BN66 - Time to fight back!!!

[Jaded]

Not sure I can be bothered reading all this thread but it appears to me that these people have tried it on and are now not happy that they are going to have to cough up some cash.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

if you havent had a letter from HMRC saying they are investigating your SA return within 12 months of filing then its a closed tax year and they cant come after you for anything.....

I know people in the scheme who they have done this to ie. opened enquiries on a return after the 12 months has elapsed. I can't remember what their justification was but they reckoned they were able to.

[smalldog]

donkey Im sure they cant do that....get them to check...

[DonkeyRhubarb]

donkey Im sure they cant do that....get them to check...

I will try find out more details but I know it happened because people had already paid the 4% loan back to MTM!

[ContractIn]

I will have a word with MontP to see if they can come up with any rough formula for estimating the liability. Unfortunately, it's quite a complicated calculation so a "rule of thumb" estimate may not be good enough.

If you are already under enquiry then you could ask the Revenue for a statement, or wait until they send out the tax assessments in July/Aug.

If you are not under enquiry then I would not advise contacting them![/QUOTE]

That would be useful. However I will be reuesting this from them myself.

I have never had a letter from HMRC about enquiry so shan't rock the boat yet. However from my limited knowledge, if they were to open a enquiry for say 06/07 and found something untoward then they have justification to go back and open up pre dated returns.

[BrilloPad]

Just joining this thread to say that I am watching with interest.

I am with another IOM scheme that was recommended to be by my agency. Have not had any letters from HMRC yet, except the one saying that they know I am on the scheme.

Have been with the scheme since Sept 2006.

The scheme have given me the wording to put in my SATR and essentially it is the same as last year except for a sentence saying they are aware of BN66 and they think it isn't valid because of a clause in the Human Right's act.

My view is that I am going to sit tight while I am on this gig, then once I get another I am moving off the IOM scheme (probably go Ltd). Unless HMRC push me sooner. Don't really want to move things mid-contract.

Is anyone aware of any statements by the IOM government on BN66?

welcome to the thread

can I ask which scheme you are with?

[BrilloPad]

OK, I unerstand where you're coming from. However, if you go back to HMG's contention that this is not retrospective but merely how the law always was and is now clearly explained, you could still struggle to make the case.

I also suspect that if you win the JR, you're heading for HoL and Europe for a final ruling because Hector will keep appealing until he gets the answer he wants.

I agree - they will appeal all the way.

[smalldog]

they dont always win, in fact they have a pretty appalling track record at wasting public coffers on failed litigation....

http://forums.contractoruk.com/accou...ir35-case.html

so who is going to volunteer to go on question time and ask what the panel think of this whole mess?

PS - re what the IOM position on BN66, the guy that setup MTM pretty much owns the IOM (from what Ive been told) so be interesting to see if he can pull any strings...

[malvolio]

so who is going to volunteer to go on question time and ask what the panel think of this whole mess?

Do that and you put the whole cause of the contractor back about 15 years...

[BrilloPad]

Do that and you put the whole cause of the contractor back about 15 years...

Depends on how the question is put. If just referring to retrospective it would be quite different.

No-one has any symapthy for anyone in this country who works hard and makes a go of things. Success causes jealousy rather than approval.

What is this "contractor cause"? Are we going to form a union? I thought we were all small businesses?