BN66 - Time to fight back (Chapter 3)

[AlbionRovers]

HMRC & Footy

Some Sunday reading:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7741859.stm

[BrilloPad]

Some Sunday reading:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7741859.stm

"In one case, Leicester City settled just 10% of their £7m tax bill. " - I will offer 11% - its a win for HMRC. Not sure if I owe as much as £7m - anyone reading this from head office who can check please?

[Toocan]

Some Sunday reading:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7741859.stm

This may be controversial: I think HMRC should come at the bottom of the list of creditors when a business fails. This is because the people who are due money are likely to be other businesses, and unpaid invoices can cause other businesses to fail too. Ultimately, that will cause an even bigger burden on the public purse.

HMRC will not go out of business due to a business failing. And after all, they didn’t actually supply anything to the failing business. This is in stark contrast to the failed businesses suppliers.

[Emigre]

"In one case, Leicester City settled just 10% of their £7m tax bill. " - I will offer 11% - its a win for HMRC. Not sure if I owe as much as £7m - anyone reading this from head office who can check please?

I'm willing to bet that most of us would agree to pay 10%, even though HMRC don't deserve it. That would give us a total deduction of around 21% which is where we were before IR35. I suspect that most us accept that as reasonable.

However, IMHO HMRC don't deserve the 10% because the law at the time we made our decisions said we didn't have to pay it and secondly their greed forced us to take the alternative route.

[BrilloPad]

I'm willing to bet that most of us would agree to pay 10%, even though HMRC don't deserve it. That would give us a total deduction of around 21% which is where we were before IR35. I suspect that most us accept that as reasonable.

However, IMHO HMRC don't deserve the 10% because the law at the time we made our decisions said we didn't have to pay it and secondly their greed forced us to take the alternative route.

errr - actually I was only going to pay 10% of my tax bill - not 10% of income!

either way - who cares - no deal on table - ts a fight to the bitter end. we have won the moral argument (else HMRC would not need retrospective legislation) - now the legal argument to be won.

[VictorValiant]

Another De-Lurker Comes in from the Cold

Its midnight in the middle of the North Sea and, as I look out from the bridge windows the snow is coming down. I'm busy waiting - and reading your thread. Been out here for a while and I suspect I may have something "special" in the post when I get back from Norway judging by some of your mailings.
All interesting stuff and I have an inkling I will be logging on to these pages in the weeks and months to come. Still believe in Santa even though my girls told me a few years ago that he didn't exist. Was I disappointed ? Here is to proving them wrong.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Its midnight in the middle of the North Sea and, as I look out from the bridge windows the snow is coming down. I'm busy waiting - and reading your thread. Been out here for a while and I suspect I may have something "special" in the post when I get back from Norway judging by some of your mailings.
All interesting stuff and I have an inkling I will be logging on to these pages in the weeks and months to come. Still believe in Santa even though my girls told me a few years ago that he didn't exist. Was I disappointed ? Here is to proving them wrong.

Welcome, and thanks for de-lurking. For a moment there I thought you were describing the outlook for UK PLC, which is probably about as grim as being stuck in the middle of the North Sea.

Hopefully someone is checking the post for you while you are away, so you don't miss the 28-day deadline for lodging an appeal.

Take care out there, and safe journey home.
DR

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Anyone not written to their Member of Parliament?

Please PM me if you would be willing to write. I think it would be good to get some MPs to raise questions of the new Financial Secretary to the Treasury.

Unfortunately, I wrote to my MP quite recently so I don't want to write again for a while.

The points I think need to be made include:

• HMRC are using Section 58 to try and recover tax (+ interest) on income earned going back as far as 7 years
• There were over 200 people in the scheme in 2001/2, 350 in 2002/3 and 550 in 2003/4
• For whatever reason, large numbers of these people no longer have this money, and with recession looming, house prices, stock markets falling and credit in short supply there is little prospect of raising it
• If this measure is carried through then it will force hundreds of families into bankruptcy

Question: is this what the Government really wants?

[Cornish Cream]

Hi there,

Another De Lurker coming out of the closet. I am not with MP but with De Graaf - so this forum has been of some comfort.

I have not yet written to my MP so would welcome advice on how to word my letter.

Cheers CC

[ContractIn]

Hi DR

I have written to my MP twice and had no response, once via writetothem, and once via their personal site. I sent these when this was first discussed on the thread, so some time ago.

Any thoughts on how I could escalate this?

Cheers
CI