BN66 - Time to fight back!!!

[Likely]

Is the word "Jail" considered tabu in this thread ?

[smalldog]

Write your own. MPs (or to be precise, their secretaries) are well used to dealing with organised campaigns and if they see 50 remarkably similar letters, 49 of them get binned immediately and the first treated with suspicion. Your MP represents you personally, not some aggregated group of people, and acts accordingly; you need lobbying organisations to do the bulk protest thing effectively.

for once I agree with Mal! Write it in your own words and make it personal not just some copy and paste job...

[smalldog]

Is the word "Jail" considered tabu in this thread ?

Err no, dont see the relevance but why, dont like it as its an american word but hey ho? taboo

[DonkeyRhubarb]

smalldog...would you be prepared to offer a template of your letter that we can all use to send to our MPs...while we're all sitting around twiddling thumbs waiting for things to happen (MontP, JR, tax assessments, etc...) it might be worth targeting MPs...I feel I need to be need doing SOMETHING!...

I don't want to p*ss on anyone's parade but honestly I think it's a waste of time. The Conservatives and Libdems have already demonstrated their support in the Committee but can't do anything about it. I challenge anyone to find a single labour MP who would side with us against their masters. If you are going to write to anyone, it might be better to target the Lords who haven't debated it yet.

The government is so deep in the sh*t that they need every penny they can raise, and we are a nice soft target. They can claim the moral high ground by hounding us and at the same time bring in a couple of hundred million in desperately needed dosh. I think they also want to send a very strong message to the tax avoidance industry, and anyone contemplating using these types of schemes, that they will resort to draconian measures whenever necessary.

It's interesting because even if the government ultimately loses the court battle, they will still be able to claim a victory by pointing to the reduction in the use of avoidance schemes. My guess is that very few contractors would risk using schemes in future, and ironically we on this forum are helping to ram home the government's message.

[DaveB]

I don't want to p*ss on anyone's parade but honestly I think it's a waste of time. The Conservatives and Libdems have already demonstrated their support in the Committee but can't do anything about it. I challenge anyone to find a single labour MP who would side with us against their masters. If you are going to write to anyone, it might be better to target the Lords who haven't debated it yet.

No point targetting the Lords, on matters of Taxation they dont debate government bills etc, they just read and approve them automatically.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

House of Lords

I have just thought of something. There is a strong likelihood that the case is going to eventually end up in the House of Lords. Correct?

The HOL are unlikely to be able to impede the passage of the legislation but they could go on record as to whether they would/would not side with the government if an appeal was ever brought before them.

In which case, is it worth making the HOL Finance Committee aware of the fact that a legal challenge in the High Court is already being mounted?

The Lords don't have constituencies so you can write to any Lord you like. For example, we could target those Lords sitting on the Committee scrutinising the Bill.

Any thoughts?

[BrilloPad]

Is the word "Jail" considered tabu in this thread ?

You think Mr Brannigan will end up in jail for bullying?

[DonkeyRhubarb]

No point targetting the Lords, on matters of Taxation they dont debate government bills etc, they just read and approve them automatically.

This hasn't stopped the IOCT, BBA and ICAEW presenting evidence to the HOL opposing Clause 55.

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/CIOT.pdf
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/BBA.pdf

There may be no harm in us trying. What do other people think?

[DaveB]

I have just thought of something. There is a strong likelihood that the case is going to eventually end up in the House of Lords. Correct?

The HOL are unlikely to be able to impede the passage of the legislation but they could go on record as to whether they would/would not side with the government if an appeal was ever brought before them.

In which case, is it worth making the HOL Finance Committee aware of the fact that a legal challenge in the High Court is already being mounted?

The Lords don't have constituencies so you can write to any Lord you like. For example, we could target those Lords sitting on the Committee scrutinising the Bill.

Any thoughts?

The Law Lords will not issue any opinion on potential legal matters without first having heard all the relavent facts of the case concerned. Getting them to to go on record one way or the other isn't going to happen since if any of them do the plaintiff's i.e. the Government in a future case can claim predujice on the part of the Lord involved and get them removed from that case.

This explains how it all works.

It's further complicated by the fact that as of 2009 the House of Lords will no longer act as the court of final appeal. That role will be transferred to a new Supreme Court created under the Auspices of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. The same Law Lords who currently sit in the House of Lords will become the first Judges to sit in the Supreme Court.

[DaveB]

This hasn't stopped the IOCT, BBA and ICAEW presenting evidence to the HOL opposing Clause 55.

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/CIOT.pdf
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/BBA.pdf

There may be no harm in us trying. What do other people think?

You're right in that it can't do any harm, but it won't stop the bill being passed as is by the HoL. The best the commitee's involved can do is make recommendations that may or may not be accepted or acted on by the Government.