BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[Emigre]

All, not that i'm pre-empting a loss, i believe we are right all they way, but if we lose and the enemy proceed with the closure notices, are we entitled to amend and resubmit our tax returns for the years concerned?

If so, can we as beneficiaries of the trust come to another arrangement, entirely lawful at the time? I for one drew a salary and paid appropriate tax on it, anything else i declared on the SA was definitely not a salary

What do you think?

I discussed a number of ideas on this front with JC at MP (a few years ago, before he left). In an equitable world you would have thought that if one team can have a Tardis, the other team ought to at least have the opportunity of rearranging their defences.

The way things are at present is that HMRC have issued CNs where tax is calculated on a basis that they would like it calculated. I didn't know at the time that I was a de facto partner of an IOM partnership so I did not submit full expenses. Now with the benefit of hindsight I recall having to go to IOM for a partners meeting every week. I seem to recall that my motoring expenses ran to £50k/year, and i recall writing down all the miles done...

More sensibly, you would think that if one team has the power to go back in time the other team ought to have the ability to go back and restructure their lives into the next best basis/structure. The over-riding point here is that HMRC have not proved that the DTA arrangements did not work when we entered into our arrangements. S58 FA2008 merely states retrospectively that the arrangements did not work. It does not pronounce how our returns would have to be completed. Technically, S58 has rendered our tax returns incorrect and they would need to be resubmitted allowing us the opportunity to submit anything we like provided it is evidentially supportable.

Also, tax returns are the responsibility of the taxpayer to complete, not HMRC. It would be up to us to recomplete our returns, in reality in light of discussions with HMRC. I understand that stress counsellors are tax deductible in IOM partnerships.

Emigre

[RockTheBoat]

Now with the benefit of hindsight I recall having to go to IOM for a partners meeting every week. I seem to recall that my motoring expenses ran to £50k/year, and i recall writing down all the miles done...

Emigre

Hey, come to think of it, I also used to go these partners meetings. in fact I used to go twice a week. Cant see any reason why I cant retrospectively include my travel expenses either, they were pretty high as I recall and literally wiped out any partnership profits.

[screwthis]

I discussed a number of ideas on this front with JC at MP (a few years ago, before he left). In an equitable world you would have thought that if one team can have a Tardis, the other team ought to at least have the opportunity of rearranging their defences.

The way things are at present is that HMRC have issued CNs where tax is calculated on a basis that they would like it calculated. I didn't know at the time that I was a de facto partner of an IOM partnership so I did not submit full expenses. Now with the benefit of hindsight I recall having to go to IOM for a partners meeting every week. I seem to recall that my motoring expenses ran to £50k/year, and i recall writing down all the miles done...

More sensibly, you would think that if one team has the power to go back in time the other team ought to have the ability to go back and restructure their lives into the next best basis/structure. The over-riding point here is that HMRC have not proved that the DTA arrangements did not work when we entered into our arrangements. S58 FA2008 merely states retrospectively that the arrangements did not work. It does not pronounce how our returns would have to be completed. Technically, S58 has rendered our tax returns incorrect and they would need to be resubmitted allowing us the opportunity to submit anything we like provided it is evidentially supportable.

Also, tax returns are the responsibility of the taxpayer to complete, not HMRC. It would be up to us to recomplete our returns, in reality in light of discussions with HMRC. I understand that stress counsellors are tax deductible in IOM partnerships.

Emigre

To further compound this, for the last few years I have refrained from purchasing an investment property in an emerging market or placing a nice 5 figure sum into a managed futures account etc. for fear of not having the money to hand and/or suffering losses to money I may need to prevent bankrupcy.

I bet I'm not alone in having put nearly 6 figures aside, earning close to nothing in a safe place where I might have put the money to better use if it were not for all the uncertainty.

[Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing]

Catch 22

For those wondering why we have not had a ruling yet, I think I have the answer.

Apparently, the 3 LJ's have not been seen since the hearing ended - anywhere.

But it is rumoured that they were spotted in Ronnie Scotts back in 2002 discussing something called BN66 and Huitson and scratching there heads over something called retrospection. Given that the HMRC tardis was only invented in 2008, it means the LJ's are stuck there. In fact I calculate that it will be another 9 years before they are back at the CoA to hand down a ruling as a result...

[helen7]

Hey, come to think of it, I also used to go these partners meetings. in fact I used to go twice a week. Cant see any reason why I cant retrospectively include my travel expenses either, they were pretty high as I recall and literally wiped out any partnership profits.

I hope you kept the receipts for the boat.

[deckster]

I hope you kept the receipts for the boat.

Boat? I think you'll find I chartered a private jet

[DonkeyRhubarb]

It will have been 3 months next week since the hearing.

But I've just heard that we could have to wait a while longer.

[screwthis]

It will have been 3 months next week since the hearing.

But I've just heard that we could have to wait a while longer.

Do we know whether they are spending this time evaluating our case or on other cases ahead of us in the queue?

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Do we know whether they are spending this time evaluating our case or on other cases ahead of us in the queue?

There's no queue as such because many cases heard after ours have already received judgments.

The vast majority of CoA cases are decided in 4-6 weeks.

It may be taking a lot longer because there are 2 cases for them to consider - ours and PwC's.

[SLB]

It will have been 3 months next week since the hearing.

But I've just heard that we could have to wait a while longer.

Hi DR,

Do you know if "a while longer" is being measured in weeks or months?

SLB.