] AC 402, Kellogg Brown and Root Holdings (UK) Ltd v HMRC [2010] EWCA Civ 118.
The deeming provision in section 160(3) FA14 and its application to cashback payments.
Finance Act 2014, section 160(3).
Appeal allowed.
The Tribunal found that cashback payments are 'prizes won' under section 157 FA14, either directly or through the deeming provision in section 160(3). Cashback is an inherent feature of the game, a potential outcome known to the player from the outset. The cashback, as a real cost to the Appellant, is a payment directly related to the gaming, fulfilling the conditions of the RGD Profits Calculation.
[2024] UKFTT 749 (TC)
[2024] UKUT 27 (TCC)
[2024] EWCA Civ 185
[2024] UKFTT 222 (TC)
[2023] UKFTT 893 (TC)