Propose a change

Taxation (International and Other Provisions) Act 2010

Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.

Change 1

What to do with it
As published

259KB Meaning of “dual territory double deduction”, “excessive PE deduction” and “PE jurisdiction”

(1) This section has effect for the purposes of this Chapter. (2) A “dual territory double deduction” means an amount that can be deducted by a company both— (a) from income for the purposes of a tax charged under the law of one territory, and (b) from income for the purposes of a tax charged under the law of another territory. (3) A “PE deduction” is an amount that— (a) may (in substance) be deducted from a company's income for the purposes of calculating the company's taxable profits, for a taxable period, for the purposes of a tax that is charged on the company, under the law of a territory (“the PE jurisdiction”), by virtue of the company having a permanent establishment in that territory, and (b) is in respect of a transfer of money or money's worth, from the company in the PE jurisdiction to the company in another territory (“the parent jurisdiction”) in which it is resident for the purposes of a tax, that— (i) is actually made, or (ii) is (in substance) treated as being made for tax purposes. (3A) For the purposes of this section a “PE deduction” does not include— (a) a debit in respect of amortisation that is brought into account under section 729 or 731 of CTA 2009 (writing down the capitalised cost of an intangible fixed asset), or (b) an amount that is deductible in respect of amortisation under a provision of the law of a territory outside the United Kingdom that is equivalent to either of those sections. (4) A PE deduction is “excessive” so far as it exceeds the sum of— (a) any increases, resulting from the circumstances giving rise to the PE deduction, in the taxable profits of the company, for a permitted taxable period, for the purposes of a tax charged under the law of the parent jurisdiction, and (b) any amounts by which a loss made by the company, for a permitted taxable period, for the purposes of a tax charged under the law of the parent jurisdiction, is reduced as a result of the circumstances giving rise to the PE deduction. (4A) For the purposes of subsection (4) any increase in taxable profits or reduction of losses is to be ignored in any case where tax is charged at a nil rate under the law of the parent jurisdiction. (5) A taxable period of the company is “permitted” for the purposes of subsection (4) if— (a) the period begins before the end of 12 months after the end of the taxable period mentioned in subsection (3)(a), or (b) where the period begins after that— (i) a claim has been made for the period to be a permitted period for the purposes of subsection (4), and (ii) it is just and reasonable for the circumstances giving rise to the PE deduction to affect the profits or loss made for that period rather than an earlier period.

Your change, as a redline

259KB Meaning of “dual territory double deduction”, “excessive PE deduction” and “PE jurisdiction”

(1) This section has effect for the purposes of this Chapter. (2) A “dual territory double deduction” means an amount that can be deducted by a company both— (a) from income for the purposes of a tax charged under the law of one territory, and (b) from income for the purposes of a tax charged under the law of another territory. (3) A “PE deduction” is an amount that— (a) may (in substance) be deducted from a company's income for the purposes of calculating the company's taxable profits, for a taxable period, for the purposes of a tax that is charged on the company, under the law of a territory (“the PE jurisdiction”), by virtue of the company having a permanent establishment in that territory, and (b) is in respect of a transfer of money or money's worth, from the company in the PE jurisdiction to the company in another territory (“the parent jurisdiction”) in which it is resident for the purposes of a tax, that— (i) is actually made, or (ii) is (in substance) treated as being made for tax purposes. (3A) For the purposes of this section a “PE deduction” does not include— (a) a debit in respect of amortisation that is brought into account under section 729 or 731 of CTA 2009 (writing down the capitalised cost of an intangible fixed asset), or (b) an amount that is deductible in respect of amortisation under a provision of the law of a territory outside the United Kingdom that is equivalent to either of those sections. (4) A PE deduction is “excessive” so far as it exceeds the sum of— (a) any increases, resulting from the circumstances giving rise to the PE deduction, in the taxable profits of the company, for a permitted taxable period, for the purposes of a tax charged under the law of the parent jurisdiction, and (b) any amounts by which a loss made by the company, for a permitted taxable period, for the purposes of a tax charged under the law of the parent jurisdiction, is reduced as a result of the circumstances giving rise to the PE deduction. (4A) For the purposes of subsection (4) any increase in taxable profits or reduction of losses is to be ignored in any case where tax is charged at a nil rate under the law of the parent jurisdiction. (5) A taxable period of the company is “permitted” for the purposes of subsection (4) if— (a) the period begins before the end of 12 months after the end of the taxable period mentioned in subsection (3)(a), or (b) where the period begins after that— (i) a claim has been made for the period to be a permitted period for the purposes of subsection (4), and (ii) it is just and reasonable for the circumstances giving rise to the PE deduction to affect the profits or loss made for that period rather than an earlier period.

One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".

Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.

A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.

Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.

Sign in to file it

Think it through

Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.

Questions to start with
Think it through
Legal information from the published text, not advice for your case. Check the sources. Find a law · What the register holds