Supreme Court finds LLP asset managers are not influencers
The Supreme Court has ruled that portfolio managers at a hedge fund did not have significant influence over the affairs of a limited liability partnership (LLP) and as such fell squarely within the salaried members rules. How does this decision impact LLPs across the board?
The salaried members rules were introduced to ensure only LLP members that take genuine risks associated with self-employment can benefit from lower NI rates. This means that being promoted to or admitted as a partner is not enough to get out of paying employers' and employees' NI, if three conditions are met. Two of the conditions are concerned with financial risk and the third, which is the focus of this case, is that the member does not have significant influence over the LLP. It is necessary to "fail" at least one condition to be regarded as self-employed for tax purposes, i.e. the member must show that they do have significant influence over the LLP to fail Condition B.
Condition B is not the most relied upon condition out of the three options, but it is the crux of the case in HMRC v BlueCrest Capital Management UK LLP, with £197m in PAYE and NI at stake. BlueCrest, having relied upon HMRC guidance, argued for a wide interpretation of the term "significant influence". Its portfolio managers managed over $100m each, which had a significant impact on the performance of the LLP. The First-tier and Upper Tribunals agreed with BlueCrest's approach, but the appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and agreed with the Court of Appeal that significant influence must be over the affairs of the LLP as a whole. Day-to-day management of part of the business, even critical elements of it, is not sufficient. Furthermore, influence should arise from the mutual legally enforceable rights and duties of the members conferred by the LLP agreement.
Members of LLPs relying on Condition B will need to review whether they have significant influence over the affairs of the LLP as a whole in light of this decision. Being responsible for large budgets or recognised as a key decision maker to the outside world is not enough and significant influence must arise from the mutual rights and duties of members and the LLP.
Related Topics
-
Why is HMRC checking PVA more often?
Your business imports goods and accounts for VAT by applying postponed VAT accounting (PVA) on its returns. HMRC is scrutinising returns and issuing large assessments in some cases. What can you do to reduce the risk of getting it wrong?
-
HMRC text or scam? Check before you act
HMRC is contacting some taxpayers by text this week about overdue Self Assessment liabilities and is also sending updates about VAT registration applications. At the same time, it has expanded its guidance on spotting fake HMRC messages on social media. How can you tell whether a message is genuine?
-
Received a P800? Check how HMRC has used your allowances
Some HMRC P800 tax calculations can produce too much tax where a taxpayer has several different types of income and allowances are not allocated in the most favourable way. People with employment or pension income alongside savings, dividends or other income are particularly at risk here. Could HMRC be charging you too much?
This website uses both its own and third-party cookies to analyze our services and navigation on our website in order to improve its contents (analytical purposes: measure visits and sources of web traffic). The legal basis is the consent of the user, except in the case of basic cookies, which are essential to navigate this website.