BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I'm just as pessimistic. The way I see it, the country is broke, they (the Government regardless of whatever party is in power) desperately need to raise funds and they really dont care that 2500 of us get treated unfairly as a result of that.
My only previous experience of the courts (divorce) was that they are extremely fair. However, this case is not about fairness, its about whether our rulers can walk roughshed over parts of the population and get away with it. I think that history tells us very much that they can.
Time will tell, but I sense the current woes of the country play right into the taxmans hands and we will eventually loose. Regardless that the court has to make a decision on the law, it still comes down to how they interpret it. When times are tough our sort of case has no friends, when times are good the outcome would likely be different also.

I can't offer you any definite grounds for optimism but I will say this...

...it's not over until the fat lady sings

Justice Parker may have been a lot of things but he wasn't the fat lady.

We may not get to hear the fat lady until one or other cases reaches the ECtHR or ECJ.

[KiwiGuy]

You would also find HMRC's Non Resident Recovery Unit on your tail. They have bilateral agreements with other tax authorities (like the IRS) and they can even sell the debt on to local DCAs.

Constantly looking over your shoulder doesn't sound like much of a life to me.

yes, i agree, if i leave i will be open and honest about it, i certainly dont plan to run away from this, as DR said alot of countrys have bilateral agreements which usually just a balif turning up and taking his values worth, if we lose which i dont think we will, its better dealing with the HMRC than with a guy who is just there to take all that you own.

Its a bit of a catch 22 though, you tell the HMRC that you are leaving, they might try and force the payment, or you dont tell them you have left, monitor the case and pay when needed which should avoid any Recovery Unit on your tail, eg. if we lose call em and make arrangements to pay. I dont think anyone should put there lives on hold for this case.

[OnYourBikeGB]

I'm just as pessimistic. The way I see it, the country is broke, they (the Government regardless of whatever party is in power) desperately need to raise funds and they really dont care that 2500 of us get treated unfairly as a result of that.
My only previous experience of the courts (divorce) was that they are extremely fair. However, this case is not about fairness, its about whether our rulers can walk roughshed over parts of the population and get away with it. I think that history tells us very much that they can.
Time will tell, but I sense the current woes of the country play right into the taxmans hands and we will eventually loose. Regardless that the court has to make a decision on the law, it still comes down to how they interpret it. When times are tough our sort of case has no friends, when times are good the outcome would likely be different also.

I think we have a fight on our hands, yes, but it's not without hope. These judges will be older, wiser, and will have a list of honours as long as your arm already. They'll first and foremsot be defenders of the law, and I can't believe that pressure can be directly applied to them. HMRC know that they are in a minefield. just as we do. No matter how certain they talk (not very, going by the PWC hearing), they know they can still lose this. Nothing, absolutely nothing, has been won or lost yet.

My view is prepare as best you can for the worst, but don't lose hope. In someways losing the JR has almost a healthy reality shock. If we had won, and Hector appealed, we'd be heading for CoA with a false sense of security. Instead, we can prepare ourselves, and a minor shockwave has been sent round the financial and business world, that has actually strengthened or cause. There will be many more still out of sight who will be watching this carefully. We are going into CoA wiser, more prepared and stronger than we would have if the JR review had gone our way. We have a bloodied nose but we're not beaten. Not by a long, long way.

[KiwiGuy]

Typical

Can i pay back only £1500 also?

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...500-payback.do

[smalldog]

yes, i agree, if i leave i will be open and honest about it, i certainly dont plan to run away from this, as DR said alot of countrys have bilateral agreements which usually just a balif turning up and taking his values worth, if we lose which i dont think we will, its better dealing with the HMRC than with a guy who is just there to take all that you own.

Its a bit of a catch 22 though, you tell the HMRC that you are leaving, they might try and force the payment, or you dont tell them you have left, monitor the case and pay when needed which should avoid any Recovery Unit on your tail, eg. if we lose call em and make arrangements to pay. I dont think anyone should put there lives on hold for this case.

hold your horses chaps, never said I wouldnt pay and would do a runner....just think this country is going down the swany (if thats the correct spelling) and dont know if I want to live here anymore. jump to conclusions why dont ya! :-)

As you say, dont want to come back to see old blighty in the future only to have the rubber glove treatment, I would get just as much satisfaction knowing my tax isnt going to HMRC for all future earnings!

[KiwiGuy]

hold your horses chaps, never said I wouldnt pay and would do a runner....just think this country is going down the swany (if thats the correct spelling) and dont know if I want to live here anymore. jump to conclusions why dont ya! :-)

As you say, dont want to come back to see old blighty in the future only to have the rubber glove treatment, I would get just as much satisfaction knowing my tax isnt going to HMRC for all future earnings!

oh sorry didnt mean to make it sound that way, sorry

[Rhydd]

Who choses the judge?

I'm uneasy.

Someone pointed out that Parker had often represented HMCR, and didn't someone else say that a judge on the PWC case was the one who decided that Gaines-Cooper wasn't a non-dom even though he'd met the requirements as they were widely understood?

Does the government have an influence over which judges are chosen for individual cases?

[Rhydd]

"Evening Standard"

Here is an article that is very unsympathetic to tax avoidance. You can't even stop buying the "Evening Standard" now that it's free!

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...ax-avoiders.do

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Does the government have an influence over which judges are chosen for individual cases?

Absolutely not. The judiciary are totally independent.

Judges in the Court of Appeal have shown that they have no qualms whatsoever about holding the Government to account eg. in the recent rendition/torture cases.

I wouldn't worry on this score.

[smalldog]

Here is an article that is very unsympathetic to tax avoidance. You can't even stop buying the "Evening Standard" now that it's free!

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...ax-avoiders.do

BUT there is a huge difference between people who hide their money offshore and people like us who have every year disclosed ALL our income in SA's. WE have never hidden behind anonymous bank accounts. This article is related to people who hide, we have never done such a thing but are actually being penalised more!!!!!! My interest equates to more than the £30k tax penalty for supposed non doms evasion, where is the FAIRNESS in that, for someone who has for the last 8 years declared all monies and income?

Its simple isnt it Gordie, fairness only fits when it suits you, or rather for your gimps who have gnawed their way through their cage bars only to escape into the night.

Dont not approach as armed and dangerous, if seen call 999 and report sighting of HMRC gimp to the police. Dont go get the gimp yourself