BN66 - JR Judgement Day

[johnnyguitar]

Just one point of clarification. You only need to put the tax component in a CTD, not the already accrued interest.

Take this example, which is not far off my own situation because I was only in the scheme in the first 3 years.

Tax - £100k
Accrued interest - £50k (I know, shocking)

If you were taking out a CTD, it would be for £100k. The other £50k you could invest in the highest rate account you can find, and any interest earned is yours to keep. I managed to fix some at 6% before rates tumbled last year.

Also, there is one other thing we should all bear in mind.

INFLATION!!!

The way this country is going, the debt may be significantly eroded in a few years time.

Ah - so the interest isn't compounded.
Sorry - I'm sure this must have been covered before, in the depth of 3000+ posts!

[Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing]

Going Dark

Folks,

I'm taking the family off for a holiday in the sun tomorrow. So I won't be posting for a couple of weeks. I did contemplate taking a peek at CUK whilst I'm away but my wife has threatened to use my testicles as a new form of decorative earings if I do.

But I will go with a few thoughts in my mind.

1. The judgement implies that the written law is inferior to its context and interpretation. If this holds, then anyone can get caught by retrospective anything. Certainty of not just our tax system but legal system in general just went down the drains. I don't think Joe Public will swallow that when they understand the enormity of that.

2. The JR has now brought the fight into the open. The argument of HMRC is now a matter of public record. Counsel are not sitting back I can assure you. The JR has simply fast tracked the route to the Supreme Court.

3. There will be appeals. This is not dead in the water.

4. There will be an election.

5. March 9th is a date to look for.

6. There are other cases pending.

6. I'll be back!

[KiwiGuy]

Folks,

I'm taking the family off for a holiday in the sun tomorrow. So I won't be posting for a couple of weeks. I did contemplate taking a peek at CUK whilst I'm away but my wife has threatened to use my testicles as a new form of decorative earings if I do.

But I will go with a few thoughts in my mind.

1. The judgement implies that the written law is inferior to its context and interpretation. If this holds, then anyone can get caught by retrospective anything. Certainty of not just our tax system but legal system in general just went down the drains. I don't think Joe Public will swallow that when they understand the enormity of that.

2. The JR has now brought the fight into the open. The argument of HMRC is now a matter of public record. Counsel are not sitting back I can assure you. The JR has simply fast tracked the route to the Supreme Court.

3. There will be appeals. This is not dead in the water.

4. There will be an election.

5. March 9th is a date to look for.

6. There are other cases pending.

6. I'll be back!

Have a great holiday, we will still be here

[moira under the stairs]

Imagination ?

Firstly thank you for all that have contributed in the past to get us to where we are today. I have been a Lurker for sometime and for this I apologise, but now registered to join the fight and help in any way, and of course DR for Prime Minister or at least Chancellor .

Can someone put me straight.

If my memory serves me correctly (bar the age thingy), but it could have all been an elaborate dream ' I THINK I went to a presentation, and I have to be careful here because of the non disclosure, did I imagine or dream? I thought I heard and see a slide that mentioned that the scheme used 'Lunched off of' or was developed from schemes used by large corporations, two of which names I can remember . It could have been a sales pitch.

Does that mean that if this Judgement finally stands, after the remainder of our fight, then the HMRC will then go after such Corporations and scheme's. If so I can see that more Companies will leave our shores, not just a recent brewer due to the unfair and potentially illegal shifting Taxation rules. It looks as if the HMRC has finally cut through the jugular of our once proud country.

We are not the criminals here! (BBC) if we were we would already be enjoying the pleasures of one of Her Majesties' detainee sites.

[fwit]

Missed the point

I've been a lurker for a while, because I didn't have anything to add apart from my own sob story. DR and the rest of the regular contributors have been doing a sterling job. It now seems to me that one fundamental point may have been over looked in the court case and I haven't seen anybody mention it.

A part from the fact that IR35 is totally unfair, the deciding factor that made me join Montpelier's scheme in 2003 was that at least 2 contractors at the company I was with at the time had previously had their tax returns signed off by HMRC. A colleague who joined at the same time as me had his first years tax return also signed off by HMRC. I unfortunately never did. Surely this one point alone blows HMRC's argument of "and this as always been the case" out of the water. Was this not brought up in the court case? If not, why not?

[Emigre]

Folks,

I'm taking the family off for a holiday in the sun tomorrow. So I won't be posting for a couple of weeks. I did contemplate taking a peek at CUK whilst I'm away but my wife has threatened to use my testicles as a new form of decorative earings if I do.

But I will go with a few thoughts in my mind.

1. The judgement implies that the written law is inferior to its context and interpretation. If this holds, then anyone can get caught by retrospective anything. Certainty of not just our tax system but legal system in general just went down the drains. I don't think Joe Public will swallow that when they understand the enormity of that.

2. The JR has now brought the fight into the open. The argument of HMRC is now a matter of public record. Counsel are not sitting back I can assure you. The JR has simply fast tracked the route to the Supreme Court.

3. There will be appeals. This is not dead in the water.

4. There will be an election.

5. March 9th is a date to look for.

6. There are other cases pending.

6. I'll be back!

Have a great break. You and the family deserve it. Thanks for your valued contributions over the last few months. If you decide that it is sunnier where you are going (ie not as many clouds as here) and decide to stay do send us a post card.

[robinhood]

Folks,

I'm taking the family off for a holiday in the sun tomorrow. So I won't be posting for a couple of weeks. I did contemplate taking a peek at CUK whilst I'm away but my wife has threatened to use my testicles as a new form of decorative earings if I do.

But I will go with a few thoughts in my mind.

1. The judgement implies that the written law is inferior to its context and interpretation. If this holds, then anyone can get caught by retrospective anything. Certainty of not just our tax system but legal system in general just went down the drains. I don't think Joe Public will swallow that when they understand the enormity of that.

2. The JR has now brought the fight into the open. The argument of HMRC is now a matter of public record. Counsel are not sitting back I can assure you. The JR has simply fast tracked the route to the Supreme Court.

3. There will be appeals. This is not dead in the water.

4. There will be an election.

5. March 9th is a date to look for.

6. There are other cases pending.

6. I'll be back!

Thanks TSBT - your comments always bring a ray of hope !

March 9th will be very interesting and we should know by then whether we are successful in the appeal.
If not the won't the judge for PWC just back up what Parker said or are there subtle differences between the cases ?

[swede]

Folks,

I'm taking the family off for a holiday in the sun tomorrow. So I won't be posting for a couple of weeks. I did contemplate taking a peek at CUK whilst I'm away but my wife has threatened to use my testicles as a new form of decorative earings if I do.

But I will go with a few thoughts in my mind.

1. The judgement implies that the written law is inferior to its context and interpretation. If this holds, then anyone can get caught by retrospective anything. Certainty of not just our tax system but legal system in general just went down the drains. I don't think Joe Public will swallow that when they understand the enormity of that.

2. The JR has now brought the fight into the open. The argument of HMRC is now a matter of public record. Counsel are not sitting back I can assure you. The JR has simply fast tracked the route to the Supreme Court.

3. There will be appeals. This is not dead in the water.

4. There will be an election.

5. March 9th is a date to look for.

6. There are other cases pending.

6. I'll be back!

Have a great break.

[smalldog]

TSBT, best get designing those earrings!! CUK is an addiction!!!

have a great break...curious when you get back to see what your barrister friend thinks of the outcome..

[Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing]

TSBT, best get designing those earrings!! CUK is an addiction!!!

have a great break...curious when you get back to see what your barrister friend thinks of the outcome..

He's already having a think about it. First comment when I spoke to him this morning was "pass the buck, off you go to a higher court".