BN66 - Time to fight back (Chapter 3)

[PlaneSailing]

We know of one developer who is in it for £60M but I think that is exceptional. I suspect if the scheme had never been promoted to contractors, the property developers would have been allowed to get away with it.

Jane Kennedy estimated that Section 58 could net around £200M.

We have discovered that the anti-avoidance measure in this year's budget (BN60), which targets a very similar double tax scheme used by the banks, is estimated to be costing the exchequer £100M per year. BN60 clarifies anti-avoidance legislation from 2005. Had they implemented it retrospectively back to 2005, they probably could have collected the same amount of money as they are "hoping" to get from Section 58.

Draw your own conclusions.

DR,

Did you get the BN60 figures from a FOI request, or did you find out
through Treasury Committee minutes? This is an extra bit of ammunition
to throw at the MPs willing to listen.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

DR,

Did you get the BN60 figures from a FOI request, or did you find out
through Treasury Committee minutes? This is an extra bit of ammunition
to throw at the MPs willing to listen.

I submitted an FOI request, and the Treasury referred me to the following financial statement:

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/Budg...aptera_307.pdf

Scroll down the table to item 55, and it lists the revenue protected in 2009/10 as £100M.

On the advice of the Treasury, I have submitted an FOI request to HMRC asking for estimates of the revenue lost 2005 to date.

[ContractIn]

1st Closure Notice

Just got home and was greeted with my 1st closure notice today.

Will contact MontP tomorrow, but what is worrying is that HMRC are showing my partnership income to be over 30k more than what was submitted in my SA.

I know a few people had similar problems last time. How can these figures be so inaccurate?

If these turn out to be true then I have seriously underestimated my liability

[BrilloPad]

Just got home and was greeted with my 1st closure notice today.

Will contact MontP tomorrow, but what is worrying is that HMRC are showing my partnership income to be over 30k more than what was submitted in my SA.

I know a few people had similar problems last time. How can these figures be so inaccurate?

If these turn out to be true then I have seriously underestimated my liability

Best to contact montp and let them sort it.

If you have issues then PM me.

BP

[BrilloPad]

It has come to my attention that the reasons which stopped the uber-troll from posting no longer exist.

It is possible that the uber-troll may strike again soon.

In general with trolls it is best not to feed them.

HTH

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Jchr

By now the Chairman of the JCHR should have received a number of representations from MPs calling for a review of Section 58.

In addition to this, I have been sending a report on S58 to selected members of the committee. There are some very learned people on this committee. For example, try googling the following:

lord lester herne hill human rights

He has had a copy of this report.

[Toocan]

The double standards of Gordon Brown and the Labour Party appears to know no limits.

Hazel Blears actively practiced capital gains tax avoidance on the properties that she funded with taxpayers money. Gordon Brown describes it as “unacceptable behaviour”. I dare say he may even sign up to the term “unacceptable tax avoidance”. When asked if further action would be taken against her, he said:

"But she has not broken the law, she has not broken the rules of the House of Commons.”

(from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8057559.stm )

Any interest payable on that amount Mr Brown?

Any retrospective law changes as it is clearly “unacceptable behaviour”?

Any consistency Mr Brown?

One rule for you and another for us Mr Brown?

Perhaps Gordon Brown would like to explain why he thinks this an acceptable way to deal with Hazel Blears?

Why attack us with retrospective legislation and back interest (BN 66 2008, s.58 FA 2008), and not good ole Hazel and your other chums?

(The chancellor's been at it too http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politi...rling_alistair )

Mr. Brown, we didn't break the law either. Our claims for DTA relief were within the rules.

[MajorGowen]

Jchr...

Morning Everyone,

Just a quickie to say that I received a letter from my MP yesterday informing me that he has forwarded my latest letter onto the clerk of the JCHR.

I'm also thinking of writing to Stephen Timms to ask him if he now plans to retrospectively change the law on MP expenses. This has, to use his own words been "exceptional circumstances" and quite clearly it would be "...right to use retrospection, as in this instance, where it is fair, proportionate and in the public interest to do so."

I was strongly against going to the media previously to highlight our plight due to the fact that most people will see what we did as immoral, and I thought that the Government would spin avoidence into evasion in the publics mind, however in the current climate I don't see how Government can spin this against us without people asking "Well if they retrospectively changed the law for them then why haven't they done that for their own expenses?"

What are your views on this????

MajorGowen...

[Taffia]

well got my DPA back, very very basic, no letters, no emails, no information with information with regards to myself, im a little bit disapointed really, probably need to send a follow up request, what have other people recieved?

Got mine yesterday. Approx 250 (un-numbered) pages. Only had a chance to have a quick skim. Nothing pertinent to our issues at first glance, just copies of self assessment statements and screen prints of data. If I find anything I'll post it up.

The most interesting part was a stapled wedge of papers relating to couple who are splitting up and have tax issues. Full names, addresses, NI numbers, phone numbers, names of children. An appalling error really. Everything someone would need to rip off their identities if they were so inclined. Very poor.

[BrilloPad]

Got mine yesterday. Approx 250 (un-numbered) pages. Only had a chance to have a quick skim. Nothing pertinent to our issues at first glance, just copies of self assessment statements and screen prints of data. If I find anything I'll post it up.

The most interesting part was a stapled wedge of papers relating to couple who are splitting up and have tax issues. Full names, addresses, NI numbers, phone numbers, names of children. An appalling error really. Everything someone would need to rip off their identities if they were so inclined. Very poor.

Well at least you gave HMRC something to do instead of bullying us.

I wonder how much the postage cost?