Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SDO s45 Transfer between associated bodies corporate


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Tone 19:10, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

SDO s45 Transfer between associated bodies corporate

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

It is an extremely narrow interest topic that wikipedia is not a guide to taxation. The article lack of citation, and probably you never find this topic on newspaper. Probably someone from law firm or accountant firm can write a book about the concept, but it is very not likely passing WP:GNG for that Matthew hk (talk) 16:27, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Matthew hk (talk) 16:27, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. Matthew hk (talk) 16:27, 11 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Note: the article title is a bad title: it should read Stamp Duty Ordinance section 45: Relief in case of conveyance from one associated body corporate to another. Matthew hk (talk) 16:38, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Merge into Stamp Duty Ordinance. Not enough details for a standalone article. Nova Crystallis   (Talk)  04:59, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 12:04, 18 October 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 14:37, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Per Matthew hk. I can't find any reliable source about SDO s45 Transfer between associated bodies corporate. Secondly, this article is unsourced and inappropriate for merge into Stamp Duty Ordinance. --SCP-2000 (talk) 18:22, 29 October 2019 (UTC)


 * I had to admit i haven't done all the step in WP:BEFORE, but despite i found RS, it seem it still gated by professional knowledge on the subject and i doubt any general interest as an encyclopedic entry. The source i found: "China: Hong Kong group stamp duty court challenge and Chinese amendment to income tax on lump-sum termination payments" in  International Tax Review In the recent Arrowtown Assets Ltd v Commissioner of Estate Duty (ESD) case, the judge dismissed the taxpayer's appeal against CED's refusal to grant group stamp duty relief under section 45 of the Stamp Duty Ordinance. The decision found that, to be entitled to the relief, the following conditions must be satisfied: [omitted] Matthew hk (talk) 07:30, 30 October 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.