No To Retro Tax - Ongoing battle against S58 FA2008

[elpinar]

I had a reply to my request to withdraw APN from HMRC bootle office yesterday. The request was acknowledged but REJECTED on the basis that there is no reason to withdraw. Has anyone else had the same?

was that based on the mont p letter for th early years ? and if so how long ago did you send the letter in ?

[gooner]

was that based on the mont p letter for th early years ? and if so how long ago did you send the letter in ?

based on year 2007 and yes it was a response to the mont p letter I sent in on may 6th

going to send it in to dawn & tony today ...

interestingly at the bottom of the letter it states ...

"I appreciate this response will be disappointing but you are obviously within your rights to issue judicial review proceedings"

[squirrel]

Are they suggesting you appeal????

"I appreciate this response will be disappointing but you are obviously within your rights to issue judicial review proceedings"

Either they are mocking you (us) knowing that JRs are expensive etc or they are actively encouraging you (us) to JR in order to throw this sorry mess out of the window!

I would have expected something more along the lines of we're right you're wrong pay up. most interesting choice of words from them... Or I'm reading too much into it!

[RingStinger]

based on year 2007 and yes it was a response to the mont p letter I sent in on may 6th

going to send it in to dawn & tony today ...

interestingly at the bottom of the letter it states ...

"I appreciate this response will be disappointing but you are obviously within your rights to issue judicial review proceedings"

So positively encouraging you to shlt or bust - and incur an extra penalty in the meantime.....

[webberg]

I've made a few enquiries about why APN's are being withdrawn and whilst I have had less than clear answers I think there might be some mileage in the following.

1. The MP representations are not making any difference. HMRC has a template response to the template letter which is being turned around pretty fast.

2. There is a potential issue in the original selection of APN/PPN where you are in a partnership scheme. It's not entirely clear what that issue is but HMRC think that there may be grounds to challenge the original forms on the basis that they are not appropriate.

3. The above weakness has been exposed by the JR's being launched. At this point my information runs into a brick wall that leads me to believe that there may be some application here in a wider context.

The above is partly speculation and reading between the lines. My contacts are unwilling to expose themselves further at this time so we will have to wait and see.

[Fireship]

Either they are mocking you (us) knowing that JRs are expensive etc or they are actively encouraging you (us) to JR in order to throw this sorry mess out of the window!

I would have expected something more along the lines of we're right you're wrong pay up. most interesting choice of words from them... Or I'm reading too much into it!

I wouldn’t read anything into it, it’s simply HMRC’s way of saying the law may ultimately be on your side but until you can prove it they intend to press forth regardless. They know full well their suggestion of a JR is far beyond the means of the majority of taxpayers making any such challenge unlikely/impossible. In addition should this finally end up in court (on an individual basis or as a collective) they can also state they gave us every opportunity to appeal no matter how unrealistic!

[the great escape]

I've made a few enquiries about why APN's are being withdrawn and whilst I have had less than clear answers I think there might be some mileage in the following.

1. The MP representations are not making any difference. HMRC has a template response to the template letter which is being turned around pretty fast.

2. There is a potential issue in the original selection of APN/PPN where you are in a partnership scheme. It's not entirely clear what that issue is but HMRC think that there may be grounds to challenge the original forms on the basis that they are not appropriate.

3. The above weakness has been exposed by the JR's being launched. At this point my information runs into a brick wall that leads me to believe that there may be some application here in a wider context.

The above is partly speculation and reading between the lines. My contacts are unwilling to expose themselves further at this time so we will have to wait and see.

Are you saying that the withdrawls that have been made to date are based on 2. only? 'Not notifiable' is being rebuffed?

[Morlock]

Re-Issued APNs..?

Has anybody had an APN withdrawn by HMRC, and then another one subsequently issued instead?

[elpinar]

Has anybody had an APN withdrawn by HMRC, and then another one subsequently issued instead?

youve jinxed it now !!

[lucozade]

Has anybody had an APN withdrawn by HMRC, and then another one subsequently issued instead?

I've had APN warning letters withdrawn and then re-issued. Going from "tax the partnership avoided" to "the tax you avoided", followed by actual APNs for "the tax you avoided".

I wonder if this is the reason behind the withdrawals.