BN66 - Time to fight back (Chapter 3)

[Ratican]

Meeting with Lib Dem MP

Hello all! I finally met with my Lib Dem MP last Wednesday. I got half an hour with her and her researcher.

The way I structured the meeting was:

1. Why I am here today – Introductory letter – Personal situation
2. Background
   1. Background to S58 MFinance Act 2008
   2. Background to IR35
3. Current Situation – Summary (i.e. our efforts / what we are doing)
4. Communications I have received
   1. Treasury / HMRC Responses (standard letters)
   2. FOI Request Replies
   3. Emails from Finance Bill 2008 Committee members (mainly supporting us)
5. Finance Bill Committee Clause 55
   1. The debate
   2. How the Committee may have been mislead
6. How can you help me (Why I am here)
   1. My Objective (Repeal S58 / Amnesty on Payments)
   2. Questions for the government

I printed all this out for her - presented in a folder with a table of contents - to leave with her and will also email her a PDF file of the content as well.

She was very happy with this as it makes it easy for her to email sections – read the sections that she is interested in - in her own time.

The meeting was extremely positive. She has said that she is totally behind us fighting this and is willing to fight too. She agrees that retrospection is vile and unjust.

Based on the information I supplied her with (a lot of which we were able to skim through during the meeting) she is going to:

1. Send the current list of questions to Stephen Timms through their Finance guy (Vince Cable?) and mention that her constituent has already received the standard “cut and paste” letter which did not answer/address the questions he asked.
2. Ask additional questions to the government related to the financial/health/family problems that the retrospective legislation is causing/will cause a lot of those affected (ordinary people not wealthy individuals) as well as the obvious unfairness of the legislation/length of time to action a solution to the scheme.
3. She is going to ask if any research was carried out to find out what impact S58 would have on individuals affected – and benefits to the Treasury, etc.
4. Write to the Business Secretary to ask him if knows about BN66 and the effects that bankruptcy will have on many consultants/contractors (e.g. May not be able to run Limited Company / get contracts / pushed into other avoidance schemes / etc.)
5. Write to the Lib Dem treasury guy to see if he can do something (he has signed the petition so far).

My MP is a well known campaigner and is well aware of the best ways to get issues noticed at a Parliamentary level and how to keep issues and feelings alive.

She advised me that the best thing we can do is to "keep chipping away" (keep the pressure on) - as we are doing – but must continue to do so:

• Keep the pressure on MPs
• Keep the pressure on HMRC
• Keep the pressure on Treasury officials
• Ensure that the petition grows

By:

• Letter writing (– more than one or two!)
• Finding ways to get more people to sign the petition
• Especially meeting your MP / MSP

She said that if we “keep chipping away” for long enough someone will start LISTENING and importantly - start DOING something about this situation. It is, after all, only a “paltry £200M” (not my words).

So… thoughts...

• Does anybody have an MP that is involved with Finance / Finance Act / relevant Committees? If so - write/re-write/meet with him/her ASAP.
• MEET your MP – I know that it is a hassle – I know that it might be a half day off work – I know that the preparation takes effort. But – it IS worth it given the situation we are in!

[I’ll put up another post re. the preparation – I’ll make sure the documentation I put together is available to those arranging a meeting.]

I am feeling a lot happier and much more positive about the situation after meeting my MP and listening to what she had to say. Knowing that she is interested in helping, and that she is outraged by the situation, is both comforting and reassuring.

NB I had written to her on previous occasions. She had advised me to meet her.
Further Advice: It is important to know that until you meet with your MP – they are unlikely to do more than the minimum they feel they need to do to address your concern (e.g. write to the Treasury).

When you meet them and tell them what effect this will have on your family/health/prospects/etc and what actions you want them to take on your behalf – you will get a result. It becomes personal.

All in all, it went very well – I’m feeling happy and positive for the first time in a long time! I will be meeting my MP again in 4 or 5 weeks to discuss where we are and what has been done since our initial meeting. I am also going to write to her every few weeks to keep her up to date on developments.

PS – Please, please arrange a meeting… don't just rely on others!

[Fog]

I am feeling a lot happier and much more positive about the situation after meeting my MP and listening to what she had to say. Knowing that she is interested in helping, and that she is outraged by the situation, is both comforting and reassuring.

NB I had written to her on previous occasions. She had advised me to meet her.
Further Advice: It is important to know that until you meet with your MP – they are unlikely to do more than the minimum they feel they need to do to address your concern (e.g. write to the Treasury).

When you meet them and tell them what effect this will have on your family/health/prospects/etc and what actions you want them to take on your behalf – you will get a result. It becomes personal.

All in all, it went very well – I’m feeling happy and positive for the first time in a long time! I will be meeting my MP again in 4 or 5 weeks to discuss where we are and what has been done since our initial meeting. I am also going to write to her every few weeks to keep her up to date on developments.

PS – Please, please arrange a meeting… don't just rely on others![/QUOTE]

Great news well done - I too have met with my MP John Redwood and had a similiar experience - it is so worth everybody's time. This has cheered me up so thank you.

[BolshieBastard]

Got a reply from my MP today.

"I recognise your concern about the retrospective tax legislation which
was introduced in last year's budget and the implications this has for
you. I have today written to the Financial Secretary to the Treasury,
Stephen Timms, asking what consideration the Government gave to the
impact the closure the tax planning scheme to which you refer would have
on those who had legally used the scheme.

As soon as I have a reply I will be in touch with you again."

Here we go!

[arandomname]

Bit slow off the mark but...

just found out my local MP is Alastair Darling. Has anyone written to him?

[Emigre]

Hello all! I finally met with my Lib Dem MP last Wednesday. I got half an hour with her and her researcher.

The way I structured the meeting was:

1. Why I am here today – Introductory letter – Personal situation
2. Background
   1. Background to S58 MFinance Act 2008
   2. Background to IR35
3. Current Situation – Summary (i.e. our efforts / what we are doing)
4. Communications I have received
   1. Treasury / HMRC Responses (standard letters)
   2. FOI Request Replies
   3. Emails from Finance Bill 2008 Committee members (mainly supporting us)
5. Finance Bill Committee Clause 55
   1. The debate
   2. How the Committee may have been mislead
6. How can you help me (Why I am here)
   1. My Objective (Repeal S58 / Amnesty on Payments)
   2. Questions for the government

I printed all this out for her - presented in a folder with a table of contents - to leave with her and will also email her a PDF file of the content as well.

PS – Please, please arrange a meeting… don't just rely on others!

Great and helpful post Ratican. Lets keep the pressure up. As well as meeting your MP please also get friends and family to sign the petition.

Thank you.

[KiwiGuy]

well done Ratican

[MuddyFunster]

Reply to 2nd letter from Vince Cable

I sent a letter to Vince Cable back in February and I got a reply today:

"... we have debated the issue you raise extensively in Parliament and the problem is that there are a lot of very clever lawyers and accountants who are finding forms of tax avoidance which are highly sophisticated. In response, it has now been concluded that the only way of dealing with a lot of these schemes is for tax to be paid retrospectively.

I am not a lawyer but since you say that you are being financially ruined as a result, then what is happening may well be disproportianate, in which case I can take this up for you with HMRC. On the general issue, it is however clear that Parliament has now accepted that in many cases, if people are involved in tax avoidance schemes, they will be pursued retrospectively.

... if you would like to let me have further details, I will take up your case with HMRC."

This leaves me wondering when these discussions in Parliament have taken place. No other MPs that have been written to have mentioned this.

If this is the case, then it seems like HMRC will be deciding in future who they don't like and will be going after them via the gift of time travel. S58 won't just apply to us, it will be extended a very long way to any other scheme they don't like.

[ASB]

This leaves me wondering when these discussions in Parliament have taken place. No other MPs that have been written to have mentioned this.

If this is the case, then it seems like HMRC will be deciding in future who they don't like and will be going after them via the gift of time travel. S58 won't just apply to us, it will be extended a very long way to any other scheme they don't like.

It might be worth a follow up asking him to clarify? In the 2004(?) budget when the disclosure regime for avoidance schemes was announced it was also stated that failed avoidance schemes would be backdated to 2004. There was some debate about this. [Whether or not this is valid or subject to challenge has yet to be seen]

In the S58 case of course they are doing rather more than this (fwiw my view is that it wouldn't be unreasonable for HMRC to seek retrospection to 2004 since this had actually been announced - though whether they would be sucessful is a different matter entirely of course).

[DonkeyRhubarb]

there are a lot of very clever lawyers and accountants who are finding forms of tax avoidance which are highly sophisticated.

There always have been. What is so different now? What he should really be asking himself is why tax avoidance has exploded under New Labour (just like Old Labour)? Counterproductive measures like IR35 perhaps?

In response, it has now been concluded that the only way of dealing with a lot of these schemes is for tax to be paid retrospectively.

Labour may have concluded this but the Conservatives haven't, and nor have many of Mr Cable's colleagues.

On the general issue, it is however clear that Parliament has now accepted that in many cases, if people are involved in tax avoidance schemes, they will be pursued retrospectively.

This sounds a bit arbitrary. Why should some people be pursued retrospectively, and others not?

[smalldog]

what slightly worries me about this entire approach by the likes of MP etc (notbeing a lawyer I couldnt argue technicalties of course) is that its all down to law this and law that. Hows about the whole point its totally F***ing unfair to try and scr*w people for money they earnt so long ago that is probably long gone, peoples situations change massively in 8 years, how can they attempt to draw a parallel and think you've still a) got that earning power, b) still have it earning interest nicely etc....sorrys its all a load of immoral, unjust, unfair bullsh*t...we shouldnt have to argue finer details of moving capital etc...do they even consider someone might have been contracting 5 years ago and now are maybe on the dole!??

i wonder how many people who were on the scheme in 2001 have actually died, does that mean their spouses will be purused retrospectively, Im guessing it does! what a bunch of sh*isters