• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Legal challenges on past, present and future tax issues

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #11
    When things go wrong it can be incredibly difficult to admit you made a mistake. There is a temptation to chase losses - its something even traders are very prone to.

    Some people are starting to hate politicians and lawyers as much as they hate HMRC.

    HMRC have limitless funds. Any challenge will go to FTTT, UTTT, Court of appeal, SupremeCourt. To get between each step you have to appeal to go to the next step. Then there are JRs. And HMRC might be awarded costs.

    Realistically you need a minimum of a million. You may get a good fighting fund. What happens when that runs out?

    Things may go well. Or people may end up losing extra money and extra years of their life when things could have been put behind them.

    Either way the lawyers win.

    Let the buyer beware.

    Comment


      #12
      I agree with Webberg. I'd be happy to contribute to a challenge as I personally think what HMRC are doing is so unfair and heavy handed.
      Also I don't expect anything for free, and I think Webberg is right and as long as he is upfront and HONEST , then he is entitled to make his living ... In my personal experience he has been very supportive in helping and answering my questions via private PM.
      What I would say though is that before embarking on a challenge is realistically what are the chances of a positive outcome? I understand it's hard to say , but maybe the experts have some sort of idea on this. As I see it for me, I earthier settle on a reduced liability or wait till 2019 and having to pay more ... or challenge!! If challenging then what are the thoughts about having to pay in 2019 or is that put on hold until the change has concluded.

      I'd be up for challenging.




      Originally posted by webberg View Post
      Not sure what that post means?

      Are you suggesting that I/we have no skin in the game and are simply looking to make fees from process?

      That might be a reasonable position but a few economics.

      Let's assume that 1,000 joined and agreed to pay £500 each. Obviously gross funds controlled by committee = £500,000.

      That would be enough for a claim to be prepared and laid before a Court.

      That needs a law firm (to be appointed by a committee) and not a tax firm. As I mentioned, I am not a lawyer and do not work in a law firm.

      I accept that as a tax firm we are as better versed in contactor tax than many but by no means all other firms. we would be quite happy to submit our credentials to the committee for a piece of work required. The legal/tax split here though is perhaps 9/1.

      So what's in it for us?

      A strong legal challenge helps all contractors. And that included BG members.

      We have seen other challenges run of steam and funds part way though the process and that leads to either abandonment of the challenge or a disproportionately small number of people picking up the tab. We want to avoid that.

      HMRC claims that 40,000 people are caught in the 2019 charge.

      Even if the numbers are half of that and only 25% of those contribute say £100, we have a decent fund.

      Comment


        #13
        All of the points above are valid.

        If the equation was to pay £5k each with a low chance of success, then the obvious answer is don't do it.

        If the equation is pay £150 each then even a low chance of success might be worth the punt.

        This is a hugely subjective decision.

        I also take the point about the original post having a number of potential targets. The point of the committee is to reduce those to a smaller number and to limit the objectives and/or assign priorities.

        We did not recommend JR's against the APN regime on the grounds that success was unlikely. Hopefully I'll be eating my words come July, but my money is on the Government on that one.

        The big difference we have with the 2019 charge is that this is unabashed retrospective law. (APN was current law with retrospective effect). We know that a modest group of MPs we brief have reservations on a 20 year rule.

        That group also has concerns over the opening of closed years.

        However words are cheap and when push comes to shove, how much of that support melts away will be a depressing but interesting read.

        I would personally put the chance of achieving any mitigation of that 2019 charge in the 25% range. If there is a small majority for one party or another, perhaps a but more. If there is a clear majority for one side over the other, a lower chance.

        The reason for the post however is that action is needed NOW.

        The promoters and their core of users to form a group, have largely gone.

        Advisers tend to be insular and (correctly) look after their own clients.

        To a degree I'm doing that as well, but can see the greater advantage as well.

        Given however relatively few views in the last day, I have no great hope that this effort will go to nought, perhaps for the reasons above and perhaps because the fight is leaving the people here and perhaps because most are focused on paying the tax and have no spare resource.
        Best Forum Adviser & Forum Personality of the Year 2018.

        (No, me neither).

        Comment


          #14
          We have full agreement.

          If I was going to challenge HMRC on schemes, yours is the solution I would go for.

          Unbelievably some people are still using schemes! Despite APNs. So there might be a steady stream of people who only do research after its all gone wrong.

          Comment


            #15
            No interest

            Obviously the majority of the 40,000 claimed by HMRC either do not visit this little thread and/or have no interest in helping themselves.

            We (Big Group) will consider how to spread the word in other ways to try and get this legal fighting fund together.

            Can I ask an administrator to close this thread please.
            Best Forum Adviser & Forum Personality of the Year 2018.

            (No, me neither).

            Comment

            Working...
            X