Originally posted by smalldog
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
BN66 - Time to fight back (Chapter 3)
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
Topic is closed
-
-
HI All,
Here is a quote from the debate on Section 58 of Finance Act 2008 – the act that closed down the Montpelier scheme retrospectively:
(Jane Kennedy)
“They ought to have been aware of the likely consequences of their wilful attempt to flout the law. The 1987 decision to tackle treaty abuse with retrospective effect was a clear signal.”
The “clear signal” from the 1987 legislation was that if one finds a loophole in a law and uses it, then one will get to keep that tax advantage. That was how the retrospective legislation was drafted in 1987 and how it was explained in 1987 by the then treasury minister (Norman Lamont).
That is the legitimate expectation. What happened in 2008 went 180 degrees against this expectation.
The 1987 debate can be found here
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/c...f-partnerships
The 2008 debate can be found here
http://www.publications.parliament.u...m/80522s03.htm
and here
http://www.publications.parliament.u...m/80522s01.htm
I hope you can see the deception that is being used against us. If you’re lurking, or if you have not yet written to you MP – be aware this is your chance to change this. Write to your MP NOW, while it can still make a difference.There's an elephant wondering around here...Comment
-
HI All,
Here is a quote from the debate on Section 58 of Finance Act 2008 – the act that closed down the Montpelier scheme retrospectively:
(Jane Kennedy)
“They ought to have been aware of the likely consequences of their wilful attempt to flout the law. The 1987 decision to tackle treaty abuse with retrospective effect was a clear signal.”
The “clear signal” from the 1987 legislation was that if one finds a loophole in a law and uses it, then one will get to keep that tax advantage. That was how the retrospective legislation was drafted in 1987 and how it was explained in 1987 by the then treasury minister (Norman Lamont).
That is the legitimate expectation. What happened in 2008 went 180 degrees against this expectation.
The 1987 debate can be found here
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/c...f-partnerships
The 2008 debate can be found here
http://www.publications.parliament.u...m/80522s03.htm
and here
http://www.publications.parliament.u...m/80522s01.htm
I hope you can see the deception that is being used against us. If you’re lurking, or if you have not yet written to you MP – be aware this is your chance to change this. Write to your MP NOW, while it can still make a difference.There's an elephant wondering around here...Comment
-
Originally posted by Toocan View PostI hope you can see the deception that is being used against us. If you’re lurking, or if you have not yet written to you MP – be aware this is your chance to change this. Write to your MP NOW, while it can still make a difference.Comment
-
Reply from Member of Parliament
Received my reply from my MP last week. He expressed his concern and said he will take it up with the Treasury Minister, also he asked for my tax reference and NI number to take up the matter himself with HMRC.
Have replied immediately and wait for the reply.
I received a closure notice nearly a month ago, sent copy to NW and TQ, but logged on to SA and only 2007/8 has changed for the latest submission. 05/06 and 06/07 have stayed the same. Have emailed NW/TQ to check this has been appealed.
Will post again when I get more news.Comment
-
gateway
Can anyone help with the gateway, had a login in from way back..
Just wondering what service I use. I am logged in an individual I had registered for SA online, went in there.... and under my account, it gives me literally nothing, I have options like Your Service/ Manage Services/ etc. clicked all and end up going round in circles..?
am I missing something, besides a brain :-) ?
SL- SL -Comment
-
Gateway
I'm still getting : -
"
Our system does not currently support the display of your Self Assessment account. Please contact the Online Services Helpdesk for further information (quoting reference SA001)
"
Anyone else get this?Comment
-
Originally posted by silver_lining View PostCan anyone help with the gateway, had a login in from way back..
Just wondering what service I use. I am logged in an individual I had registered for SA online, went in there.... and under my account, it gives me literally nothing, I have options like Your Service/ Manage Services/ etc. clicked all and end up going round in circles..?
am I missing something, besides a brain :-) ?
SL
https://online.hmrc.gov.uk/self%2DassessmentComment
-
3rd time lucky
Finally got a response from my MP Nick Hurd, stated forwarding my letter to relevant minister for a response.Comment
-
Originally posted by ContractIn View PostFinally got a response from my MP Nick Hurd, stated forwarding my letter to relevant minister for a response.
He is going to be getting something else towards the end of this week which might give him pause for thought.Comment
Topic is closed
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Andrew Griffith MP says Tories would reform IR35 Yesterday 00:41
- New umbrella company JSL rules: a 2026 guide for contractors Oct 5 22:50
- Top 5 contractor compliance challenges, as 2025-26 nears Oct 3 08:53
- Joint and Several Liability ‘won’t retire HMRC's naughty list’ Oct 2 05:28
- What contractors can take from the Industria Umbrella Ltd case Sep 30 23:05
- Is ‘Open To Work’ on LinkedIn due an IR35 dropdown menu? Sep 30 05:57
- IR35: Control — updated for 2025-26 Sep 28 21:28
- Can a WhatsApp message really be a contract? Sep 25 20:17
- Can a WhatsApp message really be a contract? Sep 25 08:17
- ‘Subdued’ IT contractor jobs market took third tumble in a row in August Sep 25 08:07
Comment