Here's a brief summary of a tax case from the summer that made me laugh.
Mr Rockliff was a retired policeman. He received a pension from his former employer. His wife had no income, and consequently had a 0% tax band going to waste. He decided that he would just declare half of his pension on his own tax return, and have his wife declare the other half. That way, less tax would be payable on the income overall.
Not surprisingly, Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs didn't agree with this creative approach to taxation. It's been a central principle of UK tax for quite a while now that an individual's income is his or her own, and can't just be allocated to a spouse. Despite this major flaw in his plans, Mr Rockliff decided to take the issue to a tax tribunal.
Showing a further capacity for imagination that, if we're honest, is not generally associated with the police force, Mr Rockliff's argument to the tribunal was that if a) he were he to be divorced from his wife, and b) a court were consequently to order his pension to be split between him and his ex-wife, then some of the pension would be taxable on him and some taxable on his wife.
Unfortunately, the tribunal pointed out that a) he wasn't divorced from his wife and b) a pension sharing order therefore hadn't been made. So, he lost. Why Mr Rockliff had pursued the matter I don't know, because there was never any chance he would win.
Of course, if Mr R shows a bit more commitment, he might want to consider actually getting divorced, and have a pension sharing order made, thereby achieving his goal. However, the danger is that might be a bit of a short-term saving at the expense of long-term cost - the reliefs available against Capital Gains Tax and Inheritance Tax are much more generous to married couples than other co-habitors. And of course divorce isn't cheap in itself. So it's probably not a tax-planning strategy that is going to be advisable for many couples.
www.fizzhq.com