BN66 - Time to fight back: Continued

[BrilloPad]

I am with Ratican. Its going to be very hard to get public sympathy. Even the retrospective bit will only go so far.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I am with Ratican. Its going to be very hard to get public sympathy. Even the retrospective bit will only go so far.

I wasn't thinking of sympathy, more along the lines of HMRC incompetence, government acting unlawfully and undermining the legislative process.

[BrilloPad]

I wasn't thinking of sympathy, more along the lines of HMRC incompetence, government acting unlawfully and undermining the legislative process.

Absolutely. But they will find some contractor earing £2000 per day and portray them as typical. We will displayed as fat cat tax evaders!

Once the story is in the papers its hard to control. Its a bit like grabbing the tiger by the tail....

[TheGadgetMan]

Absolutely. But they will find some contractor earing £2000 per day and portray them as typical. We will displayed as fat cat tax evaders!

Once the story is in the papers its hard to control. Its a bit like grabbing the tiger by the tail....

BP I agree. With the country going down the financial plug-hole right now, this is exactly the kind of headline the Daily Mail are looking for today.....there's far more harm that could be done than any potential benefit gained...

[Emigre]

The real issue here is about the principle of retrospecive changes in tax law, not specifically about a small group of people who used a DTA to their advantage.

If the Govt get away with this retrospective attack they will be given a mandate to make whatever retrospective changes they like with impunity. The Daily Mail would be the first to shout "foul play" if Gordy increased basic rate by 1% back 5 years to pay for his fiscal ineptitude.

If retrospective is allowed once where is the boundary? Seems strange to me that the major accounting firms appear not to be prepared to get involved in such a matter of principle when they could easily market their actions as being in the public interest. The irony is that it is being left to MP to bat on behalf of the public interest. But then tere won't be any knighthoods going in MP's direction.

[Cheshire Cat]

Breaking news, the govt has rushed through a bill to make the smoking ban in public places retrospective, back to 1987. Offenders will be hanged.

[SantaClaus]

Breaking news, the govt has rushed through a bill to make the smoking ban in public places retrospective, back to 1987. Offenders will be hanged.

The govt. have just announced that the speed limit on all roads will be changed to 10 mph, effective from 1970. The change will "clarify" an existing law and is not deemed to be retrospective.

The public will be asked to hand in their driving licenses so the DVLC can administer the full 12 penalty points and a driving ban. A satellite tracking device will be strapped to offenders legs so their walking speed can be monitored.

Don't laugh, it could happen!

[poppy01]

I am with Ratican. Its going to be very hard to get public sympathy. Even the retrospective bit will only go so far.

I am not entirely sure thats true. It underestimates the British sense of fair play which I think is very powerful. Not one person I have ever described my situation to hasnt been aghast. Typical reaction is 'they can't do that can they?'

[AlbionRovers]

I personally would err on the side of caution as far as the public is concerned. They're a fickle bunch, those red top readers.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Absolutely. But they will find some contractor earing £2000 per day and portray them as typical. We will displayed as fat cat tax evaders!

Once the story is in the papers its hard to control. Its a bit like grabbing the tiger by the tail....

That may be why the property developers are keeping a low profile. They would probably be even more vilified than us.

What do you reckon the chances are of the papers taking an interest in this type of case in the high court?