BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[GottaBeOptimistic]

Very well said TSBT!

I'd just like to add my thoughts regarding Helen7's comments that HMRC could collect within 30 days of the COA decision.

HMRC have only taken Mr Huitson to court. If the Revenue win the COA and send me a demand as a result, what is that demand for? I have not been through the legal process and I expect to have my day in court too.

Now let's imagine what would happen if 3000 of us all demand that we have our day in court?

Obviously, this is strictly a lay-person's view. Comments from armchair lawyers invited

Surely the reality is that this wouldn't happen. We'd get the demand and have to pay within a certain time period ?

[GottaBeOptimistic]

Please bare in mind that if HMRC demand payment and Montpellier advice us to settle you will have 30 days to pay up or you face a penalty (20% I think). I believe they also add another 5% every subsequent 30 days payment is late.

Personally I could not afford to risk adding another 60k to my bill after 30 days for the sake of trying to fight something we have a slim chance of winning.

Can anybody confirm if this is how HMRC will be allowed to proceed ? I would have thought that if there were so many that couldn't pay, HMRC would change the timetable some what to a) allow them to administer all of the paper work and b) provide time for payment.

People don't tend to have 50,000k <> 300,000k just lying around.

Any thoughts ?

[GottaBeOptimistic]

You are absolutely right. All i was trying to say that you are wrong to direct 100% of blame at HMRC. Furthermore i am defending my decision to negotiate a settlement with HMRC. I was the only non-HMRC person present at the negotiation meetings and therefore i am the only person outside of HMRC who knows the position of HMRC at that time. AND at that time a settlement was the right thing to do.

Are the negotiation details that you had with HMRC open to the pubblic ?
Is it likely that if we fail there will be some kind of negotiation for MP clients ?
Prior to the court cases, HMRC offered to ignore interest payments, does anybody believe this is likely to be an option going forwards ?

[BolshieBastard]

Well considering the position we are all in, there are some people who appear in my view overtly optimistic and dont read MontP's letter the same way myself and a few others do.

Im not trying to make out my view is correct but imo the tone of MontP's recent letter was clear enough. And that is, they expect one case, the PWC one, to be given short shrift by the judges.

The impression I got regarding our case was that MontP are not too confident on the outcome. Again, just my opinion. People may say that's because Im very pessimistic on the outcome but, I'd argue so far everything's gone against us so why the optimistic outlook other than the vain hope the law will come good and rescue us?

As for what we were told at the scheme presentation, well, I attended one in Liverpool by W Gittins no less and I can remember what I was told. At the time I thought the statement that the then IR 'only had 12 months' to investigate \ consider the returns' which, would be submitted as near the filing deadline as possible, to be not quite correct.

Im sorry to say I also consider I've been told stuff by Mont P since which have been downright reckless (dont bother with a CTD, we are going to win etc) not to mention poor communication over the years which suggests to me I shouldnt be too surprised if, this appeal goes against us, Mont P may (and I emphasise the word 'may') decide with their business model now washed up and them pulling their horns in, the time was right not to carry on the fight.

This is, of course just my take on it all. I joined the scheme not long after 2000. Since then, I've had nearly 10 years of worry hanging over me.

As far as arguing that if HMRC win the judgement only applies to that person and each one of us could clog up the system by having our individual day in court there's 2 things.

First, it will cost each individual a small fortune in legal fees.

Second, the judgement will set case law so HMRC wont need and the individual wont be entitled to, a day or 3 in court.

I really think people need to be a bit more pragmatic on this.

I've thought long and hard about posting this because I know the majority wont like my view. That said, I think the 'other side' of the fence needs to out there too.

[d000hg]

As an outsider to all this stuff, I've a question. Even if HMRC win ultimately, is there any evidence to suggest what they would do? Generally speaking, it's not in their interest to bankrupt people any more than it's in the interests of banks to do the same... often debts are written off or truncated based on realistic payment plans. Is that likely here or are you guys expecting more vindictive 'revenge' measures to make an example as a warning to others in the future?

[GottaBeOptimistic]

As an outsider to all this stuff, I've a question. Even if HMRC win ultimately, is there any evidence to suggest what they would do? Generally speaking, it's not in their interest to bankrupt people any more than it's in the interests of banks to do the same... often debts are written off or truncated based on realistic payment plans. Is that likely here or are you guys expecting more vindictive 'revenge' measures to make an example as a warning to others in the future?

I think it will become very messy with collections/demands etc being issued. A "Win" verdict for them is just the start of the hard work. Nothing has happened yet other than watching the cases pass through the courts.

I would have thought (hoped) that HMRC will have some structure/plan as to how they will chase the debt. I don't see them backing off either but whether there will be room for case by case negotiation - who knows ?

All a bit concerning really - particularly at this time of the year.

[BolshieBastard]

As an outsider to all this stuff, I've a question. Even if HMRC win ultimately, is there any evidence to suggest what they would do? Generally speaking, it's not in their interest to bankrupt people any more than it's in the interests of banks to do the same... often debts are written off or truncated based on realistic payment plans. Is that likely here or are you guys expecting more vindictive 'revenge' measures to make an example as a warning to others in the future?

HMRC dont really care if by bankrupting people it means they get less money from that individual. HMRC also see this as issuing a punishment for not toeing the line like all good taxpayers should.

I know one or two people who have been made bankrupt by IR \ HMRC. They were prepared to pay IR \ HMRC a lot of money back but over a longer period than IR \ HMRC wanted.

HMRC made them bankrupt anyway and ended up getting less back.

In another example, HMRC were prepared to make Portsmouth FC bankrupt meaning HMRC would get far less money back from them than if they agreed to a restructuring of the debt. HMRC pressed very hard for bankruptcy but in the end, the football club were able to avoid it.

[Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing]

Can anybody confirm if this is how HMRC will be allowed to proceed ? I would have thought that if there were so many that couldn't pay, HMRC would change the timetable some what to a) allow them to administer all of the paper work and b) provide time for payment.

People don't tend to have 50,000k <> 300,000k just lying around.

Any thoughts ?

Well this is how it should work. If it all goes South and that's the end of the matter, HMRC Collections will send you a letter with a payment demand which will include many helpful ways to pay up in full within 28 days. Now of course you don't happen to have 100K under the bed because never in your wildest nightmares did you anticipate THIS.

So you panic and might choose to simply ignore the demand and hope it goes away. It won't. HMRC might refer the claim to their Debt Management Office (DMO) and a few weeks later you get a letter from them telling you to pay right away or they'll commence legal proceedings against you. You panic again and ignore the letter. It goes quiet for a while then you either get a visit from the mob or a Court Order telling you to pay or you might lose everything blah blah blah.

So instead, when you get the initial letter, you call the office which sent it and go through the motions of talking through your issues and they'll offer you time to pay (something like 10K a month for 10 months if you're lucky). If you get a break, you might speak to someone who is old school IR and they will look favourably on you despite what HMRC might say. But in the end you'll have to pay up. But you won't get rolled over within 6 weeks and end up with your house being taken away and you're left to sleep in your friends car.

All this assumes that the CoA goes South and that's it. Well I wouldn't be so sure.

But the key consideration is that HMRC don't just roll up 2 days after a bad CoA ruling and ask you for 100K. I know as a fact that from the day you get a Collections demand, there's a good 8 weeks before it gets to be a big issue. The main consideration is not to simply pretend it's not happening.

But, all this assumes that the CoA goes against us and there's nothing else. Whilst the former part of that sentence might end up being true (who knows), I doubt the latter part will.

Have a read of this:

HM Revenue & Customs: What to do if you can't pay your tax bill

Don't read too much into it as HMRC also claim to use litigation to resolve disputes:

Tax Enquiry Solutions

Don't recall this being the option HMRC took with us (oh sorry, they were going to with 4 test cases but...)

In any event, a CoA loss on say December 18 does not equal a visit from Scrooge on Christmas Eve. But I suspect that in the event of such an outcome, there will be Ghosts of Schemes Past who will be rattling their chains at Scrooge to remind him that they're still around and not ready to let him have his way.

[OnYourBikeGB]

Are the negotiation details that you had with HMRC open to the pubblic ?
Is it likely that if we fail there will be some kind of negotiation for MP clients ?
Prior to the court cases, HMRC offered to ignore interest payments, does anybody believe this is likely to be an option going forwards ?

Don't let AJs smooth patter fool you. Everyone who's looked at it says there was no real benefit.

I am pretty pragmatic on the situation. All views are valid. No-ones going to be doing anything anyway until the verdict is returned. We may be cheering from the rafters, but I like to be mentally prepared for bad news. I read the letter from MP overall to be relatively positive. PWC looks like a dud, but our argument still has substance, it is not a lost cause. MP have always been poor at communication, and I admit I feel uneasy, but I will judge them by their actions. They owe us, irrespective of optimistic / pessimistic viewpoint. I expect them to fight on, to Europe, if that's what it takes.

I don't think that's correct about the interest payments. There's no penalties, but interest is a different matter.

[SantaClaus]

Surely the reality is that this wouldn't happen. We'd get the demand and have to pay within a certain time period ?

I don't know the legal in's and out's and I'm sure many on this forum don't either, hence the term "armchair lawyer".