BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[StellaFan]

HMRC and their timing is coldly calculated to have the maximum psychological effect. We've all seen it.

Not half. It's almost 5 years to the day that hmrc sent me my xmas investigation card

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Not half. It's almost 5 years to the day that hmrc sent me my xmas investigation card

My first one was 7 years last month.

[Toocan]

My husband and I are clients of Montpelier and we had the pleasure of a delightful christmas communication from the special investigations unit at HMRC earlier this week. Basically, the letter says...

We do not agree your tax return of 2007/08.
We are investigating Montpelier for criminal activities
We are making civil enquiries into your tax return
You may wish to withdraw your return for that year and settle your tax liability

The letter makes no reference to being cop8 or 9 and doesn't give much information other than that above. We have spoken several times since then to our accountants in the Manchester office and they insist that the scheme will be robustly defended.

If it was me, and I lived this again, I would force this to the commissionars (now tax courts) as soon as possible.

Take their letter as an statement of fact on their part and ask for an internal review to establish whether the scheme was (il)legal and what tax is actually due. Force the issue into the internal procedures and get on their case to resolve the issue.

Waiting will play into their hands - wait long enough and we'll have a Labour government again who will gladly pass retrospective legislation to make your scheme fail whether it works or not.

Good luck....

[theywontbreakme]

Thanks for the support and advice everyone. I really appreciate it. It definitely makes it somewhat easier to know we are not alone in this.

We have a meeting with the tax people at Montpelier in the new year. We have already put a range of questions to them and asked for replies before the meeting so as to get most value out of our time with them.

I totally agree that the timing of the letter from hmrc is meant to cause maximum distress. Shame on them. Even Montpelier were surprised at the aggressive tone of the letter we received and I imagine they've dealt with lots.

We know of one other person on the scheme and they have no intention at this time of "settling" with hmrc but of course, we have no idea of how many more will be scared into paying.

I imagine it's only a matter of time before they issue a cop8 or 9 investigation letter but given that time moves much slower in hmrcland than in the rest of the country, then, we could be waiting for months if not years for them to make their move.

As such, the strategy of forcing their hand is an interesting one to me, and I shall bring this up at the meeting to see what Montpelier say. Their response will, I think, be telling. I may well learn just how robust they really think the scheme is.

On a positive note, I slept nearly 5 hours last night and am not feeling quite as distressed. I'm determined not to let this ruin our family christmas. We have 3 children to think of and I have to make it a great christmas for them.

Thanks again for the support, and merry christmas to you all.

[RichardCranium]

I'm determined not to let this ruin our family Christmas. We have 3 children to think of and I have to make it a great Christmas for them.

HMRC do not work Bank Holidays. They cannot touch you, telephone you or write to you on Xmas Day or Boxing Day. They are not working; so you should not be worrying about them.

You are hereby officially excused worrying on those two days.


Your take home %age is of very little direct interest to your children. What they actually value is time with their parents. The same applies for family and friends. Any time spent worrying is time wasted and lost forever.

You are hereby officially forbidden to waste time even thinking about money on those two days.


Don't think about Hector over Christmas. Because I can guarantee: he won't be thinking about you. He'll be sat in his bedsit, masturbating over his index-linked pension plan details and wondering what it would be like to have a friend with a pulse.

And the same goes for everyone else who stares at the ceiling at night worrying about an unpayable tax bill: take some time off from worrying. Tell 'em I said you could.


Some Dick Head on an internet forum.

[cojak]

Yes, Merry Christmas to you all

RC is a wise old owl...

[StellaFan]

from the COP8 page
HM Revenue & Customs: Specialist Investigations (Fraud and Avoidance)

We will always be courteous, fair and professional

[Toocan]

from the COP8 page
HM Revenue & Customs: Specialist Investigations (Fraud and Avoidance)

We will always be courteous, fair and professional

This is further evidence of HMRC institutional dishonesty.

[phileds]

From Taxman warns 'HMRC approved' scheme users :: Contractor UK

Users and potential users with doubts about their scheme should check with a “reputable” tax adviser, though the Revenue also said that they are some tell-tale signs to “be wary of.”

Among them:
• It sounds too good to be true
• Artificial or contrived arrangements are involved
• It seems very complex given what you want to do
• There are guaranteed returns with apparently no risk
• Upfront fees are payable or the arrangement is on a no win/no fee basis
• The scheme is said to be vetted by a top lawyer or accountant but no details of their opinion are provided
• The scheme is said to be approved by HMRC (it does not follow that this is true)
• Taxation of income is delayed or tax deductions accelerated
• Offshore companies or trusts are involved for no sound commercial reason
• Tax exempt entities, such as pension funds, are involved inappropriately
• It contains exit arrangements designed to sidestep tax consequences
• The scheme promoter lends the funding needed


I wonder which points of HMRCs list Vodafone or Philip Green may have broken in their well-publicised tax avoidance schemes.

Is there anything more faux-profound than "it sounds too good to be true"? Lucky Einstein didn't take this advice.

[loser]

From Taxman warns 'HMRC approved' scheme users :: Contractor UK

Users and potential users with doubts about their scheme should check with a “reputable” tax adviser, though the Revenue also said that they are some tell-tale signs to “be wary of.”

Among them:
• It sounds too good to be true
• Artificial or contrived arrangements are involved
• It seems very complex given what you want to do
• There are guaranteed returns with apparently no risk
• Upfront fees are payable or the arrangement is on a no win/no fee basis
• The scheme is said to be vetted by a top lawyer or accountant but no details of their opinion are provided
• The scheme is said to be approved by HMRC (it does not follow that this is true)
• Taxation of income is delayed or tax deductions accelerated
• Offshore companies or trusts are involved for no sound commercial reason
• Tax exempt entities, such as pension funds, are involved inappropriately
• It contains exit arrangements designed to sidestep tax consequences
• The scheme promoter lends the funding needed


I wonder which points of HMRCs list Vodafone or Philip Green may have broken in their well-publicised tax avoidance schemes.

Is there anything more faux-profound than "it sounds too good to be true"? Lucky Einstein didn't take this advice.

Half of these could apply to buying an ISA....