8(1)For the purposes of paragraph 7 a person is a “designer” of the arrangements if that person was, in the course of a business carried on by that person, to any extent responsible for the design of—U.K.
(a)the arrangements, or
(b)a proposal which was implemented by the arrangements;
but this is subject to sub-paragraph (2).
(2)Where a person would (in the absence of this sub-paragraph) fall within sub-paragraph (1) because of having provided advice which was used in the design of the arrangements or of a proposal, that person does not because of that advice fall within that sub-paragraph unless—
(a)the advice is relevant advice, and
(b)the knowledge condition is met.
(3)Advice is “relevant advice” if—
(a)the advice or any part of it suggests arrangements or an alteration of proposed arrangements, and
(b)it is reasonable to assume that the suggestion was made with a view to arrangements being designed in such a way that a tax advantage (or a greater tax advantage) might be expected to arise from them.
(4)The knowledge condition is that, when the advice was provided, the person providing it knew or could reasonably be expected to know—
(a)that the advice would be used in the design of abusive tax arrangements or of a proposal for such arrangements, or
(b)that it was likely that the advice would be so used.
(5)For the purposes of sub-paragraph (3), advice is not to be taken to “suggest” anything—
(a)which is put forward by the advice for consideration, but
(b)which the advice can reasonably be read as recommending against.
(6)In sub-paragraph (3)—
(a)the reference in paragraph (a) to arrangements or an alteration of proposed arrangements includes a proposal for arrangements or an alteration of a proposal for arrangements, and
(b)the reference in paragraph (b) to arrangements includes arrangements proposed by a proposal.
(7)For the purposes of this paragraph—
(a)references to advice include an opinion;
(b)advice is “used” in a design if the advice is taken account of in that design.