Revenue Precedent

The content shown on this page describes precedents set by Revenue judgements. To view the section of legislation to which the precedents apply, click the link below:

Revenue Precedents

Does the death of an individual constitute a disposal of shares for the purposes of this section? No IT943510

Would the exchange of shares in a RICT company for equal shares in a new holding company (also a qualifying company) lead to a loss of RICT relief? No – where the restructuring is essential to ensure that the existing employment is safeguarded and future job creation is facilitated. 191/85

If investors swap their shares in a subsidiary for shares in a holding company, it would normally be referred to as disposal. However, because Section 498(1)(b) [previously 17(1)(b)] applies, there is no clawback of the relief because no consideration was received by the shareholders. Is this true? No. Revenue would not accept this interpretation of the section. However, they would be prepared to consider allowing investors to retain relief if the existing investors in the qualifying subsidiary were given shares in the qualifying company on a share for share basis. 4395/88

Where an individual disposes of shares in a company on the take-over of that company within the three year “relevant period”, would the relief be withdrawn by virtue of this section? Yes 3584/87C

Would the existance of a CAP on dividends and assets on a winding up, and a put-call option offend this rule? No. The existence of a CAP would not necessarily preclude the granting of approval but its bearing on other aspects of the case would need to be examined. 1034/92