Section 69 Operator-instruction deemed to be an instrument of conveyance or transfer
|
(1) Where a transfer of title to securities through a relevant system is effected by an operator-instruction, that operator-instruction shall, for all purposes of this Act, be deemed to be an executed instrument of conveyance or transfer of such securities and the date of execution shall be taken to be the date the operator-instruction is generated.
How is a transfer of securities through the CREST system charged to stamp duty?
(1) An operator instruction which effects a transfer of securities through the CREST system is deemed to be an executed instrument of transfer of those securities. The date of execution of the deemed instrument is the date on which the operator-instr...
(2) Where an operator-instruction is generated in connection with the transfer through a relevant system of an equitable interest in securities, that transfer shall be deemed for the purposes of subsection (1) to have been effected by that operator-instruction.
(3) Where no operator-instruction is generated in connection with the transfer through a relevant system of an equitable interest in securities, that transfer shall, for the purposes of this Part, be deemed to have been effected by an operator-instruction generated on the date of the transfer.
What happens if no operator-instruction was generated for a CREST transfer?
(3) If an equitable interest in securities is transferred through the CREST system, and no operator-instruction was generated for that transfer, the transfer is deemed to have been effected by an operator-instruction generated on the transfer date.
(4) Where a transfer of title to securities through a relevant system is effected by an operator-instruction relating to a single netted settlement in a relevant system of two or more contracts for sale of the same type of securities of a company that operator-instruction shall not be treated as an operator-instruction falling within subsection (1) and shall, instead, be deemed to be a separate operator-instruction generated in respect of each contract for sale included in that single netted settlement and each such operator-instruction shall be deemed to be an executed instrument of conveyance or transfer of the securities which are the subject of the contract for sale concerned and the date of execution of each such conveyance or transfer shall be taken to be the date the operator-instruction relating to the single netted settlement is generated.
Amendments
Subs (4) inserted by Finance Act 2003 section 135 in relation to instruments executed on or after 28 March 2003.
Where the transfer of securities through CREST contains two or more sale contracts, how are they treated for stamp duty purposes?
(4) This is an anti-avoidance provision. Where a transfer of securities made through CREST contains two or more sale contracts, each is to be treated separately for stamp duty purposes and the contracts may not be "netted off". It counteracts the fol...
(5) Where no operator-instruction is generated in connection with a single netted settlement in a relevant system of two or more contracts for sale of the same type of securities of a company, a separate operator-instruction shall be deemed to have been generated on the date of the single netted settlement in respect of each contract for sale included in that single netted settlement and each such operator-instruction shall be deemed to be an executed instrument of conveyance or transfer of the securities which are the subject of the contract for sale concerned and the date of execution of each such conveyance or transfer shall be taken to be the date the deemed operator-instruction is generated.
Amendments
Subs (5) inserted by Finance Act 2003 section 135 in relation to instruments executed on or after 28 March 2003.
If the netting off of several CREST transfers gives a nil settlement figure, how are the transactions treated?
(5) This anti-avoidance provision supplements the rule in (4). If the netting off of several transfers of securities through CREST results in a NIL settlement, the transactions are still treated as separate transactions.
