BN66 - Time to fight back (Chapter 3)

[AlbionRovers]

disagree, it sounds like the times is sympathetic to our predicament, presented intelligently and in the current climate of worry over personal freedoms being eroded, I cant see it harming us in the least. . I think our story is extremely important and must get out there. any accusation of us being fat cats can very quickly be countered. Incompetence and disgusting behaviour of HMRC must be exposed .

I disagree with your disagreement. The red tops will pounce on any broadsheet article and assist any attempt to take us to the cleaners.

[kiwinlondon]

I disagree with your disagreement. The red tops will pounce on any broadsheet article and assist any attempt to take us to the cleaners.

I agree with the disagreement.. the papers will just show a bunch of IT contractors earning 80-100k a year moaning about paying 40% tax... given the annual salaries are around £35k we wont end up looking like we are struggling even if a lot of us are... and what the revenue have done prob wont come out either....

[TheBarCapBoyz]

What do I think about HMRC and their games - I cannot print the answer here.

Sure you can.

HMRC are a bunch of c@unts.

There, I said it for you.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I think we are all too close to this. Do you think any papers would really be interested in the "Overpaid contractors get their comeuppance" angle?

No offence but we are just a bunch of "nobodys". The red tops would only be interested if it outs someone rich or famous (celebs, bankers, public figures). IT contractors are boring. So what if Joe Bloggs from Slough avoided tax and now he's going to be bankrupted? Who cares?

Think about this. Section 58 may be a first in UK legislative history. Fully retrospective legislation, which allows HMRC to travel back in time up to 21 years and yet it hasn't even been reported. Why? Because (sadly) it doesn't affect anyone in the public eye.

We live in a celebrity culture and Joe Bloggs doesn't get a look in anymore unless he is a serial killer, child molester or suspected terrorist.

2000 Contractors avoiding paying tax is a "non story".

[poppy01]

I think we are all too close to this. Do you think any papers would really be interested in the "Overpaid contractors get their comeuppance" angle?

No offence but we are just a bunch of "nobodys". The red tops would only be interested if it outs someone rich or famous (celebs, bankers, public figures). IT contractors are boring. So what if Joe Bloggs from Slough avoided tax and now he's going to be bankrupted? Who cares?

Think about this. Section 58 may be a first in UK legislative history. Fully retrospective legislation, which allows HMRC to travel back in time up to 21 years and yet it hasn't even been reported. Why? Because (sadly) it doesn't affect anyone in the public eye.

We live in a celebrity culture and Joe Bloggs doesn't get a look in anymore unless he is a serial killer, child molester or suspected terrorist.

2000 Contractors avoiding paying tax is a "non story".

I agree, and disagree with the previous disagreements and agreements with disagreements disagreeng with my original agreement with your idea.

'The story' isnt about tax avoiders, its about fundamental justice, retrospective taxation, cover ups of government incompetence at the expense of citizens, belligerence and bullying.

THIS IS IMPORTANT TO EVERYONE. We are just the first thats all. Government must be shown to have gone too far.

oh.. and show me someone who hasn't tried to avoid paying tax and I'll show you a liar, let him who hath not sinned and all that... and I dont exclude the Chancellor, although I believe in his case it was claiming that the garden shed in his sister twice removeds back yard was his primary residence over the 12 bedroom mansion in Edinburgh.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Red tops

Another reason why the tabloids wouldn't be interested is that there is no picture to go with the story. Where is the photo opportunity?

The Government have played the "tax avoidance" card to death over recent years and it's not news any more.

[AlbionRovers]

No picture, just TAX CHEATS in big red, headlining letters.

[AlbionRovers]

That was a joke btw, strongly agree that we're no headliners.

[bombaycat]

I think we are all too close to this. Do you think any papers would really be interested in the "Overpaid contractors get their comeuppance" angle?

No offence but we are just a bunch of "nobodys". The red tops would only be interested if it outs someone rich or famous (celebs, bankers, public figures). IT contractors are boring. So what if Joe Bloggs from Slough avoided tax and now he's going to be bankrupted? Who cares?

Think about this. Section 58 may be a first in UK legislative history. Fully retrospective legislation, which allows HMRC to travel back in time up to 21 years and yet it hasn't even been reported. Why? Because (sadly) it doesn't affect anyone in the public eye.

We live in a celebrity culture and Joe Bloggs doesn't get a look in anymore unless he is a serial killer, child molester or suspected terrorist.

2000 Contractors avoiding paying tax is a "non story".

I agree with DR, we aren't interesting, we're not Jade Goody dying of cancer or 1.3 trillion in government debt - not even close to these extremes that the papers aim for. I think the issues are actually rather complicated for most non-involved people to even bother following the logic.

However much we may be bankrupted and out on the streets in the future you'll never never get people feeling sorry for us as we had what most people would think of as good money in the past.

Unfortunately there are so many people facing seriously hard times the papers have their pick of hard luck stories.

We would need more than Max Clifford to protect us from the media - remember the mess Diana got herself into thinking she could control the media!

There be dragons.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

No picture, just TAX CHEATS in big red, headlining letters.

Ok, let's imagine how the story might look.

TAX CHEATS CAUGHT RED HANDED

HMRC are using legislation introduced in last year's budget to claw back tax from 2000 chancers who thought they could cheat the tax system out of millions of pounds. These individuals used an unlawful scheme based in the Isle of Man to get out of paying tax for the past 8 years. HMRC will also be slapping them with interest charges as restitution.

In the long run, who do you think this would hurt most? We are anonymous nobodys. But this would lead to a lot of very awkward questions:

1) If it was unlawful evasion, why aren't they facing penalties. Why aren't they being prosecuted.

2) Why did it take 8 years to discover this?

3) What is this legislation?