104 / 406
GAZETTE
APRIL 1985
Accordingly, it would appear that the definition of
"business" is a wide one for the purposes of the relief, and
whether or not a particular activity will be accepted as
being a business will depend on the particular
circumstances of each case.
B. 'Carrying On or Assisting in Carrying On'
Paragraph 9 makes a clear distinction between
"carrying on" and "assisting in carrying on" a business. It
would appear that the use of the former term does not
mean that the nephew must take over the business
completely, in that the uncle has to retain ultimate
control. In
A.E.
-v-
Revenue Commissioners,
Judge
Sheridan emphasised that Mrs. A.E. was ". . . under the
ultimate authority" of her uncle, and stated that
21
:
"the disponer must remain the dominant person in
whose hands the ultimate decision as to the
management of the land must be made".
In that case, the uncle received all of the letting moneys,
and any farming profits.
Judge Sheridan also remarked that Mrs. A.E. could
take the business as she found it, and it was not necessary
for her to impose her own regime. Neither had she to
prove that she had taken over the entire running of the
farm
22
.
(5)
'Property Used in Connection with the Trade, Business,
Profession, Office or Employment'
The property comprised in the gift or inheritance for
which relief is sought must have been used in connection
with the trade, business, profession, office or
employment. Thus, if a farmer left his entire estate to his
nephew who qualified under Paragraph 9, and the estate
included the proceeds of life assurance policies and
personal investments, the latter assets would not be
subject to the relief.
The practice of the Revenue Commissioners prior to
the Finance Act 1984 was to assess tax on the two kinds of
property at the effective rate that would have been
payable if the entire inheritance was taken under the
relevant Table
23
.
This has now changed because of the method
introduced by FA 1984, of calculating tax by aggregating
gifts and inheritances taken from all sources since 2 June
1982. The calculation of the tax liability is quite
complicated and, where a combination of business and
non-business assets is taken, different liabilities may arise
depending on the mixture of assets taken by the nephew.
Example 1
Richard Devereux, who qualifies under Paragraph 9,
takes the following inheritance from his uncle, a
farmer:—
'Our
Progressive
and
Professional
Team'
OUR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
VALUATIONS
RENT REVIEWS
LEASE RENEWALS
ARBITRATIONS
CAPITAL GAINS AND
PROBATE VALUATION
RATING APPEALS AND
INSURANCE VALUATION
COMPULSORY PURCHASE
ORDERS
OUR VALUATION TEAM
Anthony M. Sherry
F.S.VA, F.IAV.I.
Gordon H. Gill
F.R.I.C.S.
Philip G. Sherry
A.R.I.C.S.
JEm
W,
Farmland
(Net of Agricultural
Relief)
Personal Investments
160,000 Business Assets - Relief
40,000 Other Assets - No Relief
200,000
Because Richard is deemed to take the land from a
parent, the "threshold amount" relating to the farmland
93