BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[TAF4]

<Big Snip>
As I said at the start, MP is the only MP that hasn't flipped their position on this and they're putting good money into it too. Rather than speculate on what might happen in the future, let's focus on understanding the facts as they stand and worry (if needed) about the what if's as and (or) when they become facts.

Top Post TSBT. Thank you.


....and many thanks to DR for keeping a sane perspective on behalf of us all.

[futurecat]

There seems to be a lot of confusion about this.

Let's be absolutely clear, HMRC winning the Huitson case does NOT automatically enable them to issue us with final demands.

Firstly, they would still need to go through the formal process of discharging our individual CN appeals, which have got nothing to do with Robert Huitson's JR.

Secondly, and most importantly, the Human Rights argument was not the only grounds Montpelier cited in our appeals.

HMRC would need to take test cases forward to Tribunal to test the other grounds of appeal.

If you are going to disagree with what I've stated above, please can you do so on the basis of fact not speculation.

Wehoo!! Thanks Donkey. Great Post!

[RingStinger]

Although not agreeing with it, I think some of the scaremongering and negativity is understandable. Some people have a hell of a lot at stake (I'm in the red line at the top), and when they read an articulate, well written, paragraph on what someone's take on the situation is (positive or negative), they're going to listen ...

The term 'armchair lawyer' has cropped up over the past few pages. And these ramblings by them aren't doing anyone any good.... one minute you're feeling pretty chilled, the next suicidal. Depending on who's just written what.

I want facts. When are we going to win? so I can treat my family to a good holiday (and myself to a new yacht). When are we going to lose? so I know when not to answer that knock on the door. Next month, next year, next decade?

I want facts. Not bullsh*t and guesswork from 'armchair lawyers.'

But thanks DR for bringing this back on track. and reminding us of some of the basic facts.

[loser]

Perhaps I should have made it clear, I'm not expressing a personal opinion.

I'm relaying the advice I've received from various people, who understand the process, to counteract some of the blatant scaremongering in recent days.

And by the way, I have just been reminded that I missed something.

Montpelier didn't just appeal our CNs.

They also formally requested postponement of payment, pending these appeals, which HMRC accepted.

Wow. Great posts today donkey. he is a "donkey on the edge"!

[Potsie Webber]

Perhaps I should have made it clear, I'm not expressing a personal opinion.

I'm relaying the advice I've received from various people, who understand the process, to counteract some of the blatant scaremongering in recent days.

And by the way, I have just been reminded that I missed something.

Montpelier didn't just appeal our CNs.

They also formally requested postponement of payment, pending these appeals, which HMRC accepted.

Hi DR,

What is the implication of the postponement of payment? Does this mean the HMRC will not be accruing interest/penalties while the appeal is underway?

thanks

[SantaClaus]

Wow. Great posts today donkey. he is a "donkey on the edge"!

Go donkey! Kick ass!

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Hi DR,

What is the implication of the postponement of payment? Does this mean the HMRC will not be accruing interest/penalties while the appeal is underway?

thanks

There are no penalties anyway.

Unfortunately interest will continue to accrue.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Scaremongering

Below are examples of recent comments that I feel are very unhelpful.

This is the sort of thing we might expect from an HMRC troll but not from our fellow victims.

"I have no doubt that HMRC will try to enforce collection when they win the current appeal in November."

"The chances of us winning the appeal at the JR are very similar to hell freezing over."

"I have no doubt that we will be receiving a nice 2nd class post letter from HMRC just in time for Xmas."

"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)." [INCORRECT - it's only 5%]

"Maybe I got a different comms from everyone else but mine seems to suggest that the property developers got laughed out of court and the judges didn't seem to please that the Huitson arguement was being heard again."

"As I predicted a few months ago....Montpellier drop tax avoidance and change business structure.

I got abusive messages for suggesting it at the time.

I expect them now to drop s58 if HMRC win the JR."

By the way, regarding this last comment, I checked through this particular user's posts going back to the beginning of the year and could find no such prediction.

[nick4notax]

We are in the right, after all

Lots of negativity and understandably so. We are all scared witless about this whole situation, a situation which is not of our making in any way.

Just remember, we have done nothing illegal and have been completely honest in all that we've disclosed. We've abided by and obeyed the law to the letter!! This has happened thanks, in the main, to the expert service provided by Montpelier and I certainly value them for this and their ongoing support. We all should.

I think we will win, if for no other reason than the above and that those shameful sh*ts in HMRC can no longer rely on help from New Labour's crooks, with whom they cooked up this nightmare in the first place.

Fingers crossed, positive and quietly confident

[Johnnycomelately]

There are no penalties anyway.

Unfortunately interest will continue to accrue.

First of all, I just want to say that I think this forum is a great resource of value, and I think that in time this will be shown to be the case. The reason is there are (in the main) people publicising factual content, which by and large usually forms the basis of legal argument, and ultimately you have to have faith that this will win out. DR (and others) - keep up the great work.

I have added nothing since my initial post, as I have nothing factual to add to your case (although some of the messages i received have been "interesting"). I do however have this observation on interest payments, which may or may not be relevant, but it would appear that HMRC have set a precedent in not charging interest on outstanding amounts in excess of £2k to some people. Whether they will now argue that this is not applicable to amounts outstanding under BN66 should they become payable is another question. As you know, the goal posts are not fixed at their end of the pitch.

BBC - BBC One Programmes - Panorama, Are You Paying Too Much Tax?
(see from 17.50 if you can't bear to watch the rest)