No To Retro Tax - Ongoing battle against S58 FA2008

[TAF4]

I'm slowly coming to the view that 0% (nothing to pay) is the right outcome.

I've just re-read document F007 - The Case.
It makes my blood boil!!!


That brilliantly constructed treatise is the strongest natural justice argument for why 0% is the only acceptable level of settlement.
After that we should use our collective financial clout to pursue Mr Brooks through the courts, dragging along all those that directed and supported him.



Calm down. Breathe........

[DownButNotOut]

Just received my hmrc apn courtesey call

Did I receive my APN?.....err yes
Do I understand what it means?.....err yes

The clocks ticking. Something gotta happen pretty soon otherwise its penalty time for me

[SantaClaus]

Have you tried it from the Members Area drop-down?

Alternatively, try clicking on this:

Members Profile

Not sure why the dropdown doesn't work, but the link that DR supplied definitely does.
This screenshot shows what the profile page looks like and where to select it:

http://my.jetscreenshot.com/6325/20150319-0qar-138kb

[GripRacing]

Did I receive my APN?.....err yes
Do I understand what it means?.....err yes

The clocks ticking. Something gotta happen pretty soon otherwise its penalty time for me

I'm with you.

HMRC have sent copies of both the pre and APN letters to my accountants - who have just called me.

I'm deGraaf, but I know that MTM clients have also been receiving APNs and have sent them on, so I hope that the response is within the next few weeks and will suspend APN proceedings for all of us (MTM or not).

[smalldog]

Breaking News - HMRC vs Montp tribunal case

Victory against HMRC for Montp case:

Tribunal confirms no penalty for implementing tax avoidance scheme - Lexology

We live in hope, Bet WG will be getting hammered later!!!!

Now this is an interesting comment:


This decision can be distinguished from the Gardiner case because HMRC at least managed to properly plead its case. However, the FTT was clearly unconvinced by its arguments, to such an extent that it was able to give its decision orally at the end of the hearing.

HMRC should appreciate that a taxpayer is entitled to rely upon professional advice when implementing tax planning, and irrespective of how much it may object to such planning, it does not automatically follow that such a taxpayer should be subject to penalties. In the words of the FTT: "there should be no penalty for honestly implementing a legal scheme, with no element of evasion, and with full provision of the DOTAS number."

[jlg15333]

Another donation made to NTRT!

Keep up the good work guys (&gals)

[GripRacing]

The only reason George agreed to settle was because he was on his own and would have had to fund the FTT by himself.

We're not in that position.

As a number of people have said to me "why would we settle, and pay any of this obscene retrospective tax, when the odds are heavily in our favour?"

Fascinating... And clearly HMRC would also have been aware that George was a single 'customer'.

Wonder how much money they are prepared to invest in legal proceedings against a group, rather than an individual, with a (for them) c.75% chance of losing the case?

[SantaClaus]

Did I receive my APN?.....err yes
Do I understand what it means?.....err yes

The clocks ticking. Something gotta happen pretty soon otherwise its penalty time for me

Sorry the dreaded letter has arrived.

I find it strange that HMRC are phoning round to check people have received their APNs.

I know what I would do if they asked me if I have received it.

[GripRacing]

Victory against HMRC for Montp case:

Tribunal confirms no penalty for implementing tax avoidance scheme - Lexology

We live in hope, Bet WG will be getting hammered later!!!!

Now this is an interesting comment:


This decision can be distinguished from the Gardiner case because HMRC at least managed to properly plead its case. However, the FTT was clearly unconvinced by its arguments, to such an extent that it was able to give its decision orally at the end of the hearing.

HMRC should appreciate that a taxpayer is entitled to rely upon professional advice when implementing tax planning, and irrespective of how much it may object to such planning, it does not automatically follow that such a taxpayer should be subject to penalties. In the words of the FTT: "there should be no penalty for honestly implementing a legal scheme, with no element of evasion, and with full provision of the DOTAS number."

Love it - especially the last sentence:

"In the words of the FTT: "there should be no penalty for honestly implementing a legal scheme, with no element of evasion, and with full provision of the DOTAS number."

[BolshieBastard]

Sorry the dreaded letter has arrived.

I find it strange that HMRC are phoning round to check people have received their APNs.

I know what I would do if they asked me if I have received it.

So do I. Report the bastards to the Information Commissioner for cold calling!