Court of Appeal shuns Upper Tribunal’s interpretation of salaried members rules
The Court of Appeal has sided with HMRC regarding the definition of “significant influence” in respect of the salaried members rules. What happened and what does this mean for members of limited liability partnerships (LLPs)?

The salaried members rules treat individual members of an LLP as employees for the purposes of income tax and National Insurance where three conditions are met. The rules aim to prevent individuals from benefitting from the lower tax rates available to self-employed individuals without taking on the risks and responsibilities associated with owning a business.
In HMRC v Bluecrest Capital Management (UK) LLP, the case concerns the application of condition B, which applies where the member does not have significant influence over the affairs of the LLP. The members of the LLP (BC) in question contended that some portfolio managers did have significant influence, as they were each managing over $100m investments. The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) and the Upper Tribunal (UT) agreed with BC that “significant influence” can mean influence over part of the LLP’s affairs. However, the Court of Appeal found that the FT and UT had erred in law. It was confirmed that in order to “fail” condition B, a member’s influence should apply to the affairs of the whole LLP and must be held via legally enforceable rights and duties of members, i.e. the LLP agreement. The appeal was allowed, the court set aside the decision of the UT and has remitted the case to the FTT for reconsideration.
Members of LLPs should review the application of the salaried members rules if they, like BC in this case, previously relied on HMRC guidance in respect of the level of influence required.
Related Topics
-
Could HMRC incorrectly withdraw you from annual accounting?
Your business can only use the annual accounting scheme (AAS) if its annual sales are below certain limits. Is there a risk that HMRC could wrongly instruct you to leave and, if so, what can you do about it?
-
Mandatory payrolling of employee benefits delayed until 2027
The start date of mandatory payrolling of employee benefits has been delayed from April 2026 to April 2027. What do we know so far?
-
The government has published the results of a survey of over 2,000 employers on their awareness of correct right to work checks. What do the results show?
The government has published the results of a survey of over 2,000 employers on their awareness of correct right to work checks. What do the results show?