Richard Tice\u2019s company has been accused of breaking the law by allegedly failing to pay tens of thousands of pounds in tax on dividends that were paid to him and his offshore trust.<\/p>\n
Reform UK\u2019s multimillionaire deputy leader is alleged to have received at least \u00a391,000 in excess payments as a result, the Sunday Times reported<\/a>. Dan Neidle of Tax Policy Associates \u2013 whose analysis was cited by the newspaper \u2013 said that<\/a> further analysis suggested that the total in tax that should have been paid by Tice\u2019s company was about \u00a3120,000.<\/p>\n The MP for Boston and Skegness, and business, trade and energy spokesperson for Nigel Farage\u2019s party, posted on X that \u201coverall, HMRC received the correct amount of tax due\u201d and described the claims as a \u201csmear\u201d.<\/p>\n Quidnet REIT Ltd, the property investment company Tice founded, owned and ran as chief executive, did not pay a required 20% levy on the dividends, known as a \u201cwithholding tax\u201d, before channelling profits to Tice and his trust registered in Jersey, the Sunday Times said.<\/p>\n Tice suggested the failure amounted to a \u201ctechnicality\u201d and appeared to suggest it did not matter as he ultimately paid income tax on the dividends he received, the newspaper said. It quoted Tice saying: \u201cI have paid all tax at the highest rate on all dividends received. HMRC has been paid in full.\u201d<\/p>\n Tice owned more than 90% of Quidnet personally and through various on and offshore entities he controlled, the Sunday Times wrote. Tice said he had received \u201cprofessional accountancy advice\u201d and the revelations were \u201chardly a story\u201d.<\/p>\n According to the paper, Tice\u2019s property company used a rare legal status known as a real estate investment trust (Reit). Reits do not have to pay corporation tax, but are required to deduct a given proportion of dividends destined for certain shareholders before making payments. This is known as withholding tax and it is charged at 20%, the basic rate of income tax.<\/p>\n The company\u2019s legal obligations were not affected by the amount of tax Tice or his trust did or did not subsequently pay on the dividends, Neidle wrote. However, much either paid, the company was, and was still, required to pay its original amount.<\/p>\n Responding to the allegation on X,<\/a> Tice wrote: \u201cDesperate still to smear me & Reform, Sunday Times has again spent weeks pouring [sic] over my company accounts with Labour-supporting tax accountant. All that effort has revealed overall HMRC received the correct amount of tax due. Journo now effectively complaining I paid too much tax rather than company pay some tax on my behalf! All due to complex tax technicality around dividends to certain shareholder classes in REITs.\u201d<\/p>\n Asked to comment on the \u00a3120,000 figure alleged by Tax Policy Associates, a Reform UK<\/a> spokesperson said: \u201cRichard has paid all tax due.\u201d<\/p>\n