RMcH states: a lot can be learned about Irish Revenue practice, during revenue audits /interventions, if we examine the cases before the tax appeal Commissioners (TALC), The case below relates Claiming cash withdrawals are family loans, It’s worth a read.
This month, we reviewed a capital acquisitions tax appeal involving alleged family loans, business expenses, consultancy fees, and significant unconfirmed cash withdrawals,.
238TACD2025 – Capital Acquisitions Tax: Gifts vs Loans, Business Expenses & Cash Withdrawals
This appeal concerned CAT assessments for the 2012–2015 tax years, arising from substantial cash movements identified during a Revenue audit. The Respondent treated various amounts received by the Appellant as gifts—both “confirmed cash withdrawals” paid directly to her and “unconfirmed cash withdrawals” taken from family accounts. The Appellant contended that a portion of these funds represented a €225,000 family loan, sums used to pay business expenses, and consultancy fees taxable under income tax rather than CAT, while also maintaining she had not received any of the unconfirmed withdrawals.
On the alleged €225,000 loan, the Commissioner found no contemporaneous evidence—no loan agreement, emails, statements, text messages, repayment terms, or security. The first written reference was a letter produced close to the original hearing date. The probate form and the relevant will made no reference to any loan. Although the Appellant produced a €20,000 bank draft and a typed “schedule of repayments,” there was no evidence of lodgement or supporting bank statements or tax returns. The Commissioner determined that on the balance of probabilities, the sum was not a loan but a gift, with additional amounts of €70,000 (2012) and €25,000 (2015) also found to be gifts and assessable to CAT.
The Appellant also claimed certain amounts were business expenses. However, she produced no supporting documentation showing how the invoices were paid or from what accounts. The NPPR charges related in part to her own properties, and her submissions varied between €76,000, €28,834, and €7,200. The Commissioner found the evidence unclear, inconsistent, and insufficient to establish that the amounts treated as gifts were genuine business expenses.
Both parties agreed that €34,700 received as consultancy fees had since been assessed to income tax. This amount was therefore not a gift for CAT purposes, and the CAT assessments were reduced accordingly.