Section 138: Payments by companies liable to pool betting duty
530.This section gives a special deduction to companies which pay pool betting duty. It is based on those parts of section 126 of FA 1990 and section 121 of FA 1991 which relate to the calculation of the profits of traders. The corresponding rule for income tax is in section 162 of ITTOIA.
531.In 1990, following the Hillsborough disaster, pool betting duty was reduced on condition that the money saved be paid to the Football Trust 1990 to implement Lord Justice Taylor’s recommendations on safety and comfort at football grounds. In 1991 the duty was reduced again, this time on condition that the money be paid to the Foundation for Sport and the Arts, a charitable trust which supports athletic sports and games and promotes the arts. The reductions were initially for a limited period, but have so far been maintained.
532.Subsection (1) sets out the circumstances in which the section applies. It introduces the expression “qualifying payment”.
533.Subsection (2) defines a “qualifying payment” to which the section applies. It does not specify that payments in consequence of the 1990 reduction in pool betting duty must be paid for football safety and comfort, and that payments in consequence of the 1991 reduction must be paid to the Foundation for Sport and the Arts. Instead the section applies to a payment for either purpose in consequence of any reduction in pool betting duty. See Change 35 in Annex 1.
534.The section retains a general description of the payments, without identifying the bodies which were the targets of the original legislation. It is clear that payments made as a consequence of a reduction in pool betting duty to either body would qualify for relief under the section.
535.The source legislation is restricted to the 1990 and 1991 reductions in pool betting duty. This section applies to payments made in consequence of any reduction in the duty. See Change 36 in Annex 1.
536.Subsection (3) is the rule that allows the payments as a trading deduction. Without this rule the payments might be disallowed because they are not made wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the company’s trade.
