BN66 - Time to fight back!!!

[TheGadgetMan]

What would MontP sue you for? If you are IR35 caught, you are IR35 caught, nothing you can do about that surely?!

Not sure I follow all the thinking above ... how can HMRC go after MontP plus agencies in one big IR35 catch all case anyway. Each contract must be assessed invdividually. Althought I guess if no contractor disputes being caught that could be quite a quick process.

sorry...its just my rambling style and i should have been a little clearer...TWs argument was that hector would go UP the chain one step at a time...first they would go after MontP for all the tax and then if that wasnt successful, they would go after the next link in the chain, the agency...but the crucial point was that once hector starts this process, he cant then go back down the chain after you and me...

my worry with all this is that you would be opening up a HUGE can of worms by doing this...and there would be no telling where it would all end...

[smalldog]

the cunning thing about the "alienating" montp bit is how would they find out? Warr and co write to HMRC not Montp?? The first Montp would hear of it would be when Hector sends them an assessment asking them for my tax...!!!!! how nice would that be!!!!

Then it would be them SH££ing themselves, not lil ole you and me

[smalldog]

If someone actualy went through this route successfully, wouldnt the same rules applie to everyone as a blanket case ?

pretty much, it depends largely on IF you had ever signed any paperwork with anyone at anytime that stated you are self employed....IF you did then you dont have a chance with this one as you are obviously taking responsibility for your own tax affairs

[Lewis]

sorry...its just my rambling style and i should have been a little clearer...TWs argument was that hector would go UP the chain one step at a time...first they would go after MontP for all the tax and then if that wasnt successful, they would go after the next link in the chain, the agency...but the crucial point was that once hector starts this process, he cant then go back down the chain after you and me...

my worry with all this is that you would be opening up a HUGE can of worms by doing this...and there would be no telling where it would all end...

My point was more how could HMRC start with MontP for IR35. You would have to start with each of the 3000 odd assignments, assess their working practices and contracts and then work up to MontP if they are deemed IR35 caught. Presumably some of the MontP people are definitely outside IR35. In fact the same person could be caught in one assignment and not in another whilst with MontP the whole time. Which would explain why Warr says only 50% will escape BN66. So then what do HMRC do with the other 50%? Chase them individually as they are now? Would MontP then start defending 1500 IR35 cases?! ... which as we know only have about a 1 in 1500 success rate anyway! It really is a right old can of worms like you say! Plus to make things even more confusing for you guys as it's only if you think you might be IR35 caught you potentially want to persue this Warr route anyway.

[Lewis]

p.s. and I have never heard of an AGENCY being chased for IR35! I can't see how that can be done.

[smalldog]

p.s. and I have never heard of an AGENCY being chased for IR35! I can't see how that can be done.

its got nothing to do with IR35? Its the same way an umbrella company has to pay your PAYE before handing over any money, its the law....Warr and co. are basically saying they are the same as an umbrella co. when if you consider they sign all the contracts etc is not far from the truth...

FORGET ABOUT IR35!!!!! thats not the angle...

[Lewis]

its got nothing to do with IR35? Its the same way an umbrella company has to pay your PAYE before handing over any money, its the law....Warr and co. are basically saying they are the same as an umbrella co. when if you consider they sign all the contracts etc is not far from the truth...

FORGET ABOUT IR35!!!!! thats not the angle...

Ok, well that makes much more sense to me. But now I am confused, why is Warr saying only "Ben" will escape and not "Joe". Is it that some of you have signed "I am self employed" contracts and some haven't. Why will it only work for half of you? Or is the BN66 site out of date?

[helen7]

The money from my contract earnings was diverted to the offshore trust in IOM. I was then paid as a beneficiary of the trust.

If it was deemed IR35 caught then HMRC would insist that New Media wrongfully moved the money to the trust and would have them re-do there books.

I do not see how they would be responsible for tax we have not paid on trust income as this is unrelated to the contract.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Hold your horses

From what I've read, it doesn't sound like Warr & Co have even figured out whether this would work or not, yet they are promoting it like a scheme and touting for business.

Perhaps I could take it more seriously if they had already got buy in from HMRC. However, I'm doubtful whether HMRC would take this seriously. They already know from the problems they had going after MSC's how difficult it is to chase companies which can disappear in a puff of smoke. Also, the debt transfer rules introduced to thwart MSCs only came in last year, so I don't see how HMRC could go after agencies for unpaid tax in 2001/2/3 etc.

If Warr & Co are looking for guinea pigs then you would have to be very brave or stupid (or both) to sign up for this.

[Lewis]

4 - they will work on a commission basis, no win no fee apart from a small up front payment. So doesnt look like a big money making scam on first appearance

Site says "Joe" pays £1000 as he didn't escape BN66.
If Warr can persuade you all to join him. 3000 * £1000 = £3m !