Insurance premium tax (IPT)

FORTHCOMING CHANGE: The outcome of a consultation on improving the operation of IPT and making it easier for both the industry and HMRC to administer is that no legislative policy changes have been announced. However, in the outcome document, the government has confirmed that it will engage with industry to explore appropriate public access to a register of insurers registered to pay IPT, alongside a code of conduct for brokers to follow in relation to IPT. The consultation did not consider the rates of IPT or the exemptions. For more information on the consultation, see: Tax weekly highlights—12 November 2020—HMRC publishes consultation on IPT administration and unfair outcomes.

Insurance premium tax (IPT) is an indirect tax on insurance premiums.

Unless an insurance contract is exempt, IPT is charged as a percentage of the premium paid on certain types of insurance policies issued by certain types of insurers covering risks located in the UK. It is borne by the policyholder but collected and paid to HMRC by the insurer by reference to three-month-long accounting periods.

Whereas colloquially one might refer to IPT being charged by reference

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Tax News

Tax weekly highlights—21 November 2024

This week's edition of Tax weekly highlights includes: (1) the Supreme Court decision in Refinitiv concerning the interaction between the diverted profits tax and an advance pricing agreement, and (2) the Supreme Court decision in Cobalt Data Centre on the scope of the enterprise zone allowance.

UT finds FTT made errors when setting aside HMRC best judgment assessment (HMRC v Sintra Global)

Tax analysis: In Sintra Global, the Upper Tribunal (UT) set aside the decision of the First-tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) insofar as it related to a notice HMRC had issued to an individual making him liable for the payment of a civil evasion penalty charged against a company he was a director of. The UT found that the FTT had failed to follow the guidance provided by the Court of Appeal in Pegasus Birds in relation to the assessment the penalty was based on.

Supreme Court rules on the scope and limitations of the enterprise zone tax incentive (R (oao Cobalt Data Centre) v HMRC)

The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the taxpayers’ argument that the relevant expenditure fell within section 298(1) of the Capital Allowances Act 2001 (CAA 2001) and concluded that, based on the proper interpretation of that provision, the expenditure was not incurred under a contract executed prior to the conclusion of the initial ten-year period, as required. Adam Craggs, partner at RPC, discusses the implications that the judgment has on taxpayers going forward.

Consultation on expanding tax conditionality to new sectors

Environment analysis: On 30 October 2024, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) issued a consultation on ‘Tackling the hidden economy: expanding tax conditionality to new sectors’. The consultation runs to 21 January 2025. Angus Evers, partner at Shoosmiths, comments on the consultation.