The Stain of Spotless Services Spreads to Hong Kong: The Tai Hing Cotton Mill Case
On 4 December 2007, the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal issued its judgment in Commissioner of Inland Revenue v. Tai Hing Cotton Mill (Development) Ltd. The case was about whether the Commissioner was empowered by section 61A of the Inland Revenue Ordinance to adjust the price of a sale of land for tax purposes. The Court of Final Appeal’s leading judgment was written by Lord Hoffmann, a non-permanent judge of the Court and a member of the House of Lords in the United Kingdom. Lord Hoffmann adopted a broad interpretation of section 61A, Hong Kong’s general anti-avoidance statute, in finding that the Commissioner was entitled to adjust the terms of a genuine commercial transaction entered into by the taxpayer. In doing so, he relied heavily on a 1996 decision of the Australian High Court, Commissioner of Taxation v. Spotless Services Ltd. In this article, I will argue that Lord Hoffmann erred, like the Australian High Court before him, in...