Originally posted by smalldog
View Post
- 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
Topic is closed
-
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 -
Originally posted by Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing View PostHis Honour Deemster Newey
"I treat Mr Jones' and Mr Morris' evidence with somewhat more caution. It appears to me that Mr Jones and Mr Morris both embellished their accounts to an extent."
Is that what's known as a euphemism?
Surely not? Nor would HMRC embellish their account of Padmore...
AJ 0 - 2 DR
"33. Put succinctly, the Appellant`s [i.e. Mr Jones] second submission was that Acting Deemster Sullivan had been misled as to what had happened since May 2007 and that on the true facts the Respondent [i.e. Montpelier] had been guilty of undue delay. We observe that if this court was satisfied that Acting Deemster Sullivan exercised her discretion under a misapprehension of the facts, this court would be required to substitute its decision for that of Acting Deemster Sullivan.
34. Having carefully considered the submissions made to this court by Mr Ramsden [i.e. Barrister for Montpelier & Junior Counsel re Huitson] and the Appellant [i.e. Jones] we accept the Appellant`s [i.e. Jones] second submission. "
SO just in case you cannot read the Appeal Judges accept Mr Jones position that Montpelier "misled" the Deemster in the High court and did NOT accept the "story" put forward by Montpelier.
3-2Comment
-
Just to put the level of Government debt in to perspective: the UK treasury is now having to borrow £500m a day to pay for the budget deficit.
In other words, the £200m we all allegedly owe the taxman will provide about 10 hours worth of funding.Comment
-
hmmmmm
oh to be a lotto £56,000,000 winner - i see that couple which won it the other week have given their £400k house away to their cleaner.
Hey look HMRC, you can go and get the cleaner for Gift tax... or would that be "Just doing our job" too farWhen is comes to the HMRC and Gordy. Im a fighter not a loverComment
-
Originally posted by KiwiGuy View Postoh to be a lotto £56,000,000 winner - i see that couple which won it the other week have given their £400k house away to their cleaner.
Hey look HMRC, you can go and get the cleaner for Gift tax... or would that be "Just doing our job" too farComment
-
Originally posted by KiwiGuy View Postoh to be a lotto £56,000,000 winner - i see that couple which won it the other week have given their £400k house away to their cleaner.
Hey look HMRC, you can go and get the cleaner for Gift tax... or would that be "Just doing our job" too farJoin 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, OECDComment
-
Originally posted by Alan Jones View PostSO just in case you cannot read the Appeal Judges accept Mr Jones position that Montpelier "misled" the Deemster in the High court and did NOT accept the "story" put forward by Montpelier.
http://www.judgments.im/content/J892.htm
The real story is what happened in 2001.
http://www.judgments.im/content/J984.htm
Conclusion
161. In summary, in my judgment Mr Jones and Mr Morris made wrongful use of (a) the idea of using offshore interest-in-possession trusts in partnership to avoid the IR35 legislation, (b) information about the manner in which the Disputed Scheme was constructed and (c) Mr Argles' March opinions.
Overall conclusion
162. Montpelier has satisfied me that Mr Jones and Mr Morris are liable to it for wrongful use of confidential information.Last edited by DonkeyRhubarb; 3 March 2010, 12:28.Comment
-
Comment
-
-
PMQs today
PM Questions today (Wednesday)
1228 "Ms Harman says a parliamentary bill is not retrospective".
Really ?Comment
Topic is closed
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment