The UK 'non-dom' and non-resident trusts

The Commissioners decision in the recently reported case ofRobert Gaines-Cooper (SpC 568) has raised some interesting pointsfor tax practitioners and their clients. Momentarily, it hasbrought to public scrutiny the predicament of a citizen bornin the UK, who chose to live for significant periods abroadbut spent the rest of his time in the UK; and who, by so doing,wrongly (in the eyes of HMRC and the Special Commissioners)considered himself to be non-resident and non-domiciled forUK tax purposes, a mistake with significant and adverse taxconsequences for him. Whilst of immediate concern to tax practitioners,should this decision be of equal concern to trust practitionersadvising on the potential     

Arenas without Rules and the Policy Change Process: Outsider Groups and British Roads Policy

A key task of governments is to construct and manage systems of consultation whereby the vast array of interest groups seeking to influence public policy can be accommodated. Conventional wisdom holds that key insider groups secure for themselves special privileges, not least of which is an ability to prevent radical policy change. A concomitant view is that public policy emerges from relatively stable networks of actors who have some mutual resource dependencies. One reason why this paradigm is showing signs of intellectual fatigue is that it seems weak in explaining policy change. Yet, policy change does take place. Indeed, it is one of the characteristics of the 1980s and 1990s. This article examines an example of the traditional modalities of consultation failing to accommodate new interests, knowledge and ideas. This breakdown appears to have occurred by the use of alternative policy 'arenas without rules' by outsider groups, leading to a radical new 'framing' of transport policy. Moreover, government has failed to constrain the new policy issues in predictable and stable systems of consultation.     

Information technology and economic recovery in Western Europe

This article sets out to analyse the response of West European governments and of the European Community to the challenge of information technology (IT). European countries have joined the race among industrial nations to restructure their economies around the industries of the future (micro-electronics, computers and advanced telecommunications). The race is currently led by Japan and the United States with Western Europe following a poor third. In order to catch up, West European governments have for some time pursued national strategies and are now attempting to develop a common approach with the assistance of the European Commission. This attempt has been bedevilled, however, not only by national chauvinism, but by conflict between the ambitions of governments and the goals of private sector strategies. Eureka - Europe's response to America's Strategic Defence Initiative - marks a step towards resolving such differences. But as this article suggests, it will not resolve the deeper tensions between the major aims of current policies: the concentration of research and production resources while also creating an open and fully competitive market for IT in Western Europe.This article is part of a wider project on new technology policies in Western Europe, funded by the Leverhulme Trust and directed by Professor J.J. Richardson. The main findings will be published in Information Technology and the State, Oxford University Press, forthcoming.