BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[Emigre]

Tags

Does anyone know how the Tags get selected here?

HMG - Your Freedom

I am wondering what we would need to do to get our own tags in this list.

I was busy yesterday adding tags to our repeal idea. I probably added 10 of them. Unfortunately it does not accept numbers which makes s58 and BN66 very difficult. Just go into the "idea" and you can add as many tags as you like at the top. Enjoy!

[Emigre]

Well done all! We're Numero Uno in "Highest rated ideas" and "Ideas with most comments".

Can't help thinking the donkey had something to do with our thread being "kicked" to the top

Keep submitting comments and ratings folks. Cant afford to let this slip.

Edit: We've dissapeared from "Highest rated ideas" and sliding down the list in "Ideas with most comments". Keep posting folks!

We've slipped to 3rd on the most comments list sandwiched between the decriminalisation of cannabis and getting smoking back into pubs. An extra 50 comments and we are back on top. Time to bring Joan Cuddly out of retirement?

[macdat]

Courts owed £1.3bn in unpaid fines

So who are the real 'criminals' here ?

A measly £200M (sic) from us or £1.3bn from those convicted ?!?!?

BBC News - Courts owed

"Fair" !?!? "Proportionate" ?!?! My @rse !!

[BarneyCool]

So who are the real 'criminals' here ?

A measly £200M (sic) from us or £1.3bn from those convicted ?!?!?

BBC News - Courts owed

"Fair" !?!? "Proportionate" ?!?! My @rse !!

We are easier to extract the cash, houses, lives from.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

In 1st place

And this is where I intend us to stay!

Restoring civil liberties — HMG - Your Freedom

[OnYourBikeGB]

And this is where I intend us to stay!

Restoring civil liberties — HMG - Your Freedom

I have to say, that is one tulip website. Who designed that turd? Seems even the Government spin budget has been slashed, lol.'Someone' just posted nearly the same message 5 or 6 times, because nothing happened when 'that person' clicked the button. And it seems to have accepted all of them. Bloody hell, it must have knocked up by some primary school kid for a homework.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Statement by David Gauke

House of Commons Written Answers 24 June 2010

Double Taxation

Question

Zac Goldsmith: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer

(1) what his policy is on continuing the provisions of Section 58 of the Finance Act 2008 in respect of UK residents and foreign partnerships; and if he will make a statement;

(2) whether he plans to introduce proposals to repeal legislative provisions that ensure UK residents retrospectively pay UK tax on their profits from foreign partnerships; and if he will make a statement.

Answer

Mr Gauke: UK residents are taxable on their worldwide income wherever it arises—including situations where it arises by way of foreign partnerships. Section 58 of Finance Act 2008 was enacted to help put that beyond doubt. The Government are, in general, opposed to retrospective legislation. However, the retrospective element of section 58 is currently the subject of judicial review by the courts and the Government's view is that it is best dealt with there.

[Morlock]

House of Commons Written Answers 24 June 2010

Double Taxation

Question

Zac Goldsmith: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer

(1) what his policy is on continuing the provisions of Section 58 of the Finance Act 2008 in respect of UK residents and foreign partnerships; and if he will make a statement;

(2) whether he plans to introduce proposals to repeal legislative provisions that ensure UK residents retrospectively pay UK tax on their profits from foreign partnerships; and if he will make a statement.

Answer

Mr Gauke: UK residents are taxable on their worldwide income wherever it arises—including situations where it arises by way of foreign partnerships. Section 58 of Finance Act 2008 was enacted to help put that beyond doubt. The Government are, in general, opposed to retrospective legislation. However, the retrospective element of section 58 is currently the subject of judicial review by the courts and the Government's view is that it is best dealt with there.

On balance I think it may very well be best dealt with by the courts, because then there would be a legal precedent for future reference. The alternative could be a succession of governments who keep repealing each other's laws and re-introducing their own...?

P.S. Well done, whoever wrote to Zac Goldsmith; and well done to Zac for at least representing his constituents' views in the house. Better than the response from my own MP who still hasn't replied to any of my letters. I name and shame you, Philip Hollobone.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

On balance I think it may very well be best dealt with by the courts, because then there would be a legal precedent for future reference. The alternative could be a succession of governments who keep repealing each other's laws and re-introducing their own...?

Personally, I agree with you.

The trouble is the legal process could go on for another 5 years or more until it reaches Europe. That's a big chunk of people's lives.

Even if we won in November, left to their own devices, HMRC would appeal.

That's why I feel we need to keep the pressure on the Government, and our best way of doing that at the moment is probably through Cleggy's website.

[smalldog]

Personally, I agree with you.

The trouble is the legal process could go on for another 5 years or more until it reaches Europe. That's a big chunk of people's lives.

Even if we won in November, left to their own devices, HMRC would appeal.

That's why I feel we need to keep the pressure on the Government, and our best way of doing that at the moment is probably through Cleggy's website.

DR, Im not completely convinced HMRC would appeal, someone in HMG might have a quiet word in their shell like. I sort of get the impression the govt want to be rid of this, but without looking to condone avoidance. The easiest way to do this without any ramifications would be to let the court rule in our favour in Nov and for HMRC not to appeal.