• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by ASB View Post
    I thought better than posting that possibly dodgy comparison!
    Obviously my post was tongue in cheek but there are a couple serious points:

    (1) the higher courts are courts of law not public opinion

    (2) the courts have no qualms about going against the Government, even in highly controversial cases like this

    "The Supreme Court ruling will open the door for hundreds of serious criminals to conceal their sick past."

    "Five Supreme Court justices unanimously dismissed a Home Office bid to quash their action today."
    Last edited by DonkeyRhubarb; 21 April 2010, 19:49.

    Comment


      Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View Post
      But aren't we the ones that have been raped and abused? This Supreme Court judgment supports the abusers.
      Join the No To Retro Tax Campaign Now
      "Tax evasion is easy: it involves breaking the law. By tax avoidance OECD means unacceptable avoidance ... This can be contrasted with acceptable tax planning. What is critical is transparency" - Donald Johnston, Secretary-General, OECD

      Comment


        Originally posted by Emigre View Post
        But aren't we the ones that have been raped and abused? This Supreme Court judgment supports the abusers.
        I'm sure the Sun and joe public would view us as "tax abusers" but that wasn't my point.

        Whatever your views on this SC ruling, it was reassuring to see the courts (a) assess the case on legality not morality and (b) take a stance in defiance of the legislature.

        Comment


          Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View Post
          I'm sure the Sun and joe public would view us as "tax abusers" but that wasn't my point.

          Whatever your views on this SC ruling, it was reassuring to see the courts (a) assess the case on legality not morality and (b) take a stance in defiance of the legislature.
          I agree DR. The fear all along is that the government simply cannot afford to lose the case, and so will apply whatever pressure it can to make sure the courts come down on their side. Hopefully the case will eventually reach a level where that pressure doesn't exist, either here or in Europe.

          Comment


            courts

            My fear until we get to Europe is the ability of the government to have a quiet word in the shell likes of the judges to convince them not to rock the government boat. Its not just HMRC revenues at stake, its reputations, credibility and potentially even perjury with some of the creativity we have seen in justifying the legislation!

            Comment


              Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View Post
              Obviously my post was tongue in cheek but there are a couple serious points:

              (1) the higher courts are courts of law not public opinion

              (2) the courts have no qualms about going against the Government, even in highly controversial cases like this

              "The Supreme Court ruling will open the door for hundreds of serious criminals to conceal their sick past."

              "Five Supreme Court justices unanimously dismissed a Home Office bid to quash their action today."
              FWIW I think the SC was entirely right; and I am glad they found the way they did.

              Comment


                New CUK forum

                Anyone else having problems since they "upgraded" CUK?

                I could probably learn to live with the new look and feel (even though I preferred the old minimalist style) but it runs sooooo damn slowly on my older computer I can't be doing with it.

                This is one instance where I would fully support retrospection.

                I guess HMRC will be pleased though if it curtails my activities.

                Comment


                  IR35 and retro

                  you never know this could help bring home to some of the others that they could end up being in the same position as us at some point in the future, might help rally our cause:

                  http://forums.contractoruk.com/accou...ml#post1129629

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by smalldog View Post
                    My fear until we get to Europe is the ability of the government to have a quiet word in the shell likes of the judges to convince them not to rock the government boat. Its not just HMRC revenues at stake, its reputations, credibility and potentially even perjury with some of the creativity we have seen in justifying the legislation!
                    That's illogical thinking. Look what happened to the government at the hands of a Supreme court judge over the rendition matter. And the government had far far more at stake with that case than with ours, both legally and with their reputations.

                    PS - the new forum design is bloody awful. What did they do? Get an infinite number of monkeys working Sharepoint Designer to churn this muck out???

                    Comment


                      squicker my timing was awful, the day before that was on the forum I posted that about the courts.....gives me a bit more hope since finding out about the supreme court!

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X