IRC v Biggar, [1982] STC 677

Can You Answer This?

Practice with real exam questions

Rachel owns a fruit distribution business, purchasing pomegranates from a local orchard under a three-year exclusive supply agreement. The orchard is known for producing high-quality fruit that Rachel sells for a premium in specialized markets, giving her stable profits. Midway through the second year, the orchard is sold to a new owner who wants to re-negotiate the exclusive supply arrangement. Instead of continuing, the new owner offers Rachel a large lump-sum payment to terminate the agreement early so they can supply other distributors. Rachel contends that the lump-sum represents a disposal of her business asset, whereas the tax authority argues it replaces expected future income from her normal trading activities.


Which of the following statements best aligns with legal principles on whether the lump-sum payment should be treated as revenue or capital?

Introduction

The House of Lords ruling in IRC v Biggar [1982] STC 677 sets out methods for identifying how lump-sum payments received in business should be treated. The key question is whether such payments are capital (often not taxed as income) or revenue (taxed as trading income). The judgment outlines factors to resolve this, including how the transaction was arranged, the reason for the payment, and its relationship to the taxpayer’s regular business. This ruling clarifies how lump sums are taxed and continues to apply in modern tax law.

The Facts of IRC v Biggar

The taxpayer, Mr. Biggar, sold potatoes. He had a yearly renewable agreement giving him exclusive rights to buy potatoes from specific farms. When the farms were sold, the new owner paid Mr. Biggar a lump sum to cancel the agreement. The Inland Revenue claimed this payment was trading income, while Mr. Biggar argued it was a capital receipt.

The House of Lords' Decision

The House of Lords ruled the payment was trading income and taxable. They concluded the payment replaced future profits Mr. Biggar would have made under the continuing agreement. The agreement was not a capital asset but a central part of his business, enabling him to purchase potatoes for resale. The payment to end it was tied to his trade and treated as trading income.

Distinguishing Capital and Revenue Receipts

IRC v Biggar highlights the challenge of separating capital and revenue receipts. Capital receipts come from selling long-term business assets (e.g., property). Revenue receipts arise from routine business activities. The case states payments must be judged based on the specific business situation and transaction facts, focusing on practical outcomes rather than formal terms.

The Lasting Importance of IRC v Biggar

This case remains a key reference in UK tax law for handling lump-sum payments. It confirmed that compensation for lost future profits, even as a lump sum, is typically trading income. The Lords’ focus on the payment’s reason and link to business activities gives a structure for assessing similar disputes. Later rulings have expanded on these ideas, refining the capital-revenue split in other scenarios.

Applying the IRC v Biggar Rules

The rules from IRC v Biggar apply to many cases involving lump sums. For example, compensation for ending a business contract (as here) would usually be trading income. Selling a business property, however, would generally be a capital receipt. Each case turns on details: the asset or right given up, the payment’s conditions, and the taxpayer’s business. The judgment demands a detailed, fact-based analysis to classify payments correctly.

Conclusion

The IRC v Biggar ruling is a leading case on taxing lump-sum payments. The House of Lords clarified how to separate capital and revenue receipts by studying the payment’s reason and connection to business. These methods remain relevant today, aiding resolution of similar issues. The decision stresses reviewing each transaction’s specific facts to determine tax treatment, favoring practical results over formal wording. This approach ensures consistent handling of lump-sum receipts.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of December 2024. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

Practice. Learn. Excel.

Features designed to support your job and test preparation

Question Bank

Access 100,000+ questions that adapt to your performance level and learning style.

Performance Analytics

Track your progress across topics and identify knowledge gaps with comprehensive analytics and insights.

Multi-Assessment Support

Prepare for multiple exams simultaneously, from academic tests to professional certifications.

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal