1st October 2024
Posted in Articles by Andrew Marr
Before March 1998, ‘bed and breakfasting’ of shares was a generally accepted piece of tax planning. This would work by an investor selling shares to realise a gain and then buying them back immediately on the market. “Why did they want to make a gain?” I hear you asking. This was usually done to crystalise a gain which was equivalent to the capital gains tax annual exemption which would otherwise have been lost. From March 1998, new rules were introduced which made this approach more difficult.
March 1998 ’30-day rule’
From March 1998, this kind of planning was somewhat scuppered by a rule that said that any acquisitions of the same shares within 30 days of a disposal would be matched with the disposal proceeds. Therefore, on the basis that acquisition costs were generally equivalent to the disposal proceeds, no gain (and no ability to use the annual exemption) arose. However, these rules did not prevent what came to be known as ‘bed and spousing’ whereby one spouse would dispose of the shares and then the other spouse would immediately acquire the shares.
The 30-day rule and anticipated rate rises
There is much speculation about the Government announcing an increase in capital gains tax rates in the 30 October Budget. Although a rate increase seems likely, nobody (except perhaps the Chancellor) knows what the quantum of any increase would be, or when it would apply from. Although a rate change could apply from the day of the Budget, it would be no surprise if any change kicked in from 6 April 2025.
This has all led me to consider whether an investor holding listed shares could use the 30-day rule as ‘a hedge’.
Example
Ray holds £1m of shares in Tesla which he paid £0.5m for some time ago. Although he has no real inclination to sell, he would rather pay tax at 20% on a gain than risk taking his inherent £0.5m gain into a 40% tax regime (or higher). Ray considers the following strategy.
This seems to provide Ray and Judith with flexibility to trigger a tax charge at lower rates if it suits them to do so.
Forbes Dawson view
In the right circumstances, Ray and Judith’s strategy could be a good one, although there are possible costs, the main ones being as follows:
Ray may well feel that the benefits of this planning outweigh the risks, particularly if there is a chance of him avoiding a 20% tax hike!
You can use this form to request us to give you a call or if you prefer just leave us a message. Please be sure to leave us a contact number or email address for you and we will get back to you as soon as we can.