+ Reply to Thread
Page 19 of 41 FirstFirst ... 9 17 18 19 20 21 29 ... LastLast
Posts 181 to 190 of 409
  1. #181

    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 ads1980 View Post
    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?
    Something along the lines of -

    Dear xxxx,

    I have been directed to a consultation document called 'Tackling marketed tax avoidance' (link below). In summary the proposals are for any tax payer in dispute with HMRC to pay the tax estimated by HMRC first and then fight his/her corner in a tribunal. Where as currently the tax payer can appeal and the case may go to court if a settlement cannot be found.

    This may well force the tax payer into bankruptcy before they can attempt to justify their position with HMRC in Court. This will certainly destroy families and adversely affect the economy. Meanwhile foreign companies pay corporation tax in the single figures and HMRC do nothing.

    I know that when dealing with HMRC the tax payer is assumed guilty and has to prove innocence but this proposal goes way too far.

    I would be very interested in your thoughts

    https://www.gov.uk/government/upload..._avoidance.pdf


    Yours sincerely,

  2. #182

    Godlike


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

    Default

    It is important to point out that this isn't just aimed at disputes that arise in future.

    It would also apply to existing disputes going back to 2004 when DOTAS was introduced. According to HMRC, they have 65,000 of these open cases.

  3. #183

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    29
    Thanks (Given)
    4
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    98
    Likes (Received)
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vern19 View Post
    Something along the lines of -

    Dear xxxx,

    I have been directed to a consultation document called 'Tackling marketed tax avoidance' (link below). In summary the proposals are for any tax payer in dispute with HMRC to pay the tax estimated by HMRC first and then fight his/her corner in a tribunal. Where as currently the tax payer can appeal and the case may go to court if a settlement cannot be found.

    This may well force the tax payer into bankruptcy before they can attempt to justify their position with HMRC in Court. This will certainly destroy families and adversely affect the economy. Meanwhile foreign companies pay corporation tax in the single figures and HMRC do nothing.

    I know that when dealing with HMRC the tax payer is assumed guilty and has to prove innocence but this proposal goes way too far.

    I would be very interested in your thoughts

    https://www.gov.uk/government/upload..._avoidance.pdf


    Yours sincerely,
    thanks for this I shall get writing..

  4. #184

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    44
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1

    Default Support from MP

    I have already sent my local MP [Labour] an e-mail regarding our concerns and the lack of natural justice in the proposals. Emphasising yet again the retrospective aspect of them. He immediately responded using the phrase "hugely interesting" and has forwarded my comments and references on to his colleagues in the Shadow Treasury. I will be following up with a visit to see him this weekend. Keep pushing and make them aware of what is going on in the background.

  5. #185

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    51
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VictorValiant View Post
    I have already sent my local MP [Labour] an e-mail regarding our concerns and the lack of natural justice in the proposals. Emphasising yet again the retrospective aspect of them. He immediately responded using the phrase "hugely interesting" and has forwarded my comments and references on to his colleagues in the Shadow Treasury. I will be following up with a visit to see him this weekend. Keep pushing and make them aware of what is going on in the background.
    Well done victor. I am going to compile my letter this weekend and get in touch with my MP.
    We all should be doing this as the more MP's who understand the details the better. Clearly we want an end to these ambiguous schemes but HMRC are really going a step too far with these sweeping powers to be judge, jury and executioner all within 90 days!
    If HMRC manage to get this finance bill through I will be leaving the country - not to save money but to live in a country where they don't take liberties.

  6. #186

    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 lfcynwa View Post
    thanks for this I shall get writing..
    Ok but this is just a suggestion. It would look pretty lame if everyone just copy and pastes

  7. #187

    Double Godlike!

    malvolio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Walking in the garden, dreaming of Olivia...
    Posts
    10,232
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    197
    Likes (Given)
    4
    Likes (Received)
    699

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vern19 View Post
    Ok but this is just a suggestion. It would look pretty lame if everyone just copy and pastes
    Worse than that. It will be noticed by the secretariat and all of them will go in the bin. MPs only respond to individual letters.
    Blog? What blog...?

  8. #188

    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 malvolio View Post
    Worse than that. It will be noticed by the secretariat and all of them will go in the bin. MPs only respond to individual letters.
    Rubbish. My MP has responded to me already regarding retrospective taxation

  9. #189

    Double Godlike!

    malvolio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Walking in the garden, dreaming of Olivia...
    Posts
    10,232
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    197
    Likes (Given)
    4
    Likes (Received)
    699

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vern19 View Post
    Rubbish. My MP has responded to me already regarding retrospective taxation
    Responding to a form letter identical to a few hundred others?

    Also, your MP responding means little or nothing. David Gauke (in this government) responding is the target (and yes, I have a couple of letters from the Minister in recent years on various tax-related matters)
    Blog? What blog...?

  10. #190

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    29
    Thanks (Given)
    4
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    98
    Likes (Received)
    2

    Default Noted and Thanks

    Quote Originally Posted by vern19 View Post
    Ok but this is just a suggestion. It would look pretty lame if everyone just copy and pastes
    - Yep but a good starting point, I wasn't intending on copying word for word..

+ Reply to Thread
Page 19 of 41 FirstFirst ... 9 17 18 19 20 21 29 ... 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.