BN66 - Time to fight back!!!

[ASB]

Dear general public, you know we have been charging you £100 a year for car tax, well weve been having a think over here at Hector HQ, and now we think that it should have been £150 for the last ten years. So we are going to send you a tax bill for the difference for the last ten years.

Poor example, since they don't deal with VED.

But if you just replace VED with tax treatment of small pensions which they have cocked up for the last 'n' years that is pretty much what is happening (though to be fair they are only going back for - I think - 2 years with this one).

[StellaFan]

This isn't retrospective legislation per se. It is clarification of meaning. The IR says it was clear but some people have chosen a bizzare interpretation to create a loop hole. Obviously the users of these schemes also state their interpretation is clear and it is the IR who are perverting the meaning.

If it was already clear, why didn't they act years ago to prove it?

[malvolio]

So what? We are tax evading scum who have no sympathy from the public so get what we deserve. I know its true as Mal told me. Or did I read it in the Sun?

Do try to keep up!!!

When we all get sent to prison do you think we will get neighbouring cells?

You really must learn to read and not misquote people. No wonder you have to climb cranes to make your voice heard.

95% of the public have probably never even heard of you anyway and wouldn't care less. But I bet if you explained your position to a random selcetion of them, the sympathy vote would be pretty small

Anyway, since you are collectively determined to distort what I say, perhaps I should start posting my own opinion: as of now I've given up trying to bring a little perspective to your delusions of adequacy.

[BrilloPad]

You really must learn to read and not misquote people. No wonder you have to climb cranes to make your voice heard.

95% of the public have probably never even heard of you anyway and wouldn't care less. But I bet if you explained your position to a random selcetion of them, the sympathy vote would be pretty small

Anyway, since you are collectively determined to distort what I say, perhaps I should start posting my own opinion: as of now I've given up trying to bring a little perspective to your delusions of adequacy.

Fathers groups have been fighting for fair treatment since the 1969 divorce act. They got nowhere until 2003 - suddenly they got heard. I wonder why? Sorry if facts confuse your argument.

I bet if you told 95% of the public there tax rate for the last year was being upped retrospectively they would be up in arms. It depends how you pose the question. Remember that scene from Yes Minister.

Instead of posting wht dont you **** off. seriously. your posts add nothing - in fact I reckon they give Mr Brannigan (hello ) ammunition.

PS if you want to publicize your PCG nonsense I have a great idea for you. 10 PCGers walking to number 10 naked apart from copies of your manifesto. Sell it to the press as Downing Streak. The media like that sort of stuff.....

[normalbloke]

...here we go again..... "tax avoiding/evading scumbag".... "fair share of tax"...."no sympathy." I thought we'd done this to death. I'm not after sympathy, just justice. I don't give a t*ss about a few people basking in scheudenfraude at my expense. It was a punt in 2001, and for contractors like me who I worked with in large organisations at the time IR35 'Business For Self' was just as much of a punt in those early days. Hindsight (which all you sneerers are using) is a wonderful thing.

I'm concerned about the law, particularly as it stood when I entered into the MP scheme. This is the cornerstone. It appears there was a loophole. MP (like all tax planning firms) sought to exploit it. Thats what they do. Mostly for higher net worth individuals (sorry, 'tax avoiding scumbags') than us. Loopholes are closed (sometimes after being challenged in the courts, mostly when some legislator realises they've missed something or HMRC discover people exploiting it.) and new ones found. If its legal, then forget the morals, especially where money is concerned. Mal is always on about people 'opening their eyes' and facing reality. Thats reality. Face it.

If said law is open to interpretation and there are differences of opinion, then courts decide. That is the basis of justice and democracy. I have NO PROBLEM with a court deciding if MP were misinterpreting the law. I have a BIG PROBLEM with HMRC and/or Treasury officials (and some idiots on this forum) deciding, due to Government revenue problems caused by their own making - and whats more deciding that retrospectively, after knowing about it, and corresponding about it with us and MP for SEVEN YEARS, giving more than enough time to close or legislate. Why didn't they litigate??? I think we all know why. That is why we are severely p*ssed off.

[MuddyFunster]

First post for me I spoke to MP this morning and a senior meeting was held last night and a letter / email will be sent out later today. I did get the impression that only people who have contacted them having been sent the HMRC letter last week would be sent this, so make sure you contact them and ask to be receive it.

[smalldog]

and for those people out there who think we are not contributing to the greater good and how would the world survive without all those lovely tax payers. Take a look at tax havens, funny enough they manage to survive WITHOUT taxing people to the hilt, and dya know why? Cos they arent propping up F**kin spongers!

Or are you going to try and tell me that Dubai, IOM, Guernsey, Jersey, Berumda, Lichtenstein etc etc... dont have roads, healthcare, police forces, fire brigades and that people living there are tax avoiding scum by not having a cut of their income go to the government? I guess next you will be saying they should volunteer the money on moral grounds...!!!!! try it, see what happens

If I actually thought my money was going to a worthy cause then I'd be happier paying it. But I know its likely going to the great unwashed claiming disability benefit while watching Sky, puffing on their L&B's while we all pay for them to breed..quite frankly Im just not interested....

[Iamthick]

and for those people out there who think we are not contributing to the greater good and how would the world survive without all those lovely tax payers. Take a look at tax havens, funny enough they manage to survive WITHOUT taxing people to the hilt, and dya know why? Cos they arent propping up F**kin spongers!

Or are you going to try and tell me that Dubai, IOM, Guernsey, Jersey, Berumda, Lichtenstein etc etc... dont have roads, healthcare, police forces, fire brigades and that people living there are tax avoiding scum by not having a cut of their income go to the government? I guess next you will be saying they should volunteer the money on moral grounds...!!!!! try it, see what happens

If I actually thought my money was going to a worthy cause then I'd be happier paying it. But I know its likely going to the great unwashed claiming disability benefit while watching Sky, puffing on their L&B's while we all pay for them to breed..quite frankly Im just not interested....

Posts like that make me hope you are going to need to lube up

[normalbloke]

...ahem... much as it pains me to point this out to smalldog... you can't criticise people ('spongers') for exploiting the law for their own benefit... If 'sponging' is legal, then it will happen. Thats reality. Of course if they are claiming illegally then its a different issue. Anyway don't want to go off thread too much.

[ASB]

...ahem... much as it pains me to point this out to smalldog... you can't criticise people ('spongers') for exploiting the law for their own benefit... If 'sponging' is legal, then it will happen. Thats reality. Of course if they are claiming illegally then its a different issue. Anyway don't want to go off thread too much.

Aren't you asking for it both ways ?

Users of these sorts of arrangements are not acting illegally. They are only exploiting in just the same way.