Uk exit tax
12 August, 2025
What is UK Exit Tax?
UK Exit Tax, officially known as the "Tax Charge on Migration of Company Residence," is a fiscal measure implemented by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) to address tax avoidance through corporate migration. This tax applies when a UK-incorporated company or resident entity relocates its tax residence outside the United Kingdom, potentially triggering a deemed disposal of assets at market value. The fundamental premise underlying this mechanism is to ensure that gains accrued during UK residence don’t escape taxation when an entity shifts its fiscal domicile. Unlike conventional corporate taxes, exit tax represents a one-time liability arising from the specific event of migration, capturing unrealized capital gains that might otherwise escape the UK tax net. Companies considering relocating their tax residence must carefully evaluate this potential liability within their broader international tax planning strategy. The exit tax provisions were substantially reinforced following the UK’s departure from the European Union, giving HMRC enhanced powers to protect the domestic tax base from erosion through corporate emigration strategies.
Legal Framework and Statutory Basis
The UK exit tax regime is principally governed by Section 185 of the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 (TCGA 1992) and Section 25 of the Corporation Tax Act 2009. These provisions establish the legal framework for treating a company’s cessation of UK tax residence as a triggering event for a deemed disposal of assets at market value. Following Brexit, the UK has reinforced these provisions, particularly in light of no longer being bound by certain EU directives that previously constrained its tax sovereignty. The Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD) principles, while no longer directly applicable, have nonetheless influenced the current framework. Significant amendments were introduced through Finance Acts post-2020, enhancing HMRC’s authority to prevent tax base erosion. Case law, including the landmark Cadbury Schweppes decision, continues to influence interpretations regarding the necessity of commercial substance in corporate restructurings. Companies planning international relocations must navigate this complex statutory landscape carefully, ideally through professional tax advisory services to ensure compliance while managing potential exit tax exposure.
When Does Exit Tax Apply?
Exit tax liability arises in several distinct scenarios involving migration of corporate tax residence. Primarily, it applies when a UK-incorporated company becomes resident elsewhere under a double tax treaty, or when a non-UK incorporated but UK tax resident company ceases its UK residence status. Additionally, the tax is triggered when a UK company transfers assets to a permanent establishment abroad, effectively shifting economic ownership outside UK tax jurisdiction. Asset transfers from UK permanent establishments to foreign headquarters similarly activate the charge. Significantly, post-Brexit regulations have expanded the scope to include certain corporate restructurings that result in effective migration of taxable assets. Timing is critical – the liability crystallizes on the date of residence change or asset transfer, with market valuation conducted at this specific point. Companies undergoing mergers, divisions, or substantial share exchanges with cross-border elements must evaluate potential exit tax implications, particularly when such transactions result in assets effectively departing UK tax jurisdiction. The application extends to intangible assets including intellectual property, goodwill, and customer relationships, often representing substantial value in modern corporate structures. For businesses considering UK company formation with potential future internationalization plans, understanding these triggering events is essential for proper tax planning.
Calculating the Tax Liability
The computation of exit tax liability follows a distinctive methodology based on deemed disposal principles. When triggered, assets are treated as disposed of at their market value on the exit date, with the resulting chargeable gain (or allowable loss) calculated by deducting the acquisition cost and any qualifying enhancement expenditure from this deemed proceeds figure. The applicable tax rate aligns with the prevailing corporation tax rate, currently 25% for companies with profits exceeding £250,000 (with tapering provisions for profits between £50,000 and £250,000). Notably, certain assets receive specialized treatment – intellectual property valuations often require complex considerations regarding future income streams, while goodwill valuation demands careful analysis of maintainable earnings. Companies with substantial real estate holdings face particular challenges under the Non-Resident Capital Gains Tax regime that interacts with exit tax provisions. Capital losses may be offset against gains, though anti-avoidance rules limit artificial loss creation. Timing differences between accounting and tax treatment can create additional complexities, especially for companies with significant deferred tax assets or liabilities. Professional valuation expertise is typically essential for determining accurate market values, particularly for unique or specialized assets lacking readily available comparative market data. Companies operating in regulated sectors may face additional valuation requirements imposed by industry-specific provisions that interact with the general exit tax framework.
Available Reliefs and Exemptions
Several strategic reliefs can mitigate UK exit tax liability. The Substantial Shareholding Exemption (SSE) potentially exempts disposals of qualifying shareholdings, provided stringent conditions regarding ownership percentage and trading status are satisfied. Intra-group transfers may qualify for relief under Section 171 TCGA 1992, allowing gains deferral rather than immediate crystallization. For qualifying reorganizations, Section 139 TCGA 1992 offers potential relief when company migrations occur as part of broader commercial restructuring with genuine economic substance. Post-Brexit, while EU-specific reliefs have diminished, certain treaty provisions may still provide relief mechanisms. The EU Merger Directive reliefs, though no longer directly applicable, have influenced current UK provisions for cross-border reorganizations. Companies relocating within territories having comprehensive double tax treaties with the UK may benefit from specific provisions mitigating double taxation risks. Additionally, while not technically an exemption, the instalment payment option under Section 59FA TMA 1970 allows qualifying companies to spread exit tax payments over five years, enhancing cash flow management. However, this option carries interest charges and may require security provision. Each relief comes with specific anti-avoidance provisions designed to prevent artificial arrangements, requiring careful evaluation of commercial substance in any restructuring designed to access these reliefs. For international tax planning, understanding these nuanced exemptions is critical to developing compliant strategies.
Exit Tax Planning Strategies
Effective exit tax planning requires comprehensive advance consideration rather than reactive measures. A fundamental strategy involves conducting thorough pre-migration valuations to establish defensible asset values, potentially reducing future disputes with HMRC. Step-up arrangements in destination jurisdictions may provide offsetting benefits against UK exit charges. For intellectual property-heavy businesses, licensing arrangements rather than outright transfers might mitigate immediate tax charges while maintaining economic benefits. Corporate restructuring before migration can optimize the application of available reliefs – for instance, reorganizing to maximize Substantial Shareholding Exemption applicability for investment holding structures. Timing considerations are paramount, as market value fluctuations can significantly impact tax liability. In appropriate circumstances, phased migrations may spread liability across multiple tax periods. Dual resident company structures, while complex, can sometimes leverage treaty benefits to minimize exit charges when structured properly. Post-Brexit, businesses should carefully evaluate UK-specific provisions against destination country incentives, as many jurisdictions offer preferential regimes for relocating businesses that might offset UK exit costs. However, all planning must withstand increasing substance requirements and the General Anti-Abuse Rule scrutiny. Artificial arrangements lacking commercial rationale face high risks of challenge. Companies considering substantial UK business restructuring should initiate planning at least 12-18 months before intended migration to allow for proper implementation of optimized structures.
HMRC Enforcement and Compliance
HMRC has substantially enhanced its enforcement capabilities regarding exit tax through specialized investigation teams focusing on corporate migrations and cross-border restructurings. Mandatory disclosure requirements under DAC6 (despite post-Brexit modifications) and DOTAS compel taxpayers and advisors to report arrangements potentially circumventing exit charges. HMRC increasingly utilizes international information exchange mechanisms through the Common Reporting Standard and country-by-country reporting to identify undisclosed migrations. The Diverted Profits Tax and Profit Diversion Compliance Facility operate alongside exit tax provisions as complementary anti-avoidance measures. Documentation requirements are rigorous – companies must maintain comprehensive evidence substantiating valuation methodologies, commercial rationale for restructuring, and qualification for any claimed exemptions. Penalties for non-compliance are severe, potentially reaching 100% of unpaid tax for deliberate concealment, with personal liability risks for directors in egregious cases. HMRC’s litigation stance has hardened, with increased willingness to pursue complex and high-value exit tax disputes through tribunals and courts. Advance clearance procedures, while non-statutory, provide a mechanism for obtaining HMRC’s view on proposed arrangements, potentially reducing future dispute risks. Companies planning migrations should implement robust tax compliance protocols addressing exit tax obligations specifically, as traditional corporate tax compliance frameworks may not adequately capture these specialized requirements.
Impact of Double Tax Treaties
Double Taxation Agreements (DTAs) play a pivotal role in exit tax management, potentially providing relief from double taxation when migrating between treaty partner jurisdictions. The UK’s extensive treaty network – covering over 130 countries – contains varying provisions affecting exit tax consequences. Most modern UK treaties incorporate residency tiebreaker clauses determining tax residence when dual-residence scenarios arise, directly influencing exit tax triggering events. Notably, treaties following the OECD Model Convention typically contain capital gains articles that may restrict the UK’s taxing rights in certain scenarios. Post-Brexit amendments to many treaties have introduced specific provisions addressing corporate migrations, often preserving source country taxation rights for gains attributable to immovable property. The Multilateral Instrument (MLI) implementation has modified numerous treaties simultaneously, introducing principal purpose test provisions that may restrict treaty benefits for arrangements with tax avoidance purposes. Mutual Agreement Procedures provide dispute resolution mechanisms when both jurisdictions assert taxing rights over the same gain. Credit relief provisions in treaties can offset foreign taxes against UK liabilities, though timing mismatches between jurisdictions often create practical complications. Companies contemplating migration should conduct comprehensive treaty analysis, particularly evaluating whether specific treaties contain grandfathering provisions for pre-existing structures or special provisions for intellectual property. For businesses considering international expansion, understanding treaty interactions with exit tax is essential for effective cross-border planning.
Case Studies and Judicial Precedents
Landmark cases have shaped UK exit tax interpretation and application. In Barclays Mercantile Business Finance v Mawson (2004), the House of Lords established the "purposive approach" to tax legislation interpretation, significantly influencing exit tax provision application. More recently, Development Securities (2020) examined the central management and control test, critical for determining when companies cease UK residence. The Irish-focused Gallaher Ltd v HMRC case addressed asset valuation methodologies specifically in exit tax contexts. These precedents highlight HMRC’s increasingly assertive stance on challenging artificial arrangements lacking commercial substance. In the EU context, National Grid Indus established principles regarding exit taxation compatibility with freedom of establishment – principles that, while no longer binding post-Brexit, continue influencing UK approaches. The ongoing Prudential Assurance litigation addresses timing differences between tax crystallization and actual realization. These cases collectively demonstrate courts’ willingness to support HMRC’s position when arrangements appear primarily tax-motivated, while providing taxpayer protection when genuine commercial rationales exist. For companies contemplating structures involving nominee directors or other governance arrangements potentially affecting residence status, these precedents offer critical guidance on substance requirements. Advisors should thoroughly analyze these cases when developing migration strategies, as they provide valuable insights into judicial attitudes toward different planning approaches and valuation methodologies in exit tax contexts.
Brexit Impact on Exit Tax Rules
Brexit has catalyzed significant transformations in the UK’s exit tax landscape. Prior to withdrawal, the UK was constrained by EU freedom of establishment principles, requiring deferral options for migrations to EEA states following cases like National Grid Indus. Post-Brexit, these constraints have diminished, allowing the UK to implement more restrictive policies. The Finance Act 2020 introduced provisions explicitly addressing the transition period’s end, removing certain deferral options previously available for EEA migrations. Critically, the cross-border merger relief derived from the EU Merger Directive has been substantially modified, creating new planning challenges for corporate restructurings. While existing installment payment options remain, they now carry stricter conditions, including mandatory interest charges regardless of destination jurisdiction. The UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement contains minimal provisions constraining UK exit taxation sovereignty, representing a significant departure from previous EU membership obligations. Companies with established European corporate structures that previously relied on EU directives for tax-efficient cross-border operations face particular challenges adapting to this new environment. For businesses utilizing UK companies within international structures, Brexit necessitates comprehensive strategy reevaluation. Interestingly, certain Brexit-related corporate relocations themselves have triggered substantial exit tax liabilities, particularly for financial services firms moving operations to Dublin, Paris, and Frankfurt, creating case studies in exit tax application under the new regime.
Industry-Specific Considerations
Exit tax implications vary substantially across different industry sectors. Technology companies with significant intellectual property face particularly complex challenges regarding IP valuation, with HMRC frequently scrutinizing transfer pricing aspects of technology migrations. Financial services firms contend with regulatory considerations alongside tax implications, as both the Financial Conduct Authority and Prudential Regulation Authority impose requirements affecting migration timing and structure. Real estate holding companies must navigate the interaction between exit tax and the Non-Resident Capital Gains Tax regime, particularly regarding indirect disposals of UK property. Manufacturing businesses with substantial tangible assets face practical valuation challenges, especially for specialized equipment lacking active secondary markets. Pharmaceutical companies with research and development activities must address patent valuations and the potential loss of R&D tax incentives. Natural resources businesses face specialized provisions regarding exploration and extraction rights. For regulated sectors, including utilities and telecommunications, regulatory approval requirements can significantly impact migration timelines, potentially affecting valuation dates. Professional services firms structured as limited liability partnerships face distinctive considerations regarding the taxation of work-in-progress and unbilled time. Companies in these specialized sectors should seek advisors with specific industry expertise rather than generalist tax advisors, as industry-specific provisions and HMRC approaches vary considerably. Early engagement with sector specialists can identify industry-specific planning opportunities or pitfalls that might be overlooked in generalized exit tax planning.
Corporate Residence and Management Control
Corporate residence determination stands at the core of exit tax application, with UK law employing both incorporation and central management and control tests. Under common law principles established in De Beers Consolidated Mines Ltd v Howe (1906), a company resides where its real business is carried on – typically where strategic decisions occur. This creates significant implications for governance structures, as board composition and meeting locations critically influence residence status. Companies utilizing nominee director arrangements face particular scrutiny, as HMRC increasingly looks beyond formal arrangements to actual decision-making realities. Modern digital communication complicates these determinations, with HMRC developing sophisticated approaches to analyzing virtual management structures. The Development Securities case reinforced the importance of directors’ autonomy in establishing genuine offshore management. Companies contemplating residence changes must implement comprehensive governance protocols documenting decision-making processes and locations. Practical considerations include board composition changes, physical meeting locations, documentation practices, and communication protocols. Partial migrations, where some but not all management functions relocate, create particularly complex scenarios potentially resulting in dual residence. In such cases, treaty tiebreaker provisions become essential, though post-Brexit changes to many treaties have introduced more stringent requirements for accessing tiebreaker benefits. For international businesses utilizing UK company structures, understanding these residence principles is fundamental to effective exit planning.
Permanent Establishment Considerations
The permanent establishment (PE) dimension adds another layer of complexity to exit tax planning. When assets transfer between a UK company and its foreign PE (or vice versa), this may trigger exit charges without formal corporate migration. The Finance Act 2019 significantly expanded these provisions, implementing OECD BEPS recommendations regarding PE profit attribution. Under current rules, assets transferred to foreign PEs are deemed disposed of at market value, potentially creating immediate tax liabilities. The exempt PE election, allowing UK companies to exclude foreign PE profits (and losses) from UK taxation, interacts with these provisions in complex ways, potentially affecting the availability of foreign tax credits against exit charges. Companies must carefully evaluate whether operational changes might inadvertently create new PEs or modify existing ones. Remote working arrangements, increasingly common post-pandemic, create particular risks regarding accidental PE creation. The UK’s implementation of the MLI has lowered PE threshold requirements in many treaty scenarios, increasing these risks. Digital business models face special challenges under expanded PE definitions addressing commissionaire arrangements and preparatory activities. The interaction between transfer pricing and PE profit attribution methodologies creates additional complexities when valuing assets deemed transferred between jurisdictions. Businesses contemplating operational restructuring should conduct comprehensive PE exposure assessments alongside traditional exit tax analysis, as seemingly minor operational changes can trigger significant tax consequences even without formal corporate migrations.
Impact on Shareholders and Investors
Corporate migrations triggering exit tax can significantly impact shareholders and investors beyond the corporate-level consequences. For closely-held companies, shareholders may need to consider their personal tax positions, as corporate migrations potentially trigger deemed disposal provisions at the shareholder level under certain anti-avoidance rules. International investors face particular complexities regarding treaty access following corporate migrations, as beneficial ownership and principal purpose test provisions increasingly restrict treaty shopping opportunities. Private equity investors with fixed investment horizons should incorporate potential exit tax liabilities into acquisition due diligence and exit planning, as these can materially affect investment returns. For listed companies, disclosure requirements regarding potential exit tax liabilities may impact market valuations, requiring careful investor relations management during migration planning. Companies with employee share schemes face additional complexities, as migrations can trigger unintended consequences for option holders and participants in share incentive plans. Venture capital investors supporting early-stage companies should consider potential future exit tax implications when structuring initial investments, particularly regarding intellectual property holding arrangements. Family offices managing multi-generational wealth through corporate structures must evaluate exit tax alongside inheritance and succession planning considerations. The interaction between corporate exit tax and shareholders’ tax residence creates particularly complex scenarios for internationally mobile high-net-worth individuals utilizing corporate holding structures for investment activities, often necessitating coordinated corporate and personal tax planning approaches.
VAT and Indirect Tax Implications
While exit tax primarily addresses direct taxation, VAT and other indirect taxes create parallel considerations during corporate migrations. When a UK company relocates, its VAT registration status may fundamentally change, potentially requiring deregistration from UK VAT and triggering deemed supply provisions on business assets. For capital goods scheme assets, this can create significant additional tax costs beyond corporation tax exit charges. Import VAT and customs duty implications arise when physical assets cross borders following corporate migrations, particularly relevant post-Brexit for movements between the UK and EU. Supply chain restructuring accompanying corporate migrations frequently necessitates comprehensive VAT registration and compliance adaptations across multiple jurisdictions. Digital services businesses face particular challenges regarding VAT MOSS (Mini One Stop Shop) arrangements when changing establishment location. Insurance Premium Tax, Stamp Duty, and other transaction taxes may apply to specific aspects of migration transactions, creating a complex indirect tax landscape alongside direct tax considerations. The financial services sector faces distinctive challenges regarding VAT partial exemption following migrations, often requiring advance clearance from tax authorities. Companies must coordinate VAT planning with corporate tax migration strategies, as optimal approaches from a direct tax perspective may create suboptimal indirect tax consequences. For businesses utilizing online platforms, VAT registration considerations are particularly important when changing digital business structures alongside corporate migrations.
Practical Compliance Procedures
Implementing effective compliance procedures is essential for managing exit tax obligations. The process typically begins with formal notification to HMRC of the intended migration, ideally through advance communication rather than merely reporting after the fact. Companies must complete the relevant supplementary pages of the Corporation Tax Return (CT600), specifically detailing deemed disposals and claiming any applicable reliefs. Documentation requirements are extensive, including comprehensive valuation evidence, commercial rationale memoranda, board minutes evidencing decision-making processes, and legal opinions supporting claimed exemptions. Record retention policies should be enhanced for migration scenarios, maintaining documentation for at least six years (and potentially longer for complex cases). Appointing a UK tax agent post-migration facilitates ongoing compliance, particularly regarding any deferred payment arrangements. Companies choosing the installment payment option must submit form CT600G with specific details regarding payment schedules and security arrangements. Coordination with destination country compliance requirements is essential, particularly regarding acquisition value step-up documentation that may provide future tax benefits offsetting UK exit charges. For groups undertaking partial migrations, intercompany agreements should clearly document post-migration relationships to support transfer pricing positions. Engaging with UK accounting and compliance services early in the planning process ensures all procedural requirements are identified and properly sequenced, preventing costly compliance failures that might trigger penalties or restrict access to available reliefs.
Recent Developments and Future Outlook
The UK exit tax landscape continues evolving rapidly, with recent Finance Acts introducing progressively stricter provisions aimed at preventing tax base erosion. The Finance Act 2023 implemented enhanced anti-fragmentation rules targeting arrangements dividing migrations into separate steps to circumvent exit charges. HMRC’s Manual updates throughout 2022-2023 have clarified interpretive positions regarding valuation methodologies and commercial substance requirements, generally adopting stricter approaches. Internationally, the OECD’s Pillar Two implementation (global minimum tax) creates new considerations for migration planning, as exit tax timing may influence effective tax rate calculations under these emerging rules. Domestically, consultations on potential targeted anti-avoidance rules specifically addressing certain migration strategies suggest further tightening may occur in upcoming Finance Acts. The recent introduction of Uncertain Tax Treatment notification requirements creates additional compliance obligations for larger businesses undertaking complex migrations. Post-Brexit, the UK has demonstrated increased willingness to diverge from European norms regarding exit taxation, suggesting continued policy independence in this area. The rise of digital business models has prompted reconsideration of traditional residence concepts, with potential implications for when exit tax is triggered. Looking ahead, increased focus on economic substance across international tax initiatives suggests companies will need to demonstrate genuine commercial rationales for migrations rather than primarily tax-motivated arrangements. For businesses contemplating future international restructurings, these evolving trends necessitate flexible planning approaches capable of adapting to changing regulatory environments.
Seeking Professional Guidance
The complexity of UK exit tax necessitates specialized professional guidance. When selecting advisors, businesses should prioritize practitioners with specific exit tax experience rather than general corporate tax expertise, as this niche area involves distinctive technical challenges. Multi-disciplinary teams typically produce optimal results, combining corporate tax specialists with valuation experts, international tax practitioners, and legal advisors knowledgeable in relevant company law aspects. Early engagement is crucial – ideally, professional advisors should be involved at least 12-18 months before contemplated migrations to allow for proper planning implementation. Companies should expect comprehensive scenario modeling analyzing different migration approaches and timing options, with detailed quantification of tax consequences under each alternative. Advance ruling requests, while non-binding, often provide valuable clarity regarding HMRC’s position on specific technical aspects of proposed arrangements. For regulated sectors, coordination between tax advisors and regulatory specialists ensures compliance with both tax and industry-specific requirements. When selecting advisors, companies should evaluate their experience with similar transactions, relationships with relevant tax authorities, and ability to coordinate cross-border advice through international networks. For businesses concerned about potential exit tax exposure in existing structures, specialist reviews can identify latent risks before they crystallize through inadvertent triggering events. Considering the high-stakes nature of exit tax planning, businesses should prioritize advisory quality over cost considerations, as seemingly minor technical oversights can result in substantial preventable tax liabilities.
Global Tax Planning Perspectives
Exit tax planning requires placement within broader global tax frameworks. UK provisions represent just one element in a complex international tax ecosystem that businesses must navigate cohesively. Increasingly, corporate migrations trigger multiple tax consequences across several jurisdictions simultaneously, necessitating coordinated planning approaches. Destination jurisdiction incentives, including participation exemption regimes, intellectual property boxes, and step-up provisions, may partially offset UK exit costs when properly structured. Substance requirements have increased globally following BEPS implementation, requiring businesses to demonstrate genuine operational presence rather than merely formal legal arrangements. The proliferation of Economic Substance legislation in traditional offshore jurisdictions has particular relevance for holding company migrations. For multinational enterprises, exit tax planning must align with global effective tax rate objectives and public reporting considerations, including potential reputational aspects of tax planning. The emerging global minimum tax creates new analytical frameworks for evaluating migration benefits, as headline tax rate differentials become less significant than effective tax rate calculations under standardized methodologies. Digital business models create distinctive planning opportunities and challenges, as virtual operations potentially allow greater flexibility in residence planning while facing increased scrutiny under digital taxation initiatives. Companies contemplating international structuring involving UK elements should develop comprehensive global tax roadmaps addressing all relevant jurisdictions rather than focusing exclusively on UK exit considerations.
Expert International Tax Support
Navigating the complexities of UK exit tax requires specialized expertise and a strategic approach. At LTD24, our international tax team brings decades of experience helping businesses manage cross-border tax obligations effectively, including the intricate area of exit taxation.
We understand that exit tax planning isn’t merely about compliance—it’s about integrating these considerations into your broader business strategy. Our advisors provide tailored solutions addressing your specific industry challenges, corporate structure, and international footprint.
If you’re contemplating corporate restructuring, international expansion, or changes to your company’s residence status, proactive planning is essential to manage potential exit tax implications. Our team can help you evaluate available reliefs, develop compliant valuation approaches, and implement governance structures that align with your commercial objectives while minimizing unnecessary tax exposure.
Are you seeking expert guidance on UK exit tax or broader international tax matters? We invite you to book a personalized consultation with our specialized tax team. We’re a boutique international tax consulting firm offering advanced expertise in corporate law, tax risk management, asset protection, and international audits. We develop customized solutions for entrepreneurs, professionals, and corporate groups operating globally.
Schedule a session with one of our experts now at the rate of 199 USD/hour and receive concrete answers to your tax and corporate inquiries (link: https://ltd24.co.uk/consulting).
Alessandro is a Tax Consultant and Managing Director at 24 Tax and Consulting, specialising in international taxation and corporate compliance. He is a registered member of the Association of Accounting Technicians (AAT) in the UK. Alessandro is passionate about helping businesses navigate cross-border tax regulations efficiently and transparently. Outside of work, he enjoys playing tennis and padel and is committed to maintaining a healthy and active lifestyle.
Comments are closed.