Attached to the decision in the Chris Moyles case was this diagram:
Yes, the Ramsay principle, as reborn through Arrowtown, was sufficient to strike down this contrived scheme. Yes, the test of applying the legislation using a purposive construction to the arrangements viewed realistically seems to be successful in defeating all but the odd avoidance case where a purposive reading of the legislation is a problem because Parliament didn’t bother explaining what they were trying to do, a specific problem which the GAAR was designed to address.
But the message could not be clearer. This sort of scheme can only be prevented by removing all the safeguards that currently favour the taxpayer and introducing a GRAPIST such as the one I have written which contains a quadruple questionableness test as opposed to Aaronson’s pathetic double reasonableness test.
That is obviously the whole point of this decision isn’t it?
Yes, Murphy, it is.
Of course, anybody who disagrees is part of the neoliberal global conspiracy whose sole aim is to make me look wrong. That goes without saying.