Skip to content
Law Society of Scotland
Search
Find a Solicitor
Contact us
About us
Sign in
Search
Find a Solicitor
Contact us
About us
Sign in
  • For members

    • For members

    • CPD & Training

    • Membership and fees

    • Rules and guidance

    • Regulation and compliance

    • Journal

    • Business support

    • Career growth

    • Member benefits

    • Professional support

    • Lawscot Wellbeing

    • Lawscot Sustainability

  • News and events

    • News and events

    • Law Society news

    • Blogs & opinions

    • CPD & Training

    • Events

  • Qualifying and education

    • Qualifying and education

    • Qualifying as a Scottish solicitor

    • Career support and advice

    • Our work with schools

    • Lawscot Foundation

    • Funding your education

    • Social mobility

  • Research and policy

    • Research and policy

    • Research

    • Influencing the law and policy

    • Equality and diversity

    • Our international work

    • Legal Services Review

    • Meet the Policy team

  • For the public

    • For the public

    • What solicitors can do for you

    • Making a complaint

    • Client protection

    • Find a Solicitor

    • Frequently asked questions

    • Your Scottish solicitor

  • About us

    • About us

    • Contact us

    • Who we are

    • Our strategy, reports and plans

    • Help and advice

    • Our standards

    • Work with us

    • Our logo and branding

    • Equality and diversity

  1. Home
  2. News and events
  3. Legal news
  4. Research tax relief scheme fails at tribunal

Research tax relief scheme fails at tribunal

24th July 2015 | tax

An artificial tax avoidance scheme involving medical research relief has been held ineffective by the First-tier Tribunal.

It ruled against a scheme involving the Brain Disorders Research Limited Partnership and Neil Hockin, one of its partners, in which the scheme's users attempted to claim £29m in tax relief. The investors claimed to have spent £122m on research, when in fact only £7m reached the genuine research company.

The aim of the scheme was to enable investors to make large claims to interest relief on their borrowings. Large capital allowances claims were also made. However, the tribunal found that as the partnership was not trading, no tax relief was due.

The partnership paid £122m to a Jersey-registered company, Numology Ltd, to fund research into depression and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The partnership then claimed capital allowances on this full amount.

Numology Ltd then subcontracted the entire research project to an Australian biotechnology company for £7m. The other monies, apart from those used to pay promoter fees, were used to cover the loan and interest.

The tribunal agreed with HMRC that certain elements in the documents were a sham. It also went further in stating that there was a possible element of sham in relation to fees paid. 

Jennie Granger, HMRC Director General, Enforcement and Compliance, said: "This win sends a clear message to those who still try to market and use tax avoidance schemes – HMRC will continue to challenge them, in the courts if necessary.

“This particular scheme was doubly offensive as it risks bringing fundraising for medical research into disrepute."

Click here to view the tribunal's decision.

Add To Favorites
Law Society of Scotland
Atria One, 144 Morrison Street
Edinburgh
EH3 8EX
If you’re looking for a solicitor, visit FindaSolicitor.scot
T: +44(0) 131 226 7411
E: lawscot@lawscot.org.uk
About us
  • Contact us
  • Who we are
  • Strategy reports plans
  • Help and advice
  • Our standards
  • Work with us
Useful links
  • Find a Solicitor
  • Sign in
  • CPD & Training
  • Rules and guidance
  • Website terms and conditions
Law Society of Scotland | © 2025
Made by Gecko Agency Limited