No To Retro Tax - Ongoing battle against S58 FA2008

[DonkeyRhubarb]

so...what happens to your APN while you wait for your FFT hearing?
Do you still have to pay up if you can/accept the fine if you can't (whether you win or not)?
Or would the APN be put on hold because of the pending FFT hearing? No

APN = pay NOW, argue later.

[elpinar]

Actually bothering to vote today?

I did check the candidate list for my area, sadly there was no representation from the "monster raving looney party" so will not waste my time with any of the other

Dear old Mr Pickles is my local MP ......

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Ok but the cases that do, will the person need to be there or just let it all be handled by the professionals whilst they carry on earning?

Yes they would need to be there but they would be professionally represented.

We've already got volunteers who are up for it.

[MishiMoo]

APN = pay NOW, argue later.

Unless MP launch a JR of APNs relating to this case. Or, less likely IMO, if HMRC accept that a JR of APNs is already in progress and agree to suspend our APNs.

That is how I understand it. Please correct if wrong.

[Disgusted of Coventry]

Deja vu

Exactly!

I wasn't concerned about whether it was the Special Commissioners or the FTT. It had more to do with whether a review request could create a reference point in time that would effectively shimmy any subsequent retrospective change to the Law.

But you'd imagine that the CCW partner knows his stuff.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Unless MP launch a JR of APNs relating to this case. Or, less likely IMO, if HMRC accept that a JR of APNs is already in progress and agree to suspend our APNs.

That is how I understand it. Please correct if wrong.

Yes, and I do think it will take a JR to suspend them.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I wasn't concerned about whether it was the Special Commissioners or the FTT. It had more to do with whether a review request could create a reference point in time that would effectively shimmy any subsequent retrospective change to the Law.

An application to a court (FTT) is better than a review request in this respect.

I've no doubt HMRC will, as we speak, be trying to plot something.

[Scotty15]

EU to investigate McDonald's

Re article below, and whilst a lot of people may not agree with it, it would appear to be like our own situation, a case of fully complying with the law at the time! I have discussed this at length with friends and family a small minority who have been in the scheme, the vast majority not, and all have stated that whilst they do not agree with it, they fully accept that it was legal at the time and had they known about these schemes, they would have used them too!!

The UK and the EU are the ones who are guilty and incompetent for allowing schemes to exist in the first place. My point is that is that they have a duty of care and as such it is each countries governments responsibility to ensure that they do the best for it, so why on earth have they allowed all of these loopholes to exist (and yes I am not that naïve, I know why)!

It is easier to point the finger of blame rather than accept that it is they "our elected Governments - who are their to serve their people" who are in the wrong!!

THE EUROPEAN UNION is to investigate McDonald's over claims its structure allowed it to avoid more than €1bn (£730m) in tax.

It is alleged by trade unions that the fast food purveyor exploited a royalties loophole through Luxembourg, allowing it to pay just €16m of tax on royalties worth €3.7bn between 2009 and 2013.

It is accused of diverting cash through a subsidiary based in the Grand Duchy, with a Swiss branch to exploit a generous tax break on intellectual property rights.

The unions claim McDonald's Luxembourg subsidiary employs just 13 people, yet booked €834m of revenue in 2013 - roughly around €64m per worker.

McDonald's maintains it has fully complied with EU law.

"We are looking into the information gained by trade unions when it comes to McDonald's in order to assess if there is a case, or if we should open cases there," European Union competition commissioner Margrethe Vestager said.

On Monday, McDonald's promised to become a modern, progressive and transparent burger company.

The commission has already opened investigations into the tax affairs of Amazon in Luxembourg, Apple in Ireland and Starbucks in the Netherlands.

[webberg]

Once agreed - can't withdraw

I'm sure your CCW man in on the ball but it would be useful to point out the Southern Cross Employment Agency case.

In very brief:

Taxpayer and HMRC made an agreement that VAT could be repaid to taxpayer.
VAT was repaid.
Later HMRC said that they had changed their mind and wanted the cash back.
Tribunal said "tough - you made an agreement so you have to honour it".

First time that an agreement where HMRC pay the taxpayer had been held to be not capable of later amendment.

HMRC appealed to Upper Tier - and lost. Again.

http://www.tribunals.gov.uk/financea...hern-Cross.pdf

[StellaFan]

Just had a message from by appointed agent (as far as self assessment etc is concerned) and he reckons he's just got a letter stating my apns have been withdrawn. Hopefully I have the same when I get in!
I sent objections last week but not sure if they helped or whether its a blanket withdrawal