IPSE and Tax Avoidance

[adubya]

As a member you will automatically be registered. Log in to the home page, and from your dashboard there is a link to the forums. This should take you straight in. The login you see when you go straight to the community URL is there for historical reasons, before there was single sign-on in place - logging in there can cause confusion. It's best to go via the IPSE home page. If you can't remember your login password, (your login is your registered email address) you can request to reset it from there.

Thanks but from the dashboard I can't see any link to the forums. There is the "Community" link in the "Interactive" menu item from the dashboard but that just takes me to the URL I quoted initially.

[mudskipper]

Sadly, what this means is that any dissenting voice or fresh thinking against the party line is pounced on and stifled by multiple posts from TPTB against you.

My perception and yours clearly differ. I would encourage members to visit the forums and make up their own minds.

[Fred Bloggs]

My perception and yours clearly differ. I would encourage members to visit the forums and make up their own minds.

And that's exactly what I would recommend too.

Your view differs due the position you are viewing it from. Which kind of reinforces my the point I made.

[eek]

My perception and yours clearly differ. I would encourage members to visit the forums and make up their own minds.

Sorry but I agree with Fred Bloggs. The only reason I visit there is because I have an awkward stubborn streak and I need to keep visiting in case another power that be mispresents me again.

As a particular example outing the separate ids I kept between IPSE and here really did not go down well when it was IPSE's MD doing it whilst other directors used a sockie CUK account to have a go at me here....

[eek]

But I do remember that in that thread I pointed the OP (who is still a member btw) at a thread on here that had, and still has, a high degree of relevance on the basis that the information on here was far more relevant and up to date.

Can't win, can I. Slated for getting it wrong and slated for getting it right...

Given that you misrepresented your position within PCG as it was at the time at the time I was heard the careful planned steps HMRC were planning from Agency reporting through to the current Public sector changes (I'm going back a few years) yep you can't get it right....

[Fred Bloggs]

Sorry but I agree with Fred Bloggs. The only reason I visit there is because I have an awkward stubborn streak and I need to keep visiting in case another power that be mispresents me again.

As a particular example outing the separate ids I kept between IPSE and here really did not go down well when it was IPSE's MD doing it whilst other directors used a sockie CUK account to have a go at me here....

Not to worry, Mudskipper "is on thin ice" here. Anyone who is a member can see how MS joined in a couple of weeks ago when someone put forward an alternative reality to the official IPSE one, along with the highest level of TPTB. They're fooling nobody but themselves with this. Which is really sad to see given what I wrote further up the thread about membership being essential to a MyCo Ltd user.

[eek]

Not to worry, Mudskipper "is on thin ice" here. Anyone who is a member can see how MS joined in a couple of weeks ago when someone put forward an alternative reality to the official IPSE one, along with the highest level of TPTB. They're fooling nobody but themselves with this. Which is really sad to see given what I wrote further up the thread about membership being essential to a MyCo Ltd user.

I did find it amusing when Philip Hammond called IPSE part of the problem....

[BolshieBastard]

Sorry, Im going to have to stop coming out of self imposed exile (again!) but this point and PCG \ IPSE made me have to go and change my skiddies.

OK, to try to clarify for you - PCG, now IPSE had great success for ten years or more keeping HMRC at bay for the members regarding IR35. The high water mark was obviously the Arctic Systems income splitting case.

Everyone who is in IPSE or thinking of joining needs to re read Fred's comment and let it sink in.

PCG \ IPSE doesnt support people in tax avoidance schemes blah, blah, effing blah.

Well, if income shifting to a non (contracting) spouse isnt 'tax avoidance,' I dont know what the eff is!

If the Artic Systems case was before the Courts today, it would be deemed 'tax avoidance' and 'aggressive' by just about everyone. The fact that (PCG) IPSE and its core members did not and will not offer support to people caught in such avoidance schemes today is duplicitous to say the least.

Back in the day around 2008, 7 years after HMRC took interest in the MP scheme in particular and when BN66 (retrospection came about) there were plenty of posts from PCG members stating 'if PCG gave any assistance of whatever means' to people caught up in BN66, they would 'immediately petition against this help' at the highest levels of PCG and if PCG continued would withdraw their membership.

The hypocrisy of those PCG \ IPSE member is truely astounding.

PCG, IPSE or whatever else they effing call themselves can GTF as far as Im concerned. Oh, and dont get me started on their balls up of the 'Opt out' either.

Happy New Year to you all except IPSE members. I hope you playing with the tax system comes back on you some day.

[Fred Bloggs]

I did find it amusing when Philip Hammond called IPSE part of the problem....

Well, actually, I'd be highly delighted at that.

The invitations to the cosy fireside chats at No 10 will get nobody anywhere very quickly. That seems to be one of the key parts of the new strategy that we're not supposed to ask questions about.

[Fred Bloggs]

Well, BB. I have a deal of respect for your view. I will wish you a HNY, even if as an IPSE member I don't qualify for one in return.