CA26484 | PMA: Fixtures: Changes in ownership: Evidence necessary to substantiate a claim

CAA01/S187B(1)

It is for the current owner to show whether or not the fixed value requirement applies or (where appropriate) whether the disposal value statement requirement applies.

If the current owner is not able to supply evidence, on request, to an officer of Revenue and Customs that these requirements have been met; his or her entitlement to PMA on fixtures acquired from a past owner will be nil.

The current owner must be able to provide a copy of a CAA01/S198 or S199 election, tribunal decision or written statements as applicable to show that the fixed value requirement has been met. Elections under S198 and S199 and disposal value statements may also provide evidence that the pooling requirement has been met because they can only relate to expenditure that has been pooled. However, a tribunal decision will not provide evidence that the pooling requirement has been met if the tribunal only determines a market value apportionment of the sales price without reference to the past owner’s qualifying expenditure.

(It is for the taxpayer to substantiate a claim to capital allowances. Therefore, from this perspective, and to this extent, this rule could be viewed as somewhat superfluous. However, one of the main policy purposes of the rules in CAA01/S187A and S187B is to increase the operational clarity and certainty of the fixtures regime. S187B (1) puts beyond doubt what a current owner will need to obtain and retain in order substantiate a fixtures claim under these rules.)

CAA01/S187B(2)

Where a written statement is provided to satisfy either the fixed value requirement CA26478 or the disposal value statement requirement CA26482 the amount specified in the written statement replaces any apportionment that would have been made under CAA01/S562 CA12300.

There may be cases where because of circumstances arising after the making of the written statement the maximum disposal value brought in by the past owner is reduced below the amount specified in the statement. If this happens the statement is deemed to have specified the reduced amount.