BN66 - Time to fight back!!!

[smalldog]

might be useful for people to keep an eye on this link:

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/...8/finance.html

it tracks the finance bill as its makes its way through amendments, the lords and assent etc....

[smalldog]

Hooray, just found out I can borrow enough money to pay hector if he comes knocking with some left over for a nice sparkly new DB9! Gooner99 fancy a ride in my new Aston when I get it?

[Grim Reaper]

Remember to invite him back to your house if the garden needs weeding...
Sorry couldn't resist it.

[portseven]

welcome to the thread

can I ask which scheme you are with?

Cheers, am with 20Plus

Would be interested to know what people are doing, are you still on various schemes and awaiting outcome? Or are you no longer on schemes and fighting the retrospective taxation?

[smalldog]

i havent been using it for two years, joined it in 2002

[poppy01]

i was one of the first, only used it for 2 years, and havent received trust income since april 2003, I left because i never felt right about it, tried to escape to NZ but came back in 2004, soon wished i'd stayed when i got my first letter... i think that whatever we did, hector has behaved far, far worse.... i despise them and the whole nu-labour, scottish raj that will soon (but not soon enough) have there asses kicked out of office..

[BrilloPad]

Cheers, am with 20Plus

Would be interested to know what people are doing, are you still on various schemes and awaiting outcome? Or are you no longer on schemes and fighting the retrospective taxation?

I joined in April 2006 - lucky for me as seems that 05/06 is the main year HMRC are starting with. Montpelier changed scheme in April 2008 - I am still trying to get details. I think it now matches the schemes used by sanza and others. I am sticking for now - purely as I dont have the energy to look properly. I expect a flaming from Mal for this - and he is justified.

[BrilloPad]

Hooray, just found out I can borrow enough money to pay hector if he comes knocking with some left over for a nice sparkly new DB9! Gooner99 fancy a ride in my new Aston when I get it?

That assumes that montpelier lose - still the least likely outcome. Win and you can take him for a ride in your Veyron...

[TheGadgetMan]

ECHR - Hector would be really stupid.....

and here is the killer section in the human rights act for the case against HMRC:

1.47 For an interference to be lawful under the second paragraph of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, it must satisfy the qualitative requirements of accessibility and foreseeability:[36] the law which imposes the tax must be published, intelligible and generally available in a form which enables the individual to organise their affairs knowing with reasonable certainty the consequences of acting in different ways

Hi I'm new to the boards...and I'll introduce myself properly later when i have a few moments...but something struck me lying in bed this morning (as you do!)...I don't think I have seen anyone express this view in earlier posts...

we seem to reached a point now where both sides - MontyP and HMRC - have expressed the view that this is now going to go thru the courts...High Court, Court of Appeal, HoL, European Court of Human Rights...I'm not sure what the exact route map is here but its something like that...but basically, which ever side loses at each stage will then just appeal to the next court up in the chain...

...until the point when we reach DefCon5...the EU Court of Human Rights...by this time, both sides will have spent an unbelievable amount of money to get to that stage...

...BUT has anyone thought to explain to Hector that to take it to the ECHR would be a really stupid thing to do...because Hector would be asking the ECHR to rule AGAINST one of its own laws...Section 1.47 in the Human Rights Act as quoted above by smalldog...what are the chances of ECHR finding against one of their own tenets?...you can answer that one for yourself!!!

MontyP's simple argument to the ECHR judges would be...HMRC are breaking Section 1.47, can you put them straight please?...

surely it would be worth putting that argument to Hector sooner rather than later...perhaps after the JR, regardless of who wins...Hector might be a bully but he isnt stupid...I think we may have a very strong hand here in negotiating a deal with Hector...

please feel free to pull my logic apart...

(I dont need a Veyron....I'd be happy with a nice shiny BMW M5!)

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Diary - last 7 years

I have pieced this together from the correspondence I received from SCO and talking to other people in the scheme, notably one of the guys who was in the original 4 test cases that SCO were supposedly taking to a Special Commisioners hearing.

Rhetorical question: if you were SCO, how would you feel having to stand up in court and defend the way you managed this case?

2001
May - MTM (Montpelier) start operating "IR35" Scheme

2002

2003
Jan - First year (2001/2) tax returns filed
Jun - Special Compliance Office opens 4 test cases. Requests bank records, trust accounts and copies of all correspondence with MTM.
Dec - Remaining 2001/2 tax returns placed under enquiry by SCO

2004
Jan - 2002/3 tax returns filed
Jan - SCO states their intention to challenge the DTA claim
Jun - SCO re-states their intention to challenge. Suggests payment on account
Dec - 2002/3 tax returns placed under enquiry by SCO

2005
Jan - 2003/4 tax returns filed
Feb - SCO re-states their intention to challenge. Suggests payment on account
Oct - SCO says they are still investigating. Suggests making payment on account
Dec - 2003/4 tax returns placed under enquiry by SCO

2006
Jan - 2004/5 tax returns filed
Jun - SCO outlines its technical case against the scheme. Suggests payment on account.
Dec - 2004/5 tax returns placed under enquiry by SCO

2007
Jan - 2005/6 tax returns filed
May - SCO states intention to take test case to Special Commissioners hearing. Suggests payment on account
Dec - 2005/6 tax returns placed under enquiry

2008
Jan - 2006/7 tax returns filed
Mar - SCO writes stating their intention to use BN66 when it becomes law. Suggests payment on account