BN66 - the road to Judicial Review

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Openness, honesty and transparency

These are the qualities that HMRC claims it aspires to in its dealings with taxpayers.

We've totally fulfilled our side of the bargain over the past 8 years. All incomes from the scheme were fully disclosed on our tax returns. All requests for information from HMRC were answered fully and promptly. The scheme was registered as soon as the new disclosure regime came in.

And what have we got in return for our compliance?

Secrecy, dishonesty and obfuscation.

What HMRC would call evasion if we were doing it!

[Plonker]

Agreed!

I fail to see how the HMRC can send out letters for 7 years stating that they 'may investigate the structure' and then fail to do anything.

If the first letter I received stated the alleged breach of tax law, with valid reference to (the) current legislation, then I would have immediately removed myself from the structure.

This in itself must have legal ramifications.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

What's the difference between avoidance and evasion?

What HMRC have done to us sends out a terrible message to tax evaders like those with offshore accounts.

People who are currently hiding will be thinking "look what happens when you are open and honest with HMRC, you get screwed just the same, so why bother?".

What's more, if you look at the deal that is being offered to the offshore lot, it's only marginally worse than our position:

Us: tax + interest
Them: tax + interest + 10% penalty

Answer: 10%

[PlaneSailing]

Do they mean us? They surely do.

I read this morning the the TUC have decided that tax avoidance is
something that they should comment on.

http://www.tuc.org.uk/extras/stemmingtheflow.pdf


The highlight for us being ....

Double Taxation Treaty Abuse
This scheme, announced at the same time as that noted in the previous
section, tackled overlapping areas of abuse. Double tax treaties are
important: they are designed to prevent income being taxed twice in
differing countries, and that is part of tax justice. It is obviously
inappropriate that the same income be taxed at full rate in more than
one location. It is equally obvious that those who abuse doubled tax
treaties to secure double non-taxation should be prevented from doing
so. The proposal made in the 2008 budget stopped the artificial diversion
of income from a UK resident individual to a foreign partnership using
complex structures that resulted in a claim that the income fell out of
UK taxation. This move was an entirely appropriate anti-tax avoidance
measure.




Which, interestingly, whilst mentioning 'tax justice' fails to mention
retrospectivity.

Also of interest is that they estimate that the tax gain from this
change results in £40million, not Mr Timms' favourite figure of £200million.

[Slobbo]

I wonder how much extra income we have created for the economy from the money that would otherwise been put into the HMRCs bank account. I spend my money on fuel (which they tax to stupid levels), employing builders, plumbers and other tradesmen to do the jobs I don't have the time or skill to do, I spend between £1000 and £2000 pounds a month on travel and accommodation for work, I buy food, my holidays in the last few years have been in the UK and I pay a mortgage to a bank which as a tax payer, I apparently have a 70% stake in but will never see any profit from, so how much tax have I really paid? How much have I saved the economy by keeping people in work. Why doesn't someone do a paper on how much of a persons income is actually the persons and how much tax is actually paid for every pound earned. I bet it is bloody high.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Suo Motu

If anyone who was in the Suo Motu scheme is willing to make contact, please PM or email me.

[email protected]

[Emigre]

Which, interestingly, whilst mentioning 'tax justice' fails to mention
retrospectivity.

Also of interest is that they estimate that the tax gain from this
change results in £40million, not Mr Timms' favourite figure of £200million.

The difference is that when BN66 was announced the recovery was £200m in total because it was retrospective ie covered several years. The £40m quote is an annualised figure.

Richard Murphy's name crops up far too often, mostly it seems marketing his own ego. He is not our friend,

[bananarepublic]

What HMRC have done to us sends out a terrible message to tax evaders like those with offshore accounts.

People who are currently hiding will be thinking "look what happens when you are open and honest with HMRC, you get screwed just the same, so why bother?".

What's more, if you look at the deal that is being offered to the offshore lot, it's only marginally worse than our position:

Us: tax + interest
Them: tax + interest + 10% penalty

Answer: 10%

Sorry but I think you are wrong here.

The 10% penalty is just on the outstanding tax NOT the interest.

So, example -

Us : Owe 100K + 50K interest = 150K
Them : Owe 100K + 50k interest + 10k penalty = 160K

Difference is 6% not 10% and gets less each year !!!

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Difference is 6% not 10% and gets less each year !!!

One is a crime and the other is not, yet there is bugger all difference in the treatment.

Good message that sends out!!!

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Found something out today which HMRC may not have twigged. I can't say any more because we are being watched. Suffice to say they wouldn't be happy campers if they knew...

Have a great weekend.

DR