BN66 - Time to fight back (Chapter 3)

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Are we not due for another JR (appeal) about now? Anyone know anything?

According to a circular deGraaf clients received a couple of weeks ago, the oral hearing should be heard within the next 3 months ie. before the end of May.

Assuming the application is accepted this time, then it will probably take several more months to get a court date, so we are probably looking at the back end of the year. Worst case, it could slip into next year.

[BlasterBates]

Alas CUK is full of trolls and wind-up merchants......

and reading this thread, another category springs to mind, but I'll let you draw your own conclusions

[bananarepublic]

HMRC have stated that bhey made it clear to the tax profession and taxpayer that the DTA sceme died not work.

I assumed this refered to Dawn Primarola's statement in 2004. If you do not think it did when and how did HMRC make it clear the DTA woulod not work.

When did they make it clear that the scheme didn't work? Despite being "under investigation" since 2003 the revenue didn't say that they would actually challenge my returns until mid 2006. Even then they were very vague about the basis on which they would challenge. The "does not work" mantra is a justification for the retrospective law change.

The revenue have never argued that the 2004 changes applied to us. The 2004 relates to employed people which we were not and the revenue have never argued that we were. Anyway if the 2004 changes applied to us the revenue wouldn't be seeking retrospection back 20 odd years just 4 odd.

The 2004 "warning" is common usage when justifying retrospective changes. The problem we have is that there was never any warning prior to the 2008 budget that we would be taxed retrospectively. This will no doubt form part of the HR defence.

[deckster]

HMRC have stated that bhey made it clear to the tax profession and taxpayer that the DTA sceme died not work.

I assumed this refered to Dawn Primarola's statement in 2004. If you do not think it did when and how did HMRC make it clear the DTA woulod not work.

They may have stated that, but that doesn't make it true. There is absolutely no evidence that HMRC ever made anything clear to anyone, and looking at all the official HMRC advice, transcripts of commons debates etc. shows that this particular set of circumstances simply never occurred to them. On this (as well as many other counts) HMRC are just lying.

[poppy01]

and reading this thread, another category springs to mind, but I'll let you draw your own conclusions

sorry, cant think of it

[TheGadgetMan]

sorry, cant think of it

me neither!

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Standard Tory response

Many Tory MPs are now sending this "cut and paste" response:

http://forums.contractoruk.com/786264-post1938.html

I don't think we should be surprised that they can't make any promises to reverse the legislation but we should take comfort from this:

The key problem seems to be that the Government has been aware of this scheme for some years, yet made no move to close the loophole. This served to create a legitimate expectation amongst taxpayers that the practice would be tolerated by the Government, and so people have been arranging their tax affairs accordingly.

I interpret this as a clear hint that they don't think it stacks up legally.

"Legitimate expectation" is one of the cornerstones of the human rights act.

Following on from this, here is an extract from the circular I mentioned in an earlier post:

Senior Counsel continues to believe that the application has every chance of success because the assertion of HMRC which underpins the retrospective legislation is that HMRC has always believed the law to be what the retrospective legislation now declares it to be. However, the evidence suggests strongly that this is not the case. The judge who received the written application said that he had no such evidence before him. The judge who hears the oral application will be presented with the evidence.

[Emigre]

Backdated HMRC Letters

Last night I received a letter from HMRC. It is predominantly red and entitled "Self Assessment: Final Demand". It is dated 16 February 2009. ie it took 17 days to arrive. It relates to failure to make the payment on account due at end January (hands up - my fault). However, I have not received any previous demands for payment (in my language "final demand" implies that there have been previous demands).

Ordinarily I wouldn't be that bothered about a little interest on a relatively small amount but the late receipt crossed 28 February from which date I am advised that a 5% surcharge will be added.

By coincidence I spoke with a colleague who also received a Final Demand notice last night dated 16 February 2009. Unfortunately for them the demand ignored the DTA and was for a figure assesses by HMRC!

Is posting of backdated letters systemmic in HMRC? Have you received a Final Demand notice lately? If so, when was it dated? When received?

Thanks

[TheGadgetMan]

Many Tory MPs are now sending this "cut and paste" response:

http://forums.contractoruk.com/786264-post1938.html

I don't think we should be surprised that they can't make any promises to reverse the legislation but we should take comfort from this:

The key problem seems to be that the Government has been aware of this scheme for some years, yet made no move to close the loophole. This served to create a legitimate expectation amongst taxpayers that the practice would be tolerated by the Government, and so people have been arranging their tax affairs accordingly.

I interpret this as a clear hint that they don't think it stacks up legally.

"Legitimate expectation" is one of the cornerstones of the human rights act.

Following on from this, here is an extract from the circular I mentioned in an earlier post:

Senior Counsel continues to believe that the application has every chance of success because the assertion of HMRC which underpins the retrospective legislation is that HMRC has always believed the law to be what the retrospective legislation now declares it to be. However, the evidence suggests strongly that this is not the case. The judge who received the written application said that he had no such evidence before him. The judge who hears the oral application will be presented with the evidence.

Yes I remember reading this...but this begs the question that if the judge who was presented the original application for a JR saw 'no such evidence', then why did he decline the application for a JR?...

yes this might be a standard process to weed out any weak cases from progressing and wasting valuable court time, but if one of the sides presents little or no evidence to support their case, then surely its a no-brainer to proceed to JR?

[portseven]

Is posting of backdated letters systemmic in HMRC? Have you received a Final Demand notice lately? If so, when was it dated? When received?

I got one yesterday, and it was dated 16th Feb. I did have a warning earlier this month, which I responded to with a letter drafted by DeGraff. I spoke to them about this final warning letter, and they are investigating it as a number of others with them have received them. They are not sure if it's a computer generated on or not.

Glad I was working from home at the time, as if the missus had read it, I think it would have sent her over the edge.