No To Retro Tax - Ongoing battle against S58 FA2008

[MishiMoo]

That's all I was thinking - to have the case concisely mapped out on one page - should the need arise. I was absolutely NOT suggesting we went pro-active on this. And it seems that DR has already got the bases covered on this one!

Neither was I, just that we perhaps spend a few quid on Whitehouse PR now, preparing for what I believe is the inevitable press attention this action will draw out in the near future.

regards, Mish

[SantaClaus]

Regarding the media, I personally think the media is directed and manipulated by the govt and the establishment.

You only have to look at who owns what...

The Times= Rupert Murdoch
The Telegraph = Barclay Brothers
Daily Mail = Lord Rothermere
Evening Standard/The Independent = Alexander Lebedev
The Guardian/Observer = Scott Trust (who's board members have deep ties with HSBC).

I don't fancy my chances with any of those, especially the ones who have tea with the Camerons.

... and don't get me started on the BBC.

[DotasScandal]

Regarding the media, I personally think the media is directed and manipulated by the govt and the establishment.You only have to look at who owns what...

This.
Also agree 100% with the fact that "HMRC might even have leaked the Anderson story themselves to keep the public perception up that legal avoidance is as bad as (same as) evasion."
These releases are always timed very precisely, and for a reason. Looks like HMRC needed to add some wood to the fire to front run or detract from some other news which may be detrimental to them.

What I'm wondering is when fatigue is gonna hit. There are only so many sensational "tax avoidance" stories you can run before even the most easily outraged stop paying attention.

[Morlock]

Neither was I, just that we perhaps spend a few quid on Whitehouse PR now, preparing for what I believe is the inevitable press attention this action will draw out in the near future.

regards, Mish

Sorry to be blunt, but that is not what I signed up to when I paid my dues for this phase of the campaign. As far as I am concerned my £900 is earmarked for a legal action whose ultimate cost and duration is as yet unknown. If you want to fritter away cash on something else at this early stage I suggest you raise further funds separately.

[eek]

Sorry to be blunt, but that is not what I signed up to when I paid my dues for this phase of the campaign. As far as I am concerned my £900 is earmarked for a legal action whose ultimate cost and duration is as yet unknown. If you want to fritter away cash on something else at this early stage I suggest you raise further funds separately.

To an extent even the tax tribunals are looking at public opinion which is why they seem to have moved from the letter of the law to the intent of the law.

While I'm not saying you want to spend a lot of money on media you need to be aware that the press may end up interested in you and be prepared for that occurrence. While you may not want to spend that time and money on preparation you really don't want to be unprepared when HMRC use you in their next story...

[MishiMoo]

Sorry to be blunt, but that is not what I signed up to when I paid my dues for this phase of the campaign. As far as I am concerned my £900 is earmarked for a legal action whose ultimate cost and duration is as yet unknown. If you want to fritter away cash on something else at this early stage I suggest you raise further funds separately.

Point taken. Maybe from the general NTRT war chest then? That is supposed to cover PR, isn't it? And we will need it, IMHO. I can just see the well-spun storylines now - "rich tax avoiders club together to launch unprecedented legal challenge to HMRC, who are only trying to do their job but face well-organised tax cheats, poor poor HMRC blah blah blah"

[growler]

DR has clearly stated what is going to happen with any funds surplus at the end of the process. Should those that want to see some form of retribution enacted against individuals choose to club together to finance that action then that is up to them. Personally, I agree with elpinar, it's a futile exercise. Plus there's a lot for us all to go through before any refund is due.

Indeed. Anyone who wants a surplus of funds back can of course have them. I don't think anyone at any point suggested not returning their bit to those who want bit. I would reinvest mine in this, others may or may not.

That in no way precludes myself, or others, from stating why they'd pay good money to see justice done, and, for stating the reasons why not doing so in the past contributed the current behaviour of HMRC, and why not doing so now will exacerbate their disgusting behaviour further.

Anyway, enough for now. I think it's something to bring up later, when the FTT work is done, we know the strength of of any arguments we may have and we know the cost -v- benefit (£ -v- pain and suffering for HMRC individuals)

I think Invisible Touch was the group's undisputed masterpiece

[stonehenge]

When the Scientologists went to war with the IRS, they hired private detectives to tail officials for months and dig into their private/family lives.

It depends how dirty you want to get.

[Morlock]

Point taken. Maybe from the general NTRT war chest then? That is supposed to cover PR, isn't it? And we will need it, IMHO. I can just see the well-spun storylines now - "rich tax avoiders club together to launch unprecedented legal challenge to HMRC, who are only trying to do their job but face well-organised tax cheats, poor poor HMRC blah blah blah"

As I see it, the only opinions which matter are those of the judges who'll sit on the first tier tax tribunal. And if they find in our favour, then the true scale of the injustice will finally come out. Anything else beforehand will be just the usual spin and dramatisation by the institutional media - and they will always print whatever they want regardless of how much money we spend on a PR campaign. And if we try to combat their propaganda we'll only be giving them further grist for the mill.

[Ninja]

PR - one pager

I've read the different sides of the argument with interest, however, let's prepare for the worst, and hope for the best.

It is very true that judges lately have been considering public opinion, as well as the word of law.

I think it is being too naïve to leave Hector a clear field to have their own slant on proceedings, without having our own one-pager prepared.
As I understand it, it wouldn't break the bank to get a professionally compiled press release to hand, SHOULD WE NEED TO USE IT.