EIM08003 - Employment income: transfer of real property to employees: action following District Valuer's report
Section 62 ITEPA 2003
If the amount of the informal valuation provided by the District
Valuer (see
EIM08002) exceeds the consideration
paid, the Inspector should write to the employee advising him or
her that the amount of the excess represents earnings taxable under
Section 62 ITEPA 2003 for the year in which the land was
transferred. When this advice has been given the appropriate action
should be taken to tax the excess over the amount paid as
employment income.
If the valuation is disputed on appeal, the appellant should
be asked if he or she is employing a professional adviser to act on
his or her behalf and he or she may be informed that arrangements
will be made for the District Valuer to enter into formal
negotiations with him or her or with that adviser. Any agreed
valuation will be reported in due course by the District Valuer.
If agreement is not reached, the District Valuer will report
this, together with the reasons for the failure to reach agreement
and his or her opinion of the value that he or she considers could
be defended on appeal. If it seems that no agreement on valuation
is possible, and that the matter will need to be resolved by the
First-tier Tribunal, ask the District Valuer to provide what is
known as a “defendable on appeal” valuation.
(This text has been withheld because of exemptions in the
Freedom of Information Act 2000)
Jurisdiction for hearing of the appeal lies with the
First-tier Tribunal and not to the Lands Tribunal. Although
valuation of the land may be a major issue in the appeal, or
perhaps the only issue if an employment income liability is agreed
in principle, the subject of the appeal is a charge on employment
income in the form of earnings or benefits. Jurisdiction for the
determination of employment income liability rests with the
First-tier Tribunal and there is no option for the taxpayer to ask
the Lands Tribunal to consider the matter instead.
(This text has been withheld because of exemptions in the
Freedom of Information Act 2000) - link will open in a new
window
