Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
I'm still amazed, in all my naivety, that Brannigan (hello Mr B ) - a public servant, is able to send out such bullying letters over an extended period. My partner has been stressed beyond belief since the first letter was received. (Her blood pressure has been high ever since). It boils down to hate mail and should be prosecuted as such.
If an employer issued a letter, or verbailised it, in such language they could expect very little change out of an employment tribunal. So is Brannigan (hello again, ) above the law? The majority of these letters were issued without the support of the law; the final one only by bending the laws.
BP - a personal attack on the integrity of Mr Brannigan would be wholly appropriate and without doubt in the public interest. After all, we don't know how many other people's health he is impacting with his offensive tactics.
Join the No To Retro Tax Campaign Now
"Tax evasion is easy: it involves breaking the law. By tax avoidance OECD means unacceptable avoidance ... This can be contrasted with acceptable tax planning. What is critical is transparency" - Donald Johnston, Secretary-General, OECD
I'm still amazed, in all my naivety, that Brannigan (hello Mr B ) - a public servant, is able to send out such bullying letters over an extended period. My partner has been stressed beyond belief since the first letter was received. (Her blood pressure has been high ever since). It boils down to hate mail and should be prosecuted as such.
If an employer issued a letter, or verbailised it, in such language they could expect very little change out of an employment tribunal. So is Brannigan (hello again, ) above the law? The majority of these letters were issued without the support of the law; the final one only by bending the laws.
BP - a personal attack on the integrity of Mr Brannigan would be wholly appropriate and without doubt in the public interest. After all, we don't know how many other people's health he is impacting with his offensive tactics.
I have already written to my local MP on this one, response was sadly anaemic.
Emigre
I am very sorry about your partner.
Apart from that - to the above!
My ex works for HMRC - I know what they are like. try to fight by being reasonable and you will not get anywhere.
If we win then its water under the bridge. If not then I think there will be plenty of people out for retribution. I guess I am to retribution what a financial QC is to the montpelier question. Lets sit tight for now - there are plenty of people here to support anyone who needs it.
Join the No To Retro Tax Campaign Now
"Tax evasion is easy: it involves breaking the law. By tax avoidance OECD means unacceptable avoidance ... This can be contrasted with acceptable tax planning. What is critical is transparency" - Donald Johnston, Secretary-General, OECD
trouble is HMRC think they are untouchable, and you know what happens to untouchables dont you!
They get touched? Rather you than me! make sure you wear gloves!
Of course before fathers 4 justice came along the family courts thought they were untouchable. A few people have been through a very steep learning curve.
The 2008 version is that they get caught out with some hooker or another (Spitzer)
Join the No To Retro Tax Campaign Now
"Tax evasion is easy: it involves breaking the law. By tax avoidance OECD means unacceptable avoidance ... This can be contrasted with acceptable tax planning. What is critical is transparency" - Donald Johnston, Secretary-General, OECD
With all that is going on, I'm surprised to see CUK putting up adverts for companies (5 mins ago) offering schemes utilising the use of offshore trusts. I know little about it, but does this mean BN66 has a very limited scope that these providers are now able to get around, or are they blindly carrying on regardless? It has been reported that MP have another scheme that people can join...which I presume still uses the Double Taxation Treaty. I may well be wrong, as I don't know.
Comment