Closed Thread
Page 44 of 182 FirstFirst ... 34 42 43 44 45 46 54 94 144 ... LastLast
Posts 431 to 440 of 1815
  1. #431

    I post more often than I breathe


    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Jumping in my hooptie hooptie hoop
    Posts
    70,794
    Thanks (Given)
    625
    Thanks (Received)
    610
    Likes (Given)
    625
    Likes (Received)
    775

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheGadgetMan View Post
    Hi I'm new to the boards...and I'll introduce myself properly later when i have a few moments...but something struck me lying in bed this morning (as you do!)...I don't think I have seen anyone express this view in earlier posts...

    we seem to reached a point now where both sides - MontyP and HMRC - have expressed the view that this is now going to go thru the courts...High Court, Court of Appeal, HoL, European Court of Human Rights...I'm not sure what the exact route map is here but its something like that...but basically, which ever side loses at each stage will then just appeal to the next court up in the chain...

    ...until the point when we reach DefCon5...the EU Court of Human Rights...by this time, both sides will have spent an unbelievable amount of money to get to that stage...

    ...BUT has anyone thought to explain to Hector that to take it to the ECHR would be a really stupid thing to do...because Hector would be asking the ECHR to rule AGAINST one of its own laws...Section 1.47 in the Human Rights Act as quoted above by smalldog...what are the chances of ECHR finding against one of their own tenets?...you can answer that one for yourself!!!

    MontyP's simple argument to the ECHR judges would be...HMRC are breaking Section 1.47, can you put them straight please?...

    surely it would be worth putting that argument to Hector sooner rather than later...perhaps after the JR, regardless of who wins...Hector might be a bully but he isnt stupid...I think we may have a very strong hand here in negotiating a deal with Hector...

    please feel free to pull my logic apart...

    (I dont need a Veyron....I'd be happy with a nice shiny BMW M5!)
    Good point - and one I would have hoped would have come out at the meeting last Thursday. I think Mal has summarized it correctly - Hector will go all the way. It is not their money. They might well spend more than they reclaim. But they will TRY to make an example of us.

    IMO it will be years before we know the outcome. In the meantime Hector will bully us. It is easy for me as I joined in April 2006. For others it is a choice between hard place and rock. As soon as I get a bill I will get a CTD(if mortgage paid off).

  2. #432

    I post more often than I breathe


    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Jumping in my hooptie hooptie hoop
    Posts
    70,794
    Thanks (Given)
    625
    Thanks (Received)
    610
    Likes (Given)
    625
    Likes (Received)
    775

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DonkeyRhubarb View Post
    I have pieced this together from the correspondence I received from SCO and talking to other people in the scheme, notably one of the guys who was in the original 4 test cases that SCO were supposedly taking to a Special Commisioners hearing.

    Rhetorical question: if you were SCO, how would you feel having to stand up in court and defend the way you managed this case?

    2001
    May - MTM (Montpelier) start operating "IR35" Scheme

    2002

    2003
    Jan - First year (2001/2) tax returns filed
    Jun - Special Compliance Office opens 4 test cases. Requests bank records, trust accounts and copies of all correspondence with MTM.
    Dec - Remaining 2001/2 tax returns placed under enquiry by SCO

    2004
    Jan - 2002/3 tax returns filed
    Jan - SCO states their intention to challenge the DTA claim
    Jun - SCO re-states their intention to challenge. Suggests payment on account
    Dec - 2002/3 tax returns placed under enquiry by SCO

    2005
    Jan - 2003/4 tax returns filed
    Feb - SCO re-states their intention to challenge. Suggests payment on account
    Oct - SCO says they are still investigating. Suggests making payment on account
    Dec - 2003/4 tax returns placed under enquiry by SCO

    2006
    Jan - 2004/5 tax returns filed
    Jun - SCO outlines its technical case against the scheme. Suggests payment on account.
    Dec - 2004/5 tax returns placed under enquiry by SCO

    2007
    Jan - 2005/6 tax returns filed
    May - SCO states intention to take test case to Special Commissioners hearing. Suggests payment on account
    Dec - 2005/6 tax returns placed under enquiry

    2008
    Jan - 2006/7 tax returns filed
    Mar - SCO writes stating their intention to use BN66 when it becomes law. Suggests payment on account
    Any chance of projecting that with possible court case dates into the future?

  3. #433

    Nervous Newbie


    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    12
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smalldog View Post
    Hooray, just found out I can borrow enough money to pay hector if he comes knocking with some left over for a nice sparkly new DB9! Gooner99 fancy a ride in my new Aston when I get it?
    Smalldog

    Your feeble attempts to engender feelings of envy amuse me greatly. The very fact that you aspire to owning a ‘nice sparkly new DB9’ tells me a lot about you. Fortunately, I’ve left that crap behind years ago. Let me tell you, the path of true wealth lies in a very different direction.

    One obvious question that did occur to me was that if you are earning so much and so wanted your shiny new bauble, why did you wait until you amassed a large tax liability before having to borrow money to acquire it? Don’t bother to answer – I think I know.

    Meanwhile, don’t let me stop you all from jumping up and down and squealing. I’m still deriving enormous pleasure from reading the thread. I really enjoyed the one about appearing on Question Time – that had me chuckling for hours. “Can the panel comment on the recent clarification by HMRC of tax rules that mean that myself and a couple of thousand other naive but highly paid contractors have to now pay tax on our earnings after having jumped onto a tawdry little scheme that promised to exploit a potential loophole that promised that we only have to pay single digit tax rates on our huge salaries”. Rolls off the tongue nicely. Good luck with that one.

    Here’s another suggestion - how about climbing up a big crane in Central London for the day dressed as Batman and unfurling a big banner “Please help prevent wealthy contractors from paying tax!”.

    I must congratulate you, however, on your excellent point regarding all the other taxes you pay (VAT, stamp duty, et al, yawn…). What an excellent point and one that I hadn’t thought of. Next time I get flashed by a speed camera I am going to elect to go to court and plead that I adhere to most speed limits but ignore the ones I don’t like. Should stand up in court, don’t you think? Keep repeating it enough times and you may even start believing it yourself.

    To be honest, I have no strong feelings either way whether the tax gets applied retrospectively or not. Morally you have no case but you have already made clear your lack of compunction – your are greedy and out for all you can get, and will keep grasping for as long as you’re allowed. If that is how you want to live, good luck to you. Unfortunately, however, and as has already been mentioned, it is because people like you that we all suffer – the most heavily legislated country in the world. If it ain’t screwed down, you will take it.

    Anyway, enough. And if you think I work for HMRC and that I toil away all week on a lowly salary, only to then take up a personal crusade in my own time, think again. I would have to be even sadder than you lot screaming ‘Foul!’ ‘cos you been caught with you trousers down and haven’t had even the basic intelligence to cover your asses. Streuth – as they say, you couldn’t make it up….

  4. #434

    More time posting than coding


    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    493
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gooner99 View Post
    Smalldog

    Your feeble attempts to engender feelings of envy amuse me greatly. The very fact that you aspire to owning a ‘nice sparkly new DB9’ tells me a lot about you. Fortunately, I’ve left that crap behind years ago. Let me tell you, the path of true wealth lies in a very different direction.

    One obvious question that did occur to me was that if you are earning so much and so wanted your shiny new bauble, why did you wait until you amassed a large tax liability before having to borrow money to acquire it? Don’t bother to answer – I think I know.

    Meanwhile, don’t let me stop you all from jumping up and down and squealing. I’m still deriving enormous pleasure from reading the thread. I really enjoyed the one about appearing on Question Time – that had me chuckling for hours. “Can the panel comment on the recent clarification by HMRC of tax rules that mean that myself and a couple of thousand other naive but highly paid contractors have to now pay tax on our earnings after having jumped onto a tawdry little scheme that promised to exploit a potential loophole that promised that we only have to pay single digit tax rates on our huge salaries”. Rolls off the tongue nicely. Good luck with that one.

    Here’s another suggestion - how about climbing up a big crane in Central London for the day dressed as Batman and unfurling a big banner “Please help prevent wealthy contractors from paying tax!”.

    I must congratulate you, however, on your excellent point regarding all the other taxes you pay (VAT, stamp duty, et al, yawn…). What an excellent point and one that I hadn’t thought of. Next time I get flashed by a speed camera I am going to elect to go to court and plead that I adhere to most speed limits but ignore the ones I don’t like. Should stand up in court, don’t you think? Keep repeating it enough times and you may even start believing it yourself.

    To be honest, I have no strong feelings either way whether the tax gets applied retrospectively or not. Morally you have no case but you have already made clear your lack of compunction – your are greedy and out for all you can get, and will keep grasping for as long as you’re allowed. If that is how you want to live, good luck to you. Unfortunately, however, and as has already been mentioned, it is because people like you that we all suffer – the most heavily legislated country in the world. If it ain’t screwed down, you will take it.

    Anyway, enough. And if you think I work for HMRC and that I toil away all week on a lowly salary, only to then take up a personal crusade in my own time, think again. I would have to be even sadder than you lot screaming ‘Foul!’ ‘cos you been caught with you trousers down and haven’t had even the basic intelligence to cover your asses. Streuth – as they say, you couldn’t make it up….
    gooner. i dont want your sympathy, I want fair play, if hmrc didnt want loopholes found and exploited they should draft there legislation better, as for paying the 'fair amount of tax like everyone else' is concerned, who except us is expected to bend over and kiss hectors ass and hand over the better part of 55% of our income, if it wasnt for the bulltulip that is ir35, not one of us would have dreamed of doing anything like this, i think I may speak for all present when I say that we were happy running our small businesses and paying what was owed, that being in the region of 35/40% including nic's (at least in my case, I paid myself a fair salary). also I think the db9 thing may have been a joke. incidentally, my bill when it comes will indeed bankrupt me, and i havent found anyone who'll lend me even half of at at less than 15% interest.

  5. #435

    Contractor Among Contractors

    smalldog's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,420
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    2
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    11

    Default

    Gooner Im not going to be drawn into a debate with you as you obviously have issues to be so angry towards us all and to even bother posting your hatred...I dont think I need to try and make you envious by posting about a DB9, I think you already have plenty of envy in you to be so vindictive.

    PS - you didnt get my point about the DB9, from my perspective I dont care hugely if they take my money as I have plenty spare...

  6. #436

    Godlike

    malvolio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Walking in the garden, dreaming of Olivia...
    Posts
    8,026
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    63
    Likes (Given)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smalldog View Post

    PS - you didnt get my point about the DB9, from my perspective I dont care hugely if they take my money as I have plenty spare...
    So pay the f***ing tax, stop pratting around and stop giving all the rest of us contractors a PR headache we don't need. If you lose the headlines will be "Tax dodging contractors get their come-uppance", if you win, they'll be "Tax dodging IT Contractors avoid unpaid back tax" neither of which will help those of use trying to isolate and protect contractors based around us not being tax dodgers.

    Now do you understand?
    Blog? What blog...?

  7. #437

    I post more often than I breathe


    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Jumping in my hooptie hooptie hoop
    Posts
    70,794
    Thanks (Given)
    625
    Thanks (Received)
    610
    Likes (Given)
    625
    Likes (Received)
    775

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gooner99 View Post
    Let me tell you, the path of true wealth lies in a very different direction.
    Please tell us in which direction true wealth lies. I am interested.

    Anything else on the moral side of paying tax - I created a seperate thread to keep this clean.

  8. #438

    I post more often than I breathe


    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Jumping in my hooptie hooptie hoop
    Posts
    70,794
    Thanks (Given)
    625
    Thanks (Received)
    610
    Likes (Given)
    625
    Likes (Received)
    775

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by malvolio View Post
    So pay the f***ing tax, stop pratting around and stop giving all the rest of us contractors a PR headache we don't need. If you lose the headlines will be "Tax dodging contractors get their come-uppance", if you win, they'll be "Tax dodging IT Contractors avoid unpaid back tax" neither of which will help those of use trying to isolate and protect contractors based around us not being tax dodgers.

    Now do you understand?
    Are we forming a union now? You look after your interests - I will look after mine. I have started a seperate thread on the morals of paying tax. But this sounds as if you expect us to work together

  9. #439

    Nervous Newbie


    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    12
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by poppy01 View Post
    gooner. i dont want your sympathy, I want fair play, if hmrc didnt want loopholes found and exploited they should draft there legislation better, as for paying the 'fair amount of tax like everyone else' is concerned, who except us is expected to bend over and kiss hectors ass and hand over the better part of 55% of our income, if it wasnt for the bulltulip that is ir35, not one of us would have dreamed of doing anything like this, i think I may speak for all present when I say that we were happy running our small businesses and paying what was owed, that being in the region of 35/40% including nic's (at least in my case, I paid myself a fair salary). also I think the db9 thing may have been a joke. incidentally, my bill when it comes will indeed bankrupt me, and i havent found anyone who'll lend me even half of at at less than 15% interest.
    I won’t respond to Smalldog – he seems to be a little sore and I don’t want to upset him anymore (!).

    Poppy,

    So let me get this straight. You were ‘happy’ to pay 35 – 40% tax/NI before IR35 (and magnanimously you speak for ‘all present’). However, when IR35 was introduced, your were forced into adopting an off-shore scheme. I believe you can specify how you much you want to declare as earnings and how much want to filter off into the trust, in which case I am surprised you didn’t declare sufficient as earnings to enable you to maintain the ratio of 35-40% taxation that you were previously ‘happy’ with. You obviously didn’t, saw an opportunity to get away with minimal taxation, and went for it. I suggest you felt even more ‘happy’ at this point. You may have asked yourself why 90% of other contractors wouldn’t touch the scheme with a bargepole.

    I sympathise if you are in genuine financial difficulties but it is a situation totally of your own making. Don’t you see? You are invariably in a highly paid profession and, unless you are very close to retirement, you will recover and you will see this as a learning point. As ever, if something sounds too good to be true, it usually is. But don’t ask me to break out the Kleenex just yet…

  10. #440

    Godlike

    malvolio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Walking in the garden, dreaming of Olivia...
    Posts
    8,026
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    63
    Likes (Given)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrilloPad View Post
    Are we forming a union now? You look after your interests - I will look after mine. I have started a seperate thread on the morals of paying tax. But this sounds as if you expect us to work together
    We formed a union about 10 years ago. You're welcome to join.

    OK, once last go at explaining reality, and for once I don't give a flying f*** how you feel about it:

    There is a conception in HMG that freelance IT workers are only working the way they do to avoid tax. We aren't, we are required to work that way because of extant legislation. We don't pay any more tax than absolutely necessary - why should we? - but we do pay what is legally required. What is more, some of us are working to get that position recognised, on behalf of the roughly 1.5 million small businesses affected by HMG's war on the freelance sector.

    Then we have a couple of thousand arrogant twats who think that by using some obscure and dubious (and now demonstrably incorrect) interpretation of two lines of badly written legislation, they need not pay any UK tax at all on 95% of their UK income. What's worse, they think they are so right they should challenge HMG through the courts to protect their patently ridiculous position.

    Well here's the truth. You are cheating everyone else and you're damaging our own case quite severely but are too selfish to realise it. AFAIC you deserve all you get. Enjoy the rest of this thread and your futile legal challenge. I'm staying out of it in case I say something I actually regret.
    Blog? What blog...?

Closed Thread
Page 44 of 182 FirstFirst ... 34 42 43 44 45 46 54 94 144 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.