HMRC enquiries for Schemes through ASMG / White Collar

[looonytunes]

The deadline for if you want to continue to receive asssitance from them and their associates. You need to to reply to the email and they will send you further information. I spoke with WC yesterday and the process was fully explained to me.

sent you a pm, we had a different experience

[hemnall]

Anyone who hasn't spoke with WC yet should do so now. There is a third-party that will be handling our tax affairs. From what I'm led to believe there is over a thousand of us all in the same boat.

Yes, do so. Also if anything is still unclear; call them back again!

[Romano]

So are WC essentially washing their hands of ex-clients, unless they sign up with this 3rd party company? Worryingly, the 3rd party company is the same bunch that WC recommended I use for my ltd company when I left them over a year ago.

Yes, I got that exact same impression. The options were:

Move your business to this company and receive support free (nothing extra to pay on top of the usual monthly accounting fee).

Pay a lump sum for unlimited support for this issue (if you don't move your business to this company).

I'm not feeling either option to be honest !!

[webberg]

I'm going to risk criticism here and make a couple of suggestions.

First, there is an active group of members here. You can access it by contacting Turnover via the PM system. (You may need one of the nice admin types to help you).

Their objectives may be slightly different from yours but they have KNOWLEDGE, enthusiasm and experience. Even if they are aiming at slightly different things, I suggest that their opinion as involved members is worth listening to.

Second, I have no idea who the firm is you've been referred to, but you're all now moving from one phase of an enquiry process to another. To date, HMRC has been collecting and analysing data and behind the scenes, their technical/legal teams have been sifting for weaknesses to exploit.

Those weaknesses come in three parts (I'm simplifying). First, execution - were all the parts executed as required. If not, does that lead to a different conclusion. Second, original technical analysis - was it valid and does it have an arguable basis. Third, evolving anti avoidance principles - are any of them triggered.

With all due respect, if an accounting firm is not able to analyse and deal with these three elements, all of which will be thrown at you, consider carefully whether you are getting value for money. You are moving into specialist territory and I suggest that 95% of accounting firms designed to deal with SME's will be out of their depth, very quickly.

You may find that the firm recommended is in some way connected with the provider or has access to their documents and original opinions. That can be a good thing and can get you through most of the first and second elements above. However part three is different and you don't want a firm sticking dogmatically to the original technical analysis if that is failing.

As I say, I have no idea which firm has been recommended and it may be that they are perfectly suited for the task ahead. I would be tempted to ask them;

1. What experience do they have in settling complex avoidance cases?
2. Do they have connections with the original provider and if so, what advantage does that give them?
3. Do they have access to the original tax opinions?
4. What is their strategy for dealing with the enquiry and will there be additional costs?
5. How can they guarantee the cost?
6. Are they paying the provider for introductions?

Treat this like buying an expensive personal item. Do your research, ask questions, get comparisons, consider what YOUR strategy is and whether your objectives match those offered.

[dangerouswhensober]

The firm that WC are referring people to is 'myFD' - their website is here:

W ww.myfdonline.com - MyFD - Fixed Fee Contractor Accounting - Welcome to MyFD

'My FD' is a trading name of Templeman Financial Limited - a due diligence search on that company is here:

https://www.duedil.com/company/08183...ancial-limited

I don't see any great need (or legal requirement) for this info to be kept secret - if MyFD are going to defend ex-WC scheme members against HMRC claims, then their company name is going to get publicised sooner or later.

And - just for clarity - I am not taking up the WC/MyFD offer - but that's my own personal decision ...

[Romano]

The WC recommendation

1. What experience do they have in settling complex avoidance cases?
2. Do they have connections with the original provider and if so, what advantage does that give them?
3. Do they have access to the original tax opinions?
4. What is their strategy for dealing with the enquiry and will there be additional costs?
5. How can they guarantee the cost?
6. Are they paying the provider for introductions?

Hi, thanks for your response I will ask for PM access and then get info from the private area.

After my chat with WC the following is clear:

The recommended company are in no way experts in this sort of thing, in fact the reason they have been chosen to represent us is because they don't have any "previous" with HMRC.

They do however have sound knowledge of the scheme they will be representing clients on, the jist I got from my chat with WC is that they explained the details to to them to give the accountants a thorough understanding of what it is they will be defending, if defence is indeed needed.

So to answer your numbered points based on the impression I got, I would say:
1) None
2) Yes
3) Yes
4) Don't know until I join up with them I guess.
5) Cost is based on whether you use them as accountants moving forward (so pay a flat monthly accounting fee) or you pay a one off lump sum that covers you until the first ....tribunal/hearing/I forgot the term used, but the opinion was it won't go further than that.
6) Who knows - somebody will be making a tidy sum though !

For the record I don't think I will be taking up their offer, it just seems like WC have washed their hands of it and now someone else will be making additional money from us.

Regards

[Romano]

PM access please

Hi Admin, can I have PM access please.

[webberg]

So to answer your numbered points based on the impression I got, I would say:
1) None
2) Yes
3) Yes
4) Don't know until I join up with them I guess.
5) Cost is based on whether you use them as accountants moving forward (so pay a flat monthly accounting fee) or you pay a one off lump sum that covers you until the first ....tribunal/hearing/I forgot the term used, but the opinion was it won't go further than that.
6) Who knows - somebody will be making a tidy sum though !
Regards

Thanks - useful.

I particularly love the answer to 5.

Unless they know something about HMRC policy that nobody else is aware of, my view of their opinion is that it's hopelessly optimistic.

[dangerouswhensober]

Unless they know something about HMRC policy that nobody else is aware of, my view of their opinion is that it's hopelessly optimistic.

Agree - many posts on these boards (from tax professionals, ex-HMRC people, and others) confirm that HMRC are dogged when it comes to litigation - if they don't win at one level, they just appeal and proceed to the next level. So defeating HMRC at FTT means ... not a lot.

And BTW - one of the reasons I decided not to go down the MyFD path is because WC told me (during the telecon) that their nominated company 'could' fight up to the FTT - NOT that they WOULD. So you could end up paying your up-front amount (or your monthly fee) to MyFD only for them subsequently to advise you to settle before FTT.

If I have to spend money fighting HMRC - which, unfortunately, I do - then I'd rather pay people who are committed to going all the way ...

[DNA]

MyFD are not quite 'independent' of WC as per the Director of Templeman Financial Limited

https://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/d...nts/2013-12-31