+ Reply to Thread
Page 18 of 41 FirstFirst ... 8 16 17 18 19 20 28 ... LastLast
Posts 171 to 180 of 409
  1. #171

    Some things in Moderation

    cojak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Look to your right...
    Posts
    17,813
    Thanks (Given)
    462
    Thanks (Received)
    951
    Likes (Given)
    4020
    Likes (Received)
    2637

    Default

    But I'm amused by this bit:
    There is a deep concern that some HRPs would wear ‘naming and shaming’ as a badge of honour, or worse as approval by HMRC that they provide schemes that work, providing a valuable marketing tool for the unscrupulous.
    Just as they do with 'QC Approved' currently.

  2. #172
    eek
    eek is online now

    bored now

    eek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    😂
    Posts
    21,938
    Thanks (Given)
    228
    Thanks (Received)
    1121
    Likes (Given)
    1004
    Likes (Received)
    3388

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cojak View Post
    Where does it say that in the document? I can't find any reference to VAT in the context you described.
    5.7 We are aware that there are concerns that DOTAS in respect of VAT has not
    worked as well as in areas of direct tax. That aside, there is an argument that
    the proposals should cover VAT and other EU taxes (eg customs duty) but
    only where it is compatible with the principles of EU law eg disclosing the
    names of people who advised on a number of schemes held to be abuses.
    Note CIOT are suggesting that VAT avoidance schemes should be covered within the rules, but the original draft law doesn't mention it....

    And now I'll go back to laughing from the sidelines....
    Last edited by eek; 10th February 2014 at 15:05.
    merely at clientco for the entertainment

  3. #173

    Some things in Moderation

    cojak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Look to your right...
    Posts
    17,813
    Thanks (Given)
    462
    Thanks (Received)
    951
    Likes (Given)
    4020
    Likes (Received)
    2637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eek View Post
    Note CIOT are suggesting that VAT avoidance schemes should be covered within the rules, but the original draft law doesn't mention it....

    And now I'll go back to laughing from the sidelines....
    Oh, ta. I stopped reading that line at the point I'd got to DOTAS..

  4. #174

    Godlike


    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,650
    Thanks (Given)
    7
    Thanks (Received)
    241
    Likes (Given)
    9
    Likes (Received)
    617

    Default Black Friday Proposals – A Call to Arms!

    Last edited by DonkeyRhubarb; 12th February 2014 at 08:34.

  5. #175

    Godlike


    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,650
    Thanks (Given)
    7
    Thanks (Received)
    241
    Likes (Given)
    9
    Likes (Received)
    617

    Default HMRC plans summer raid on pockets of tax scheme users


  6. #176

    Godlike


    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,650
    Thanks (Given)
    7
    Thanks (Received)
    241
    Likes (Given)
    9
    Likes (Received)
    617

    Default More measured comment

    WGEAdvisory | Just another WordPress site

    "Should we care about the “morally repugnant” DOTAS and GAAR scheme providers and those who partake in such schemes? After all, these people are the same as benefit cheats, right?"

  7. #177

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    32
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DonkeyRhubarb View Post
    I've wrote to my MP (Conservative) as regards this Bill in late January.

    I've yet to receive a reply.

    I'd be surprised if most of these muppets knew or even cared what was in this Bill.

    They may get a surprise when it's used against them I suppose.

  8. #178

    More time posting than coding


    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    306
    Thanks (Given)
    48
    Thanks (Received)
    18
    Likes (Given)
    213
    Likes (Received)
    97

    Default What has happened to Britain?

    When you look at the Finance Act 2014 proposals and undersand their significance, then you begin to understand how Britain has lost its way concerning the basic human rights of its citizens.

    To presume you have committed an offence, then demanded to pay up or else by using case law that is decided by HMRC...its a very sad state of affairs indeed.

    Lets not forget that without IR35 then this whole debacle wouldnt have come about. Many were recommended into this arrangements by accountants who advised people it was the best alternative in avoiding the stress of IR35. Remember many 5-10yrs ago were seriously stressed about it.

    Now jump forward, the government wants to take to task people who are easily identified, who thought they were in arrangements that were up front with HMRC, but now HMRC want to change the game, move the goal posts because they couldnt resolve these arrangements years ago, and let them run on...

    It stinks, it really is a stitch up that they are trying to undertake. Let the big companies like Starbucks, Amazon etc go about their business as usual, they have huge legal teams and lots of money, but your average freelancer is easy pickings...its a case of target a section in society as scum bags, tax avoiders who are unworthy of any rights of appeal and justice, they are the filthy dirty tax dodgers and we aim to get them is the mantra of HMRC.

    Dont HMRC understand the consequences of what they will do?

    They will ruin families and break many up, push people to the very edge...

  9. #179

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    98
    Thanks (Given)
    1
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    2
    Likes (Received)
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LandRover View Post
    When you look at the Finance Act 2014 proposals and undersand their significance, then you begin to understand how Britain has lost its way concerning the basic human rights of its citizens.

    To presume you have committed an offence, then demanded to pay up or else by using case law that is decided by HMRC...its a very sad state of affairs indeed.

    Lets not forget that without IR35 then this whole debacle wouldnt have come about. Many were recommended into this arrangements by accountants who advised people it was the best alternative in avoiding the stress of IR35. Remember many 5-10yrs ago were seriously stressed about it.

    Now jump forward, the government wants to take to task people who are easily identified, who thought they were in arrangements that were up front with HMRC, but now HMRC want to change the game, move the goal posts because they couldnt resolve these arrangements years ago, and let them run on...

    It stinks, it really is a stitch up that they are trying to undertake. Let the big companies like Starbucks, Amazon etc go about their business as usual, they have huge legal teams and lots of money, but your average freelancer is easy pickings...its a case of target a section in society as scum bags, tax avoiders who are unworthy of any rights of appeal and justice, they are the filthy dirty tax dodgers and we aim to get them is the mantra of HMRC.

    Dont HMRC understand the consequences of what they will do?

    They will ruin families and break many up, push people to the very edge...
    I couldn't agree more. I just hope that people on this forum write to their MPs via writetothem.com and let them know what some of their constituents think about this.

  10. #180

    More time posting than coding


    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    233
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    4
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vern19 View Post
    I couldn't agree more. I just hope that people on this forum write to their MPs via writetothem.com and let them know what some of their constituents think about this.
    My MP is useless (but most of them are!) but I would be more than happy to write to him. Without causing an issue for myself worse that it already is though, what is the best thing to say?

+ Reply to Thread
Page 18 of 41 FirstFirst ... 8 16 17 18 19 20 28 ... 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.