BN66 - Time to fight back!!!

[malvolio]

By the way Mal - according to the government, this was just "clarification of an existing law".. albeit clarification in the favour of the way that HMRC/the government viewed it...

but that being the case - the fact that they noted prior to the budget in 2004 that they reserved the right to make retrospective changes should have nothing to do with this case at all (as they were just clarifying an existing law - although they didn't want to clarify it in the normal way i.e. the courts).

Don't go there. I explained all the underlying logic way back at the start of this thread. Don't agree with it myself, but it was as well to make sure it was clearly stated.

However, HMRC's option B is to change the rules for the scheme(s) and then back-apply it to Dec 2004 (in practice Tax Year 2005/06) and charge you for any qualifying income. And they can do that at any time up to and including the resolution of any JR...

[poppy01]

Don't go there. I explained all the underlying logic way back at the start of this thread. Don't agree with it myself, but it was as well to make sure it was clearly stated.

However, HMRC's option B is to change the rules for the scheme(s) and then back-apply it to Dec 2004 (in practice Tax Year 2005/06) and charge you for any qualifying income. And they can do that at any time up to and including the resolution of any JR...

mal, welcome back, we missed you. As long as theres no more namecalling your input is appreciated

[BrilloPad]

103,882 views now, thats 120 in the last hour

If you are a scheme member and have not yet registered or posted, make yourself known now, lets see how many of us there are

The views thing updates sporadically - the 120 might be misleading. And it might be Mr Brannigan (hello ) and 119 of his under-lakeys(sp?).....

A friend got together with all his montp mates - about 15 of them - they went to a pub in the city and talked themselves into depression.

We have to think very carefully what the aims of the meeting are.

[ASB]

that would do me fine, I left in 2003

I seem to remember that you were on a loan based scheme rather than the DTA based one. If this is the case then this recent judgement might hold out some hope for you:-

http://clients.squareeye.com/uploads...pra-080708.pdf

[mossman]

Ctd

The simple interest is correct. I received a draft assessment from HMRC a couple of years ago and it was definitely not compounded.

The 7.5% rate could change. Last year it got as high as 8.5%.

Even if your wife is a non-tax payer, she can only earn about £6k tax free. Basic rate tax of 20% would reduce 7.1% down to 5.68%. It's worth using your ISA allowance but this is only £3k each per year in a cash ISA.

For me, there was also the psychological factor to take into account. The longer it drags on the bigger the cheque you might have to write out . Taking out a CTD now at least freezes the liability.

Of course, there is nothing to stop you doing a bit of both and putting some in a CTD and keeping the rest in savings.

OK the CTD sounds like it might be worth doing. But how do you find out what they think your liability is, all I've had is a letter from Brannigan telling me we're being kippered, but no mention of an amount.

Did you contact them, or did they send you an unsolicited statement of liability?

Did they mention the CTDs or did you find out about those some other way?

Other self-employed acquaintances in un-related industries have mentioned tax assessments which have been wholly or partially written-off (with input from the person's accountant). I don't know the circumstances; perhaps it only works if you are skint. If the worst case scenario happens and the JR is sunk, could there be any benefit in us (either individually or collectively) finding an advisor/accountant who can get the liability reduced? I can't see MontP being interested in us at that stage.

[seadog]

Getting upto speed on BN66

Hi Guys, Just found this website and the thread on the double taxation problems. I am one of those in the property industry who have used the Montpelier scheme and now being chased by HMRC.

Trying to get some background on how widespread these schemes were and how many people were involved.

My Montpelier client nuber is well over 3,000 so presume there must be at least that number with them and countless more with other scheme operators such as Price Waterhouse and KPMG.

FYI, I understand that Bernard has just left Montpelier.

Very interesteed to see the post by SantacClause that the avoidance industry was told schemes such as these would be stopped and all back dated to 2004.

Was that put out in the market place, If so can anyone point me in the right direction to find reference to it

We were certainly not notified.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

OK the CTD sounds like it might be worth doing. But how do you find out what they think your liability is, all I've had is a letter from Brannigan telling me we're being kippered, but no mention of an amount.

Did you contact them, or did they send you an unsolicited statement of liability?

Did they mention the CTDs or did you find out about those some other way?

Other self-employed acquaintances in un-related industries have mentioned tax assessments which have been wholly or partially written-off (with input from the person's accountant). I don't know the circumstances; perhaps it only works if you are skint. If the worst case scenario happens and the JR is sunk, could there be any benefit in us (either individually or collectively) finding an advisor/accountant who can get the liability reduced? I can't see MontP being interested in us at that stage.

I got a draft assessment from HMRC a couple of years ago. You could ask MontP for a calculation or wait for the closure notices which should be arriving soon. As a rough estimate, you wouldn't be far out assuming 1/3rd of the trust income. If it's not enough, you can always pay a bit more in later; if you've paid too much then you can always withdraw the excess.

I can't see HMRC being willing to negotiate if you have got the means to pay.

[malvolio]

...snip

Very interesteed to see the post by SantacClause that the avoidance industry was told schemes such as these would be stopped and all back dated to 2004.

Was that put out in the market place, If so can anyone point me in the right direction to find reference to it

We were certainly not notified.

Should have joined the PCG then...

Anyway, apart from assorted press interrviews at the time, the intent is most clearly stated by Dim Prawn here:
http://www.parliament.the-stationery...3/50713s01.htm ; look for Column 5, but the whole piece is interesting (and includes the observation that a tax write-off on commercial loans was only ever intended to apply where there was clear business risk)

and if you want the underlying logic, look up the PRe-Budget Report for 2004 - Google will turn it up.

[poppy01]

OK the CTD sounds like it might be worth doing. But how do you find out what they think your liability is, all I've had is a letter from Brannigan telling me we're being kippered, but no mention of an amount.

Did you contact them, or did they send you an unsolicited statement of liability?

Did they mention the CTDs or did you find out about those some other way?

Other self-employed acquaintances in un-related industries have mentioned tax assessments which have been wholly or partially written-off (with input from the person's accountant). I don't know the circumstances; perhaps it only works if you are skint. If the worst case scenario happens and the JR is sunk, could there be any benefit in us (either individually or collectively) finding an advisor/accountant who can get the liability reduced? I can't see MontP being interested in us at that stage.

all i can think of is Tim Warr, but he has other axes to grind and isnt massively popular on this forum, I do know he has contacts at the sco though

[akan]

About to write the cheque of for the CTD. On the HRMC sir it asks for

* the name and address of the Depositor
* the date and amount of the payment
* the full names of all Executors or Trustees, if the CTD has been purchased

What is the second bullet point? Is it the date of the tax due? Or if its the date of payment - wouldn't the covering letter date or date of cheque indicate? Or have I missed something as its too early in the day?

This is gonna hurt as its my entire savings.