UK: Costs for preliminary windfarm studies qualified as capital expenditures (Court of Appeal decision)

Costs considered expenditures “on the provision of” plant or machinery

Share
April 3, 2025

The Court of Appeal held in Orsted West of Duddon Sands (UK) Ltd v HMRC that the taxpayer’s environmental and technical study costs for offshore windfarms qualified as capital expenditures under section 11 of the Capital Allowances Act 2001.

The court found that the taxpayer’s preliminary costs (e.g., on geotechnical surveys, environmental impact assessments, and metocean studies) were expenditures “on the provision of” plant or machinery. The court noted, however, that for such costs to qualify as capital expenditures, the project must actually be completed. The court also made a distinction between preliminary costs that inform whether a project should go ahead and preliminary costs that inform how a project is to go ahead, with the former not qualifying.

HMRC has applied to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court.

Read an April 2025 report prepared by the KPMG member firm in the UK

Thank you!

Thank you for contacting KPMG. We will respond to you as soon as possible.

Contact KPMG

Use this form to submit general inquiries to KPMG. We will respond to you as soon as possible.

By submitting, you agree that KPMG LLP may process any personal information you provide pursuant to KPMG LLP\'s . Privacy Statement

An error occurred. Please contact customer support.

Job seekers

Visit our careers section or search our jobs database.

Submit RFP

Use the RFP submission form to detail the services KPMG can help assist you with.

Office locations

International hotline

You can confidentially report concerns to the KPMG International hotline

Press contacts

Do you need to speak with our Press Office? Here's how to get in touch.

Headline