BN66 - Time to fight back: Continued

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Correct me if wrong - important part is the judgement? Which is weeks/months after the hearing?

I would still like to attend some of the hearing.

I think it will be revealing to hear what HMRC/Treasury have got to say for themselves. Specifically, how they justify sitting on an investigation for 5 years, threaten litigation, and then pull a stunt like retrospective legislation? It would also be interesting to see who else is lined up against them and whether the big boys (KPMG, PwC) join the fray at this stage.

[Ratican]

Jr

There is some basic information here regarding the JR process:
http://www.richardbuxton.co.uk/v3.0/?q=node/51#ECJ
Here are some highlights:
"
The culmination of the second stage, the final hearing, will however usually take place a few weeks or months after receipt of evidence from the other parties and the claimant filing any further evidence. A few weeks before the date fixed, counsel for both sides will exchange "skeleton arguments" - summaries of the respective legal cases. The judge should pre-read these and essential parts of the documentary material. If this is done, the hearing itself can proceed quite rapidly. JRs seldom take more than three days and many in our experience are over within one day
"
"
...In JR, evidence is always given on paper. There are circumstances where witnesses may have to appear in person but, although we have come close, we have never actually encountered these...
"
"
The judge may deliver judgment there and then, or shortly afterwards, or it may be "handed-down" in writing later. Handed-down judgments are more satisfactory as they are usually better thought through, and one also does not have to expend time and costs for the time it takes to attend delivery of an oral judgment. Even with oral judgments, a transcript is usually available within a week or two afterwards. After judgment is given, there is always argument about who pays the costs, and whether permission should be given to appeal the decision
"
"
Judges usually refuse permission to appeal, and one has to apply to the Court of Appeal direct. For details of appeals to the Court of Appeal and beyond, see the appeals section
"

[poppy01]

I think it will be revealing to hear what HMRC/Treasury have got to say for themselves. Specifically, how they justify sitting on an investigation for 5 years, threaten litigation, and then pull a stunt like retrospective legislation? It would also be interesting to see who else is lined up against them and whether the big boys (KPMG, PwC) join the fray at this stage.

and charge us interest to boot,
liars, cheats and pickpockets

[BrilloPad]

and charge us interest to boot,
liars, cheats and pickpockets

I hope you are going to be the judge when the case comes up!

[SantaClaus]

I hope you are going to be the judge when the case comes up!

I think I'll check my pockets if I brush past the Inland Revenue representatives.

[kiwinlondon]

I think I'll check my pockets if I brush past the Inland Revenue representatives.

You wont need to .. they will be charging entry fee's.. just like at the movies... you also need to take 2 forms of id with you to prove who you are and a note from your mum!!!

[lucozade]

Hi all, I wrote to my MP and have had a response in the post that he would be happy to represent me in this case. All he is looking for is some more information.

Not being lazy but just thinking this has been done before by many others. Does anybody have a standard enough reply that I can use and send back in order to get the ball rolling.

Many thanks.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Hi all, I wrote to my MP and have had a response in the post that he would be happy to represent me in this case. All he is looking for is some more information.

Not being lazy but just thinking this has been done before by many others. Does anybody have a standard enough reply that I can use and send back in order to get the ball rolling.

Many thanks.

Could you fashion something out of this?

Dear MP,

With reference to your letter of etc., please find below further details of my situation.

In 200x, I entered into a tax planning arrangement, which was approved by leading Tax Counsel as a perfectly legitimate way of organising my affairs.

In 200x, HMRC wrote to me stating that they were opening enquiries into my self assessment tax returns. In subsequent correspondence over the past X years, they stated that they intended to challenge the arrangement through litigation. However, this never materialised.

In this year's Budget, parliament approved legislation known as "BN66/Clause 55" which retrospectively changed the law going back to 1987, making the arrangement unlawful. HMRC have since written to me stating that they will use the legislation to demand tax & interest for every year the arrangement was used.

My advisors have recommended that I appeal against the HMRC closure notice. They are also applying for a Judicial Review on the basis that the legislation infringes my human rights.

However, if the legislation is ultimately enforced, it will cause severe hardship to my family and thousands of others, possibly leading to family breakdown, personal insolvency etc.

I consider myself to be a decent law abiding citizen of this country, and I would never enter into anything that was unlawful. However, by changing the law retrospectively, the Government has deemed me "guilty" by default.

As my member of parliament, I was hoping that I could count on your support to help me seek justice.

Your sincerely,

[TheGadgetMan]

Closure Notices

Are we aware of any more Closure Notices being received? Still waiting for mine...

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Are we aware of any more Closure Notices being received? Still waiting for mine...

When I spoke to MP about a week ago they had only received around 20. At this rate, some of us might be getting one for Xmas!