As we enter a new era of ‘living with Covid’, new financial woes accompany new freedoms for many. Inflation is now at a 30-year high, with income failing to keep pace with the cost of living and interest rates rising twice in the last 4 months. A number of retailers, including Next, B&M and Greggs, have warned that soaring costs cannot be fully absorbed and will lead to price rises for consumers in 2022.
So, what is going on for retailers post-pandemic? And what steps can smaller, boutique brands take to mitigate the risks to their businesses going forward?
ANNUAL CASE REVIEW 2021 serlecourt RAISING THE BAR IN CHANCERY & COMMERCIAL “Stacked with highly experienced silks and juniors, Serle Court has long been one of the leading sets when it comes to civil fraud disputes” Legal 500 serlecourt 02 Welcome to Serle Court’s Annual Review of 2021. In the second year of the pandemic, barristers at Serle Court have continued to appear, often remotely, in courts at all levels around the world, in cases across our wide field of commercial chancery law.
The proper tax treatment of real property disposals is a common area of dispute between taxpayers and the Inland Revenue Board (Revenue). Taxpayers who have disposed of investment properties expect to be taxed under the Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 (RPGTA). The Revenue, on its part, may disagree, taking the view that the taxpayer had been trading and ought to be taxed (at the higher rate) under the Income Tax Act 1967 (ITA).
Introduction
The legislature has time and again introduced various income-tax benefits and incentives to encourage fresh investments and stimulate the economic growth. These incentives are generally given to new businesses in form of tax holidays, concessional tax rates or additional deductions.
The Finance Bill, 2022 introduces amendments to provide clarity and reduce protracted litigation for entities undergoing business succession / reorganisation.
The Government has been making consistent efforts to simplify and rationalise the tax framework in India. Accordingly, the Finance Bill, 2022 (Bill) proposes several amendments to address practical nuances and anomalies arising in business successions/reorganisations.
Can the foreclosure of a property tax lien on real estate be avoided as a fraudulent transfer under § 584 of the Bankruptcy Code?
That’s the issue before the District Court, on a bankruptcy appeal, in Duvall v. County of Ontario, New York, Case No. 21-cv-06236 in U.S. District Court, WDNY (issued 11/9/2021).
Courts have gone both ways on the issue.
The Difficulty
La CNMV ha publicado un documento con “preguntas y respuestas” que pretende servir de ayuda en la interpretación por las sociedades cotizadas del régimen de operaciones vinculadas tras la reforma introducida por la Ley 5/2021 para la incorporación de la Directiva sobre derechos de los accionistas en las sociedades cotizadas. A continuación, se incluye un resumen de los criterios interpretativos ofrecidos por el organismo supervisor.
Referencias Jurídicas CMS
Artículos de fondo
We are happy to present the second issue of our e-magazine – Trilegal Quarterly Roundup.
Restructuring a Multinational Corporation to Optimize Profitability and Efficiency A Case Study By Owen D. Kurtin Kurtin PLLC, New York, NY 2022 Revised Edition T:212.554.3373|E: [email protected] | W:kurtinlaw.com 2 The TO Project A few years ago, I was asked to serve as lead outside legal counsel to a U.S.-basedpublic corporationinanindustrialbusiness sector withoperations in over thirty countries in the reorganization of its global corporate structure and operations.
A “federal [fraudulent transfer claim under Bankruptcy Code § 548] is independent of [a] state-court [foreclosure] judgment,” held the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on Dec. 27, 2021. In reLowry, 2021 WL 6112972, *1 (6th Cir. Dec. 27, 2021). Reversing the lower courts’ approval of a Michigan tax foreclosure sale, the Sixth Circuit reasoned that “the amount paid on foreclosure bore no relation at all to the value of the property, thus precluding the … argument that the sale was for ‘a reasonably equivalent value’ under the rule of BFP v.