• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

BN66 - JR Judgement Day

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    The Way Ahead

    There has been a lot of panic on the forum recently – it’s been a week since the judgement was handed down and it’s now time to be rational and level headed.

    The Judicial Review
    The Judicial Review was dismissed. But this is far from over. I have studied the judgement and I can tell you that to my layman’s eye it is flawed in both fact and law. However, the judge has done us a great service in bringing this into the court system and sending us to a higher court.

    Update
    In the next few days, everyone who used the scheme should receive an update from his or her provider. This will not give exact details of the basis of appeal, and there will be no substantive discussion of the same on the forum either. But it is clear that there are strong grounds for appeal.

    Amnesty?
    In addition, while it might be tempting for HMRC to offer an amnesty, the tax planning industry cannot allow this judgement to stand. Because of how the judgement was worded, it is essential to their business that this judgement is corrected. We now stand with some of the biggest names in the industry.

    Can HMRC demand payment?
    I think the biggest question on everyone’s mind is whether HMRC can now demand payment of any tax that they claim is ‘due’. I don’t believe they can. If you have received a closure notice then your provider should have appealed that notice. All notices under appeal are suspended pending the outcome of the judicial review. The judicial review is not over until either a verdict is accepted (ie 28 days have passed without an appeal) or the courts have refused appeal.

    If HMRC pushed for payment then the taxpayer would demand a hearing at the tax courts. That court would be bound to adjourn pending the outcome of the higher court (in this case the Court of Appeal or (if we’re lucky) the Supreme Court). If HMRC are extremely awkward then we can ALL demand a hearing. HMRC could combine all the cases for the purposes of the DTA part but due to the structure of the scheme every single individual has elements of the scheme that would have to be decided individually – they would have to grant all 2 – 3,000 hearings. It’s in their interests to wait on this one.

    Should I save cash?
    Yes, if only to reduce the stress of the threat. Put the money in a Cash ISA with a interest rate better than HMRC's rate.

    When will the next hearing be?
    It’s going to be months until this gets back to court. There will be a written application for an appeal – this will probably be rejected (just as our original JR was), then there will be an oral hearing. Then a hearing will be heard. This will probably be at the Court of Appeal but it could go directly to the Supreme Court as this has now become a very important and constitutional issue. Our case could be fast tracked but the word right now is that it will be towards the end of the year.

    So what to do?
    If you receive any letters from HMRC consult your provider. Don’t be alarmed, you know their letters will arrive on a Saturday morning and you know they are bullies. Let your provider deal with them.

    If you receive any ‘unusual’ or particularly alarming letters from HMRC – then report them on here. We can still write to our MP’s. It’s high time that HMRC had a ‘duty of care’ imposed on it – the rest of us have.

    The Way Ahead
    Other than that, get through Winter, look forward to Spring, have a great Summer and we’ll see you back here in the Autumn.
    There's an elephant wondering around here...

    Comment


      Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View Post
      When you get the letter you will see that a lot of work has gone into it.

      Montpelier have to tread a very fine line with what they can tell us, knowing full well that there is every likelihood the letter could fall into the wrong hands.

      HMRC are at an advantage in this respect because they don't have to divulge anything to anyone.

      We have to accept that we can't be told everything otherwise HMRC might discover every single step in advance.

      It would only take one rotten apple among the 2500 of us...

      That's fair enough. I appreciate you are acting in a totally unofficial capacity for them when you tell us stuff. I just fail to see why they couldnt issue an email to all those affected saying when they'll get something out.

      I also appreciate they are between a rock and a hard place but communication is vital at this time.

      When I get to know how much im in for excluding interest, Im going to have to take out a CTD because this thing is just screwing with my head (as I guess it is everyone else).

      I was on the verge of coughing up but if I get a CTD I can happily sleep at night (I hope) and **** those tosspots at HMRC off.
      I couldn't give two fornicators! Yes, really!

      Comment


        Originally posted by Toocan View Post
        There has been a lot of panic on the forum recently – it’s been a week since the judgement was handed down and it’s now time to be rational and level headed.

        ....

        The Way Ahead
        Other than that, get through Winter, look forward to Spring, have a great Summer and we’ll see you back here in the Autumn.
        very good post. thanks Toocan

        Comment


          Originally posted by orientalist View Post
          i think we have a duty to advise potential investors of the implications of the precedent set by retrospective legislation
          Don't come to the UK unless you are willing to pay your "fair share" of tax, where the Government arbitrarily decides what's "fair" and the law is not worth the paper it's written on.

          Does that cover it?

          Comment


            Originally posted by RockTheBoat View Post
            very good post. thanks Toocan
            I agree, excellent post.

            I have included a link to in on the 1st post of the thread.

            Comment


              Beyond the Supreme Court

              I have heard from WG that Montpelier are prepared to do whatever it takes to overturn the legislation.

              Previously they had committed to take it as far as the HoL (Supreme Court).

              If necessary, they will then take it to Europe (ECtHR).

              Comment


                Originally posted by Toocan View Post
                ...
                When will the next hearing be?
                It’s going to be months until this gets back to court. There will be a written application for an appeal – this will probably be rejected (just as our original JR was), then there will be an oral hearing. Then a hearing will be heard. This will probably be at the Court of Appeal but it could go directly to the Supreme Court as this has now become a very important and constitutional issue. Our case could be fast tracked but the word right now is that it will be towards the end of the year.
                ...
                Very informative. Thanks Toocan

                We're assuming (hoping?) that the oral hearing will go our way and this case will be heard higher up. What's the odds on this? better than 50:50?

                Comment


                  Originally posted by PlaneSailing View Post
                  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.'
                  Interestingly they also ramble on to say, "Determined or organised attempts to undermine legislation, particularly where agents are orchestrating non-compliance. It is important to identify these situations early and proceed quickly to litigation if legal advice is favourable."

                  Ergo the muppets either broke their own process or their legal advice was not favourable.

                  If we take their argument at face value, that is.

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View Post
                    I have heard from WG that Montpelier are prepared to do whatever it takes to overturn the legislation.

                    Previously they had committed to take it as far as the HoL (Supreme Court).

                    If necessary, they will then take it to Europe (ECtHR).
                    Whats Strasbourg like this time of year? Well maybe in 5 years, this time of year
                    'Orwell's 1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual'. -
                    Nick Pickles, director of Big Brother Watch.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View Post
                      Don't come to the UK unless you are willing to pay your "fair share" of tax, where the Government arbitrarily decides what's "fair" and the law is not worth the paper it's written on.

                      Does that cover it?
                      I've always said that New Liebour bastardised the word "fair".
                      'Orwell's 1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual'. -
                      Nick Pickles, director of Big Brother Watch.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X