BIM40060 | Receipts: general: particular types of transaction
From HM Revenue & Customs · Business Income Manual
,
Items of a capital nature must not be brought into account as receipts in calculating the profits of a trade. This rule is disapplied where there is a specific provision which treats a capital item as a trading receipt. For guidance on the capital/revenue divide generally, see onwards.
Guidance in the context of particular types of transaction may be found at onwards (compensation and damages), onwards (exclusivity agreements), onwards (grants) and onwards (reverse premiums). The case law highlights certain characteristics that may apply generally; for instance:
It is important not to be guided too much by the label attached to the receipt. What is important is to establish what in fact the receipt was actually for (see Walton J in Burman v Thorn Domestic Appliances (Electrical) Ltd [1981] 55 TC 493 at 507I).
In determining the true character, all the surrounding circumstances should be considered. In particular, it may also be necessary to have regard to extrinsic evidence (see Megarry J in CIR v Church Commissioners for England [1976] 50 TC 516 at 538).
There is no single touchstone that determines whether a receipt is capital or revenue. But to have the character of capital, receipts should derive from the loss or disposal of tangible capital assets of the trade, or intangible assets of a capital nature (for detailed guidance on intangible assets see onwards). Receipts arising from the loss or disposal of trade agreements will be revenue except in exceptional cases where their loss cripples the whole trade (see Van den Berghs Ltd v Clark [1935] 19 TC 390 and, on the payments side, Vodafone Cellular Ltd & Others v Shaw [1997] 69 TC 376, discussed in ).
If appropriate, a receipt may be apportioned, part to capital and part to revenue.