BN66 - JR Judgement Day

[PlaneSailing]

Obviously it was a knock last week but having had time to reflect, talk to a lot of other people (many not in the scheme), I am now feeling a hell of a lot more confident.

Justice Parker's judgment was more in line with the "spirit of the law" (purposive interpretation).

We need the higher courts to judge it on the "letter of the law" (literal interpretation), and I think we've got every chance of winning that argument.

To all those who are considering settling

Feel free to try but I can't see you getting anything out of HMRC.

Jones only got minor concessions from them settling on behalf of 148 Suo Motu users, and HMRC had no case back then.

Settling is a one-way ticket. There's no comeback if we win.

Do you really want to throw away a chance of winning?

As for settling, HMRC have this document :

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/practitioners/lss.pdf

Concerning Tax Avoidance

'If our legal advice is strong, do not accept settlements for less than 100% of the tax and interest due.'

[Doug1965]

'If our legal advice is strong, do not accept settlements for less than 100% of the tax and interest due.'

Makes you wonder why they did not go for 100% on SuoMotu.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Makes you wonder why they did not go for 100% on SuoMotu.

Because HMRC had nothing, nada, zilch...

They probably couldn't believe their luck.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Settling

I have been asked to reiterate this point.

If you settle...

you will never see the money again, ever

Think before you jump.

[Grim Reaper]

If you have your liability tucked away in a CTD then you have nothing to lose by seeing it out for the duration, correct ?
I have considered settling on the grounds that this has dragged on for 2 years and the money is still not 'mine'.
When this all kicked off HMRC told me that if I settled up and the case went against them, then they would have no right to retain the money - though in the real world this may be harder work.

[Alba]

Review

I know that people have differing opinions of PCG, but now that the judgement is out in the open, people should be made aware of the far reaching implications of it as it stands!!
Monday, 01 February 2010

PCG, the representative body for freelancers, contractors and consultants in the UK, has expressed concern at Friday’s landmark case in the High Court allowing HM Revenue & Customs to levy taxes retrospectively.

A self-employed IT consultant, Robert Huitson, had challenged the Revenue’s right to levy taxes retrospectively. Mr Huitson’s barrister said that this had broken his rights under the Human Rights Act as up until 2008, Mr Huitson’s tax affairs had been legal.

However, Mr Justice Parker rejected this pointing out that the Revenue had warned the users of the tax avoidance scheme that it might be challenged, and he said the Government was entitled to change tax law retrospectively to squash artificial arrangements.

“Whilst we recognise that the High Court Judge has clearly set out his reasons for upholding the 2008 Finance Act which allowed the Revenue to claim back this tax retrospectively in this particular instance”, said PCG Chairman Chris Bryce, “we share a common concern with all taxpayers that this judgement may be seen as opening the door to retrospection.”

“For a seven year period up to 2008 HMRC failed to take any action before the law was changed, despite being well aware of these arrangements. Whilst PCG in no way encourages off-shore tax arrangements we object in the strongest terms to taxpayers being retrospectively penalised for arranging their tax affairs in a way which was entirely legal and proper at the time they undertook to do so.”

Chris Bryce concluded; “I note our concern with retrospective taxation is widely shared. PCG will continue to watch this area very closely.
HMRC must not feel this is a green light to retrospectively challenge other, entirely legitimate behaviour.”

[DonkeyRhubarb]

If you have your liability tucked away in a CTD then you have nothing to lose by seeing it out for the duration, correct ?
I have considered settling on the grounds that this has dragged on for 2 years and the money is still not 'mine'.
When this all kicked off HMRC told me that if I settled up and the case went against them, then they would have no right to retain the money - though in the real world this may be harder work.

If they really told you this, you were misled.

Do not confuse "paying on account" with "settling". The two are completely different.

Settlement is final, binding and irrevocable. For example, Suo Motu will get nothing back if we win.

[portseven]

Letter sent to my MP, Tom Leavit

[poppy01]

Obviously it was a knock last week but having had time to reflect, talk to a lot of other people (many not in the scheme), I am now feeling a hell of a lot more confident.

Justice Parker's judgment was more in line with the "spirit of the law" (purposive interpretation).

We need the higher courts to judge it on the "letter of the law" (literal interpretation), and I think we've got every chance of winning that argument.

To all those who are considering settling

Feel free to try but I can't see you getting anything out of HMRC.

Jones only got minor concessions from them settling on behalf of 148 Suo Motu users, and HMRC had no case back then.

Settling is a one-way ticket. There's no comeback if we win.

Do you really want to throw away a chance of winning?

I feel the same, I certainly wont be settling yet, and not just because I cant.
What I do hope though is we dont fall back into the hubris that I saw on the forum before the JR. It was the same before the Treasury comittee. We got ourselves worked up to the point it was a foregone conclusion. It wasnt and isnt. What it did for me was give me a wake up call that I need to plan ahead and prepare for the worst so it wont affect my family too much.

[TaxDude]

Letters to Labour MP

Is it worth sending a letter out to a Labour MP ? will do anyway but feels a bit pointless