Summary
Second Phase B scoping record under InheritKit Scoping Framework v1.3. Applied methodology validated by the first pilot (E&W × succession) to a reference-data-heavy dimension (tax) to stress-test cross-dimension architecture coherence.
Outputs
| Artefact | Version | Location |
|---|---|---|
| E&W × tax scoping record | v1.0 | docs/superpowers/scoping/2026-04-17-ew-tax.md (88-page PDF in Downloads as ew-tax.pdf) |
Key findings
-
Cross-dimension architecture coherent. Schema Audit v1.4’s InheritKit-first decisions on Gaps 7–14 (PET taper, RNRB taper, BPR/APR split, QSR, domicile scope, deemed-dom, trust IHT) all hold, conditional on the TAX-SCRs adding reference-data tables the computations consume. Without TAX-SCRs, bias would have left schema too thin.
-
29 TAX-SCRs produced (vs 8 SUCC-SCRs in pilot). Reference-data-heavy dimension count is genuinely higher — framework v1.4 could surface this expectation to future surveyors.
-
High-priority TAX-SCRs (5): TAX-SCR-02 (TNRB percentage TemporalRule wrapping), TAX-SCR-05 (spouse-exemption cap), TAX-SCR-08 (PET taper table), TAX-SCR-11 (BPR rates/categories), TAX-SCR-18 (asset-situs taxonomy), TAX-SCR-19 (deemed-dom parameters).
-
§6.1 mirror-lens approach worked. Tax lens on succession interactions confirmed pilot’s §6.1 and surfaced one genuine divergence: deed-of-variation requires two separate elections (s.142 IHT, s.62(6) TCGA) not a single fact. TAX-SCR-28 supersedes/extends pilot §3.10.
-
Valuation-basis enum promoted. Pilot flagged as “may need” without formal SCR; tax lens promoted to TAX-SCR-24. Methodology question FW-TAX-02.
Framework-refinement questions (FW-TAX-01–04 for Framework v1.4)
- FW-TAX-01. Repeat-discovery SCRs across dimensions — convention for SUCC-SCR-05 re-confirmed from tax angle. Proposed: reference-without-duplication + “Repeat-discovery confirmations” sub-section in §8. Applied in this record.
- FW-TAX-02. Pilot-implicit candidates (valuation-basis) formalised in later dimension. Promotion convention.
- FW-TAX-03. Reference-data-heavy dimensions produce 20–40 SCRs per jurisdiction, vs 5–15 for fact-heavy. Framework could set expectations.
- FW-TAX-04. Test-vector budget — 7 in this record, 6 in pilot. Recommend cap at ~7 for scoping-depth; extras belong in Lane 3 conformance suite.
SCR bundling recommendation for v4.0.0
- Phase 0 trivial/small bundle (13 + 12 SCRs, 3–4 days): most TAX-SCRs absorbable alongside pilot’s small SUCC-SCRs.
- Dedicated workstreams (4 medium SCRs with enum taxonomies): TAX-SCR-11 (BPR), -12 (APR), -18 (situs), -19 (deemed-dom) — require tax partner review.
Open questions
- Tax partner. Not yet signed per Partnership Targets v1.1. 8 questions queued for post-signing review.
- Legal counsel. 2 questions — LSA 2007 review for tax topic-surfacing (more borderline than succession), anti-avoidance disclosure of surfacing outputs.
- Cross-team. TAX-SCR bundling decision for v4.0.0 (Rich owns).
What’s next
- Rich reviews record + PDF.
- Decide third scoping record target. Candidates in framework v1.3 §Next actions: Scotland × succession; Islamic × E&W succession (first faith overlay); E&W × trust (another reference-data-heavy dimension, further composition test); E&W × PoA (mostly absorbed into succession pilot §2.6 — could be a short record).
- Parallel: Phase 0 schema hygiene (Rich, 2–3 days); tax partner outreach; framework v1.4 update absorbing FW-TAX-01–04.
Interaction pattern worth preserving (reaffirmed)
Handoff prompt explicitly told Claude: one initial sanity-check, then draft end-to-end. Four template interpretations surfaced in a single sanity-check pass; proceeded without interruption. Same pattern as pilot — sanity-check worked at start, no mid-flow questions needed. Confirmed as the correct Phase B scoping cadence.