Originally posted by MajorGowen
View Post
- 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 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
Topic is closed
-
-
Originally posted by MajorGowen View PostSurely they could have "sold it" as ensuring that the UK Tax System is certain, thus immediately bringing in more revenue from Foreign Investors when we most need it.
"Government flies in the face of High Court ruling to let tax dodgers off the hook"
The other fly in the ointment are the LibDems. They have set out their stall as the party most committed to fighting tax avoidance. Whilst they may have voted against BN66, I'm not convinced they'd support its repeal now even as a matter of principle.Comment
-
to small for the budget
Originally posted by TAF4 View PostWHS
My motivation behind writing letters is not to get it struck out as part of the budget, more to get some higher level visibility on this subject as there's just a chance someone with big enough boots might decide to quietly let it drop pre November, or even post November if appeal rules it needs to go to Europe. The last thing the government would do is publicly drop it, as DR quite rightly says Labour would splash it all over the press. However they can drop it and keep it off the radar if required and there is enough pressure and ultimately common sense applied by our new government.Comment
-
Originally posted by MajorGowen View PostDonkey, et al,
Here is the link (in case anyone has mislaid it) to where the Finance Bill was debated:
House of Commons General Committee
As David Gauke was so vociferous regarding the legislation then surely he has a duty of care to rectify this now he is in power.
To do nothing other than state that it should run it's course through the courts when he was so opposed to retrospective legislation is dereliction of duty and shows the new Government does not want the UK Tax law to be certain.
Donkey, could the letter writers knock something up as I think this response is unacceptable.
MajorGowen...
However, this u-turn is not at all acceptable; you either believe in the legislation or you don't Based on what has been offered in terms of considerations for repealing i.e. state of the public finances..... I am not sure how the legal principle and the public purse are related in the legal sense, this is a downright insulting.
Secondly, the fact the High Court or the judiciary has found in favour in the first test has nothing to do with anything. If that is they key test, why debate the legislation at all, just throw it out there and let the judiciary test it......... if the courts endorse it at the first test, then it must be right.
This is as clear an example you will get that completely undermines everything these parties claim to stand for.....
This is black and white, no grey areas.- SL -Comment
-
ucking great. I knew these unts, once they were elected and in office would sing a different song. They sounded oh so interested and concerned just to buy some votes.
Well, I didnt fall for it. I've thought for some time we're ucked. I dont expect to win a court case either. That is, except for one against you know who, for tulip advice and maybe, just maybe, negligence.
Utter utter load of wank.
I wont lose as much as some people here will. For them, Im truely sorry and I do feel for you. I wish you good luck.I couldn't give two fornicators! Yes, really!Comment
-
Originally posted by BolshieBastard View Post...I knew these *****, once they were elected and in office would sing a different song. They sounded oh so interested and concerned just to buy some votes.
The letters that have been sent have opened this subject - our next task is to push our case. Have a look at some of the stuff that was in the budget - tax allowances for companies who keep their IP offshore; a relaxation of the pension contribution rules - there is scope here for us to get a fair hearing.
But we are going to need more letter senders - and if possible for a few people to phone or visit their MP. So speak up - are we up for carrying on with our campaign?There's an elephant wondering around here...Comment
-
"Channel the Rant"
Originally posted by BolshieBastard View Postucking great. I knew these unts, once they were elected and in office would sing a different song. They sounded oh so interested and concerned just to buy some votes.
Well, I didnt fall for it. I've thought for some time we're ucked. I dont expect to win a court case either. That is, except for one against you know who, for tulip advice and maybe, just maybe, negligence.
Utter utter load of wank.
I wont lose as much as some people here will. For them, Im truely sorry and I do feel for you. I wish you good luck.
This last exercise was just about raising the profile and letting them know we are here and not going away any time soon. I personally think that they're a bit hamstrung now that it's with the courts though, but if one or more of them decides to take up our cause then that's great news. This line of attack was always going to be a long shot but still, a worthwhile episode nonetheless.
I do think that politicians have egos though - and after having won an election we should be using that to our advantage. Maybe after not being in power for so long, they have forgotten that they (you know - the ones that WE elected) are able to do something about it now?
Perhaps another letter (i) reminding them that we voted for them to change things, and (ii) explaining that climbdowns such as Mr Gauke's are not a very good first step in that direction.
BTW: If this is to end up in the european court, do we need to start saying hello to MEP's as well?
SwedeComment
-
Originally posted by Toocan View PostSo speak up - are we up for carrying on with our campaign?
Comment
-
Comment
-
Originally posted by silver_lining View PostThis was a worthwhile effort, DR et al. Nothing ventured etc.......
However, this u-turn is not at all acceptable; you either believe in the legislation or you don't Based on what has been offered in terms of considerations for repealing i.e. state of the public finances..... I am not sure how the legal principle and the public purse are related in the legal sense, this is a downright insulting.
Secondly, the fact the High Court or the judiciary has found in favour in the first test has nothing to do with anything. If that is they key test, why debate the legislation at all, just throw it out there and let the judiciary test it......... if the courts endorse it at the first test, then it must be right.
This is as clear an example you will get that completely undermines everything these parties claim to stand for.....
This is black and white, no grey areas.
It would only be a u-turn if they'd committed to repeal and then reneged on it. However they were always careful to say that, whilst they opposed it, they couldn't promise to reverse it if they got into office.
You might think this is weasly but then we are dealing with politicians.Comment
Topic is closed
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment