No To Retro Tax - Ongoing battle against S58 FA2008

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Out of curiosity, what was George's liability?

He was only in the scheme a year and a few months, so not that high.

It was a cheap fix for HMRC to settle with him at a discount.

[bananarepublic]

they will not settle ... of that i have been very very very assured. Would not even go for - if i pay the apn now can we call it quits (so no inters/ni etc) nada .... dont waste your time

HMRC are not allowed to settle for less than the tax amount due. So there was no chance of them settling on the basis of 'calling it quits'.

The beauty of the TAA argument is that it accords with how HMRC should have taken down the scheme but it now works against them because of statutory time limits. However, it may help them take down other more recent avoidance schemes.

On the basis of their LSS (litigation and settlement strategy) they may settle saving an embarrassing court case.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

An APN excludes interest, right? So if you can pay the APN now, but only just, but you can't possibly pay all the interest / penalties as well should they eventually "win", and you would then have to go bankrupt, what on earth is the point of paying the APN now? You may as well tootle off to Vegas and put it all on black!

Paying the APN puts off going bankrupt for a while longer.

[elpinar]

The additional Class 4 NIC is just under 5%.

The accrued interest is the real killer though.

2001/2 - 64%
2002/3 - 57%
2003/4 - 51%
2004/5 - 44%
2005/6 - 37%
2006/7 - 30%
2007/8 - 22%

actually have i misunderstood this

i read this as for ni and ni alone ... for say year 4/5 NI alone would add 44% to your bill with interest whcih would be crazy-

so do you mean take amount apparently owed for year - eg for ease 100k .... ni due = 4k so take 1.44 of that so about 6k

[GripRacing]

Hi,
after all the Fraud scare I'm thinking of backing out of the review & ftt as robbers & crooks have
done nothing honest - misled parliament, lied in court etc, no end to their malice, and an endless pool
of career climbing apes that can be corrupted by them -offering sweet deals to judges.
Sorry for the negativity - all looking too scary for me now, since I want to continue being freelance, although
been out of work for nearly a year - can't really take the risk! And, after all didn't we follow QC advice
in the first place. Who would have thought the time machine existed, no-one can tell what low
levels the R&C will scoop too.

Your decision, of course.

But not mine.

We have not broken any laws, have been lied to, stuffed into a time machine (I still struggle to accept that that was allowed) and are now being threatened with the most ridiculous threats to make us cave in.

We take them on, now, in the most professional way that we can (just as DR states) because this has to end.

Grip.

[bananarepublic]

Really so you owed the tax before you earn the money !!!!! yuo have ot pay interst on money before you got it - please dont scare me

You can reduce your payments on account if your earnings have decreased. The first payment on account for a tax year is 10 months into that tax year so you should not be paying a tax before you have earnt it.

[helen7]

An APN excludes interest, right? So if you can pay the APN now, but only just, but you can't possibly pay all the interest / penalties as well should they eventually "win", and you would then have to go bankrupt, what on earth is the point of paying the APN now? You may as well tootle off to Vegas and put it all on black!

If you demonstrate that you have made genuine efforts to pay, you will be offered a payment plan - HMRC will not take your house or make you bankrupt, that is a last resort.

If you spent the last 8 years buying cars and having lovely holidays they will most likely F***K you over.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

On the basis of their LSS (litigation and settlement strategy) they may settle saving an embarrassing court case.

That's why George reckons they settled with him. To make the spoon bending problem go away. (Sorry that's an in-joke)

[helen7]

HMRC are not allowed to settle for less than the tax amount due. So there was no chance if them settling on the basis of 'calling it quits'.

.

*AHEM* George.....

[bananarepublic]

That's why George reckons they settled with him. To make the spoon bending problem go away. (Sorry that's an in-joke)

Settlement would allow them to brush this mess under the carpet. Presumably they could ask us to sign non disclosure agreements?

Also as I've said there is a slight silver lining for HMRC as it would allow them to take down other schemes where they are still in time using the TAA argument.

Finally, should HMRC let this go through to litigation, a win for them would be highly damaging for their anti IR35 avoidance and other employment status strategies.