No To Retro Tax - Ongoing battle against S58 FA2008

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Hi guys, I am one of the newcomers to NTRT, joined Friday and have sent a letter to my MP requesting a meeting, don't know when that will happen as I am sure he will use the upcoming election as a reason to be too busy !!

Anyway, what I wanted to ask was about thread #205, HMRC v Montpelier Tribunal Case.
Will this have any bearing on our case? If so will this entail a further delay whilst Montpelier goes through a further FTT,or does the fact that Montpelier appears to have won this case mean we will be automatically covered?

Hi and thanks for joining.

That case was totally unrelated to our case. It just happened to involve Montpelier.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Hi all...the George thing sounds all very exciting, but I'm hugely skeptical having had raised hopes on too many occasions previously. My biggest disappointment was that, during the previous JR/Appeals etc on S58, the law at the time didn't seem to matter, and it was all 'public interest' and 'spirit of the legislation' nonsense. Hoping the tax tribunals will stick to facts and interpret the law and tax rules.

B.

I know exactly where you are coming from.

Hopes have been raised and dashed so many times over the past 7 years, and people have every right to be utterly sceptical.

Why should people believe this George/Agency business is any different?

I can only give you the facts.

1. George got a deal from HMRC that no-one else has been able to get. Everyone else who has approached them has been told to sod off. There has to be a compelling reason HMRC agreed to that deal.
2. A barrister, who is also an FTT Judge, says the Agency argument has a better than 75% chance of being successful at a tribunal. (success = nothing to pay)

[Kevthered]

Hi and thanks for joining.

That case was totally unrelated to our case. It just happened to involve Montpelier.

Thanks DR, was maybe wishful thinking on my behalf!!

[tax is taxing]

Agency Argument

I know exactly where you are coming from.

Hopes have been raised and dashed so many times over the past 7 years, and people have every right to be utterly sceptical.

Why should people believe this George/Agency business is any different?

I can only give you the facts.

1. George got a deal from HMRC that no-one else has been able to get. Everyone else who has approached them has been told to sod off. There has to be a compelling reason HMRC agreed to that deal.
2. A barrister, who is also an FTT Judge, says the Agency argument has a better than 75% chance of being successful at a tribunal. (success = nothing to pay)

Hi DR

Is this just for MP or other schemes such as EBTs. The success percentage seems enticing.

[DotasScandal]

Hi DR

Is this just for MP or other schemes such as EBTs. The success percentage seems enticing.

I'm not DR, but S.58 has nothing to do whatsoever with EBTs. So don't hold your breath.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Hi DR

Is this just for MP or other schemes such as EBTs. The success percentage seems enticing.

Counsel was only asked to give an opinion on the DTA partnership/trust schemes operated by Montpelier, deGraaf and Steed.

Don't EBTs already have a viable defence, namely that the loans were not taxable income?

[DotasScandal]

Don't EBTs already have a viable defence, namely that the loans were not taxable income?

Absolutely! And God willing, HMRC will soon be at the receiving end of another beating worthy of Rangers'.
For all the FUD spread using the Boyle case (which was not an EBT scheme to start with), they have yet to claim ANY success in court against EBTs.

[JaredM]

Well an APN arrived some days ago. Odd thing: it is addressed to an individual I've no connection with (totally different name and address to me). Forwarded on immediately to Montp.

I suspect that may be why HMRC bods are busy trying to call people to find out who received one and who didn't?

Mail merge stuff up

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Well an APN arrived some days ago. Odd thing: it is addressed to an individual I've no connection with (totally different name and address to me). Forwarded on immediately to Montp.

I suspect that may be why HMRC bods are busy trying to call people to find out who received one and who didn't?

Mail merge stuff up

[Britspud]

I know exactly where you are coming from.

Hopes have been raised and dashed so many times over the past 7 years, and people have every right to be utterly sceptical.

Why should people believe this George/Agency business is any different?

I can only give you the facts.

1. George got a deal from HMRC that no-one else has been able to get. Everyone else who has approached them has been told to sod off. There has to be a compelling reason HMRC agreed to that deal.
2. A barrister, who is also an FTT Judge, says the Agency argument has a better than 75% chance of being successful at a tribunal. (success = nothing to pay)

Hi DR - thanks for the response. I have everything crossed, obviously!

Edited to ask...so George was on a similar scheme....DTA through I-o-M? Same circumstances as MTP?

Thanks,
B.