Introduction
The Taxation (Implementation) (International Tax Compliance) (Mandatory Disclosure Rules for CRS Avoidance Arrangements and Opaque Offshore Structures) (Jersey) Regulations 2020 are expected to come into force shortly. The regulations will primarily affect promoters and service providers of certain arrangements, implementing a 30-day window to report disclosable arrangements to the Comptroller of Revenue. Failure to comply may lead to financial penalties and, in some instances, criminal penalties. It is important that intermediaries and certain taxpayers become astute to the requirements of the regulations and ensure that they are ready and able to comply with the new reporting obligations.
Background
The regulations will implement a mandatory disclosure regime which is closely aligned with the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development s (OECD s) Mandatory Disclosure Rules of Common Reporting Standard (CRS) Avoidance Arrangements and Opaque Offshore Struct
The COVID-19 pandemic has undoubtedly changed the way in which businesses are run and to a certain extent normalised remote-working arrangements. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data recently issued three guidance notes relating to working-from-home arrangements. This article summarises the guidelines' key recommendations for employers and employees, particularly with regard to the use of videoconferencing software.
The COVID-19 pandemic continues to ravage society. For the greater part of 2020, economies were brought to a standstill and lives were lost to the virus. In an effort to eradicate COVID-19, vaccines have been developed at a rapid pace. Employers are now contemplating imposing workplace-wide vaccination programmes in order to bring back available workforces and increase operational efficiency. Is this legally permissible?
Employers management prerogative to enact measures to keep workplaces safe
Employers have a management prerogative to require employees to be healthy and fit to work. This is pursuant to the principle that employers are free to regulate, according to their discretion and best business judgement, all aspects of employment – from hiring to firing – except in cases of unlawful discrimination or those which may be provided by law.(1)
Introduction
US citizens(1) who are UK-resident beneficiaries of US trusts may be taxed twice on the trust s income or capital gains because of the overlapping scope of UK and US taxation. The UK-US Double Taxation Convention (the treaty) may not serve as the desired panacea where there is a mismatch in both the timing of tax liabilities and the taxpayer s identity under the domestic laws of each jurisdiction. This potential liability to double taxation may be an unfair cost of using such trusts to benefit members of transatlantic families. However, as outlined below, there are options for mitigating this exposure so that UK residents may benefit from US trusts without suffering cross-border double taxation.
Introduction
In its initial response to the White Paper published in February 2020, the government indicated that it was minded to appoint Ofcom as the regulator responsible for oversight of the new regime, to be primarily funded from industry. While consultation responses were balanced as to the benefits and risks of appointing a new body as against extending the powers of an existing one, the government has confirmed Ofcom as the regulator, emphasising that empowering an existing regulator would help the timely introduction of the online harms regime . As Ofcom s name has been bandied around throughout the whole consultation, the decision to stick with an existing regulator isn t in itself that surprising, although the Final Response does contain some eye-catching detail, including regarding the teeth that the regulator will have to bring companies into line.