Comment on page
Badges of Trade Limitations
However, the HMRC Business Income Manual confirms it is important to be aware of the limitations of this approach in considering an activity of buying and selling shares and other financial instruments (and therefore cryptoassets).
- The ‘Badges of Trade’ emerged from a Royal Commission of 1955. Two members of the commission identified share transactions as being ones where a strict application of these Badges could produce the wrong answer.
- The presence of a large number of purchases and sales may often be used to support an argument that an activity amounts to trading, but this has no particular relevance to share transactions. In Clarke v Trustees of British Telecom Pension Scheme & Others [2000] 72TC472, Robert Walker LJ said: ‘Frequency cannot by itself be decisive, since an investor may change his investments frequently without the investments losing their character.’
- Nor is the presence or lack of a trading organisation significant. As Lord Wilberforce remarked in Ransom v Higgs [1974] 50 TC 1, ‘All depends on what you organise.’ No special organisation is needed to buy and sell shares, nor do they need any alteration before being sold. In any event, large investment entities such as pension funds exhibit an obvious level of organisation, but this does not transform them into trading entities.
- The limitation of the Badges of Trade as a whole was considered by Oliver J in Salt v Chamberlain [1979] 53TC143 at page 154: ‘…I doubt whether the question whether in any given case a person is or is not carrying on a trade is capable of solution by the application of a logical progression of propositions culled from decided cases. The question is, I think, one of overall impression.’ In the Salt case it was held that there was not a trade, despite a number of the badges being present.
Last modified 1yr ago