| Case ID |
0040e4d6-0e58-41f6-a075-ef2d42cd795f |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
No.23 of 1989 |
| Decision Date |
Jan 22, 1992 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Privy Council dismissed the appeal from David Hardy Glynn, affirming that the payments made by the company for the school fees of the taxpayer's daughter constituted taxable income under the Hong Kong Inland Revenue Ordinance. The court ruled that these payments were indeed perquisites of employment, thus assessable to salaries tax. The decision elaborated that, based on the terms of the employment contract and the relevant sections of the Ordinance, the amounts paid by the employer for the benefit of the employee were to be treated as income. The ruling emphasized the alignment of the definitions of 'salary' and 'perquisite' with those established in United Kingdom tax law, thereby rejecting the taxpayer's argument that the payments should not be classified as taxable income. |
| Summary |
The case of David Hardy Glynn vs. Commissioner of Inland Revenue revolves around the interpretation of taxable income under the Hong Kong Inland Revenue Ordinance and the implications of employment-related payments. The central issue was whether the school fees paid by Glynn's employer for his daughter constituted a perquisite of employment, thus making it subject to salaries tax. The Privy Council's ruling underscored the importance of understanding the definitions of salary and perquisite, which are consistent with United Kingdom tax law. This decision has significant implications for tax liability and the treatment of employment benefits in Hong Kong, providing clarity on what constitutes taxable income in similar future cases. The case serves as a crucial reference for legal professionals navigating the complexities of tax law and employment contracts, emphasizing the need for precise contractual language and awareness of tax obligations. |
| Court |
Privy Council
|
| Entities Involved |
Inter group Associates Ltd.,
Roedean School
|
| Judges |
LORD KEITH OF KINKEL,
LORD TEMPLEMAN,
LORD GRIFFITHS,
LORD ACKNER,
LORD LOWRY
|
| Lawyers |
Barry Pinson Q.C.,
Andrew Park Q.C.,
Bernard Whaley
|
| Petitioners |
DAVID HARDY GLYNN
|
| Respondents |
COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE
|
| Citations |
1992 SLD 205,
1992 PTD 1429,
(1992) 66 TAX 208
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Income Tax Act, 1922,
Hong Kong Inland Revenue Ordinance
|
| Sections |
8(1),
9(1),
11B,
11D
|