BN66 - Time to fight back!!!

[kiwinlondon]

They said to me it was going out last week....they did tell me it was based on their uk coy newquay which uses a loans structure my source couldnt tell me the specifics since they hadnt seen them yet!!

[BrilloPad]

[QUOTE=TheGaffer;610522]

MP have assured me that a letter will be going out to all consultants this week explaining how the new arrangement works. I won't be holding my breath though...

I hope it explains if the loan scheme is different to other loan schemes...

[Emigre]

[QUOTE=BrilloPad;610911]

I hope it explains if the loan scheme is different to other loan schemes...

A colleague went to a presentation of the new scheme a month or two back. It is different, but how different I'm not sure yet. Best to wait. However, when we do receive the details, and MP have told me too that it will be this week, this forum is not the place to discuss the detail and/or potential efficacy.

This thread discusses the old scheme, there is no point in giving Mr Brannigan (hello ) an early heads up on the mechanics (other than what MP have had to advise in the scheme registration, if anything).

[Rantor]

Hypothetical situation - lost touch with Hector

Say someone had used the MP scheme for a short while several ytears ago, and had got a number of standard letters in the past saying year xyz was under investigation. Now, say that that person had kinda lost touch with HMRC (they don't know where he lives and it ain't in the UK) but not with Montpelier (he receives updates from them) - what would the panel be tempted to do in light of the fact that payment demands are on the way?

Would he be best served writing to HMRC and telling them his address or would be be better to just ignore it and hope it all goes away?

Hypothetically speaking of course

[TykeMerc]

Say someone had used the MP scheme for a short while several ytears ago, and had got a number of standard letters in the past saying year xyz was under investigation. Now, say that that person had kinda lost touch with HMRC (they don't know where he lives and it ain't in the UK) but not with Montpelier (he receives updates from them) - what would the panel be tempted to do in light of the fact that payment demands are on the way?

Would he be best served writing to HMRC and telling them his address or would be be better to just ignore it and hope it all goes away?

Hypothetically speaking of course

Hypothetically if they were to catch up with said individual I would guess that HMRC would contract the British Library to locate the biggest and heaviest book they can find to launch at that person.

[BrilloPad]

Say someone had used the MP scheme for a short while several ytears ago, and had got a number of standard letters in the past saying year xyz was under investigation. Now, say that that person had kinda lost touch with HMRC (they don't know where he lives and it ain't in the UK) but not with Montpelier (he receives updates from them) - what would the panel be tempted to do in light of the fact that payment demands are on the way?

Would he be best served writing to HMRC and telling them his address or would be be better to just ignore it and hope it all goes away?

Hypothetically speaking of course

Personally - I would keep well clear of HMRC.

[BrilloPad]

[QUOTE=Emigre;610955]

A colleague went to a presentation of the new scheme a month or two back. It is different, but how different I'm not sure yet. Best to wait. However, when we do receive the details, and MP have told me too that it will be this week, this forum is not the place to discuss the detail and/or potential efficacy.

This thread discusses the old scheme, there is no point in giving Mr Brannigan (hello ) an early heads up on the mechanics (other than what MP have had to advise in the scheme registration, if anything).

You are totally correct- but alas until montp start communicating it is the only place! Most (but not all) at montp think a letter every 3 months is fine - that we should be grateful for any titbits.

Why dont montp setup a private forum for the members of the scheme? Although I am one of the most ferevent supporters of montp here this could quickly evaporate.

I "found" a list of alot of scheme members - some were emailed with a link to this forum. It would not take much for the ret to be emailed - and the email would not come from an anonymous address - it would appear to come from John Cuddy.

Having said all that you are right - we do have to be careful what we say. We must try not to let montp's incommunicado upset us too much.....

[BolshieBastard]

Say someone had used the MP scheme for a short while several ytears ago, and had got a number of standard letters in the past saying year xyz was under investigation. Now, say that that person had kinda lost touch with HMRC (they don't know where he lives and it ain't in the UK) but not with Montpelier (he receives updates from them) - what would the panel be tempted to do in light of the fact that payment demands are on the way?

Would he be best served writing to HMRC and telling them his address or would be be better to just ignore it and hope it all goes away?

Hypothetically speaking of course

If you've got no intentions of coming back to the UK ever, I'd check with a good tax expert or lawyer, what powers HMRC have to request an EU member state's (if that's where the said person was currently living) tax authorities can levy charges on behalf of HMRC.

The single market has few hiding places!

[Rantor]

If you've got no intentions of coming back to the UK ever, I'd check with a good tax expert or lawyer, what powers HMRC have to request an EU member state's (if that's where the said person was currently living) tax authorities can levy charges on behalf of HMRC.

The single market has few hiding places!

Thanks for all the suggestions - good options that any individual in this hypothetical situation would doubtless consider. While the 'get it up ye ' option is tempting the prospect of asset seizures by belgohector might well scare of this chap from following his instincts on this one.

Another possible problem might be MP themselves who are technically acting as an agent for the scheme members in this matter but tend not to reply to specific questions any more (such as the my original hypothetical question!) but they do have this guys details on file.

Irritating thing is the hypothetical liability is not that big as the scheme was only used as a stopgap measure.

[ASB]

Thanks for all the suggestions - good options that any individual in this hypothetical situation would doubtless consider. While the 'get it up ye ' option is tempting the prospect of asset seizures by belgohector might well scare of this chap from following his instincts on this one.

Another possible problem might be MP themselves who are technically acting as an agent for the scheme members in this matter but tend not to reply to specific questions any more (such as the my original hypothetical question!) but they do have this guys details on file.

Irritating thing is the hypothetical liability is not that big as the scheme was only used as a stopgap measure.

There is now nominally full cooperation between UK tax authorities and Belgian (and all other EU states). However whether debts are actually enforceable cross border is open to some debate because it is a civil matter not a criminal one (normally). In general I believe Hector will have to get judgement in a UK civil court and then go through the relevant authorities until they get judgement to enforce the debt in the relevant foreign court - and whether they will get that is by no means certain.

There is currently some negotiating going on (though I think it might be stalled) to increase the powers of all intra-eu revenue authorities. Whether this will ever come to fruition who knows.

If they do start to chase then there will be a certain amount of tactical manoeuvring from HMRC and veiled threats. Of course if hector does actually get judgement and you don't settle then don't set foot in the UK again. There is a good chance of getting your collar felt on arrival.