BN66 - the road to Judicial Review

[Toocan]

"Sold down the river" depends whether you are paddling up or down stream.

What does that mean?

Are you claiming that HMRC approached Suo Motu?

[Emigre]

What does that mean?

Are you claiming that HMRC approached Suo Motu?

I don't think Amnesia's claiming anything. I just don't think he knows what he's talking about. He joins up, wades in here with a complete load of twaddle, and then returns to the ether. No loss.

[ir35amnesia]

What goes around comes around

The Suo Motu scheme started in the summer of 2001. Just over a year later they approached HMRC.

Questions for ex-clients:

1. How could the validity of the scheme have changed so much in just 1 year that they were prepared to offer you up to HMRC without a fight?
2. Did Suo Motu consult you before approaching HMRC? Or was this done behind your back?
3. Did you get a refund of the fees you paid them?
4. Were you aware that the directors, in cahoots with HMRC, subsequently went on to profit from your settlement by creating www.ir35amnesty.com to sell it to users of other schemes?

Do you feel cheated? If so, drop me a line.

[email protected]

Questions for Clients affected by BN66
A/ How do you know that the scheme ever worked

B/ Did your scheme provider tellyou of the dangers of joining such a scheme. Did they tell you that every member since late 2002 was put under investigation by HMRC on joining the scheme.

C/ Has your scheme provider promised a full refund of fees if JR "fails". Probably talking about £200 million in fees.

D/ Were you aware that the scheme directors, were in cahoots with HMRC (How May we Receive lots of Cash ltd), subsequently went on to profit from you and continue to do so.

E/ If the scheme directors told you that Suo Motu was the undercover vehicle of James Bond and its actually the Octopus Man who is to blame for BN66 - would you believe them.

Three key considerations that are being overlooked - Objectivity,objectivity and yes objectivity.

[SantaClaus]

Three key considerations that are being overlooked - Objectivity,objectivity and yes objectivity.

Stop talking in riddles man! are you the Joker?

[ir35amnesia]

I know Suo Motu had the full MTM client list because I, and a number of other MTM clients I know, were cold-called by one of the Directors of S-M after the split trying to persuade us to jump ship.

Will you back that up with a sworn affidavit and be prepared to be cross examined in Court.
If so - why aren't you a key witness to the JR on 19th.

[swede]

There's that number again....

Questions for Clients affected by BN66

Probably talking about £200 million in fees.

how funny

[ir35amnesia]

The Real Deal

Haha.. more chance of Jones turning up to give evidence at the JR than HMRC responding to this

I understand from a very reliable source that Jones is willing to give evidence at the JR.

[Cosmo]

I understand from a very reliable source that Jones is willing to give evidence at the JR.

How reliable - are you him?

[PlaneSailing]

And I thought things would slow before Christmas...

Questions for Clients affected by BN66
A/ How do you know that the scheme ever worked

B/ Did your scheme provider tellyou of the dangers of joining such a scheme. Did they tell you that every member since late 2002 was put under investigation by HMRC on joining the scheme.

C/ Has your scheme provider promised a full refund of fees if JR "fails". Probably talking about £200 million in fees.

D/ Were you aware that the scheme directors, were in cahoots with HMRC (How May we Receive lots of Cash ltd), subsequently went on to profit from you and continue to do so.

E/ If the scheme directors told you that Suo Motu was the undercover vehicle of James Bond and its actually the Octopus Man who is to blame for BN66 - would you believe them.

Three key considerations that are being overlooked - Objectivity,objectivity and yes objectivity.

Mr/s Amnesia,

I was always told it was rude to answer a question with a question, and you
seem to want to avoid answering some put to you. Anyhow:

A-The same way that anyone who works under IR35, in an umbrella
or PSC 'knows' that what they are doing works. Hector always lurks.

B-Wonder how the revenue knew? Also not strictly true.

C-Perhaps they could set up a website to help people out and get
fees from that too.

D-Don't know who speaks to HMRC or not, and not sure if I care. They
are only there to collect the tax, and they don't write the rules.

E-Oh dear

[PlaneSailing]

Form a queue

I understand from a very reliable source that Jones is willing to give evidence at the JR.

So am I, but no one has asked me! But then again (beyond the discrimination argument) I don't have
a clue as to why Mr. Jones' scheme has any bearing on the BN66 legislation. The problem is
the retrospective change.

I know you're not big on answering questions, but if the scheme never worked then why didn't they
try and prove it through the courts back in 2002? As you said previously they knew about it.