Originally posted by helen7
View Post
-
Yes it did, lost in the Court of Appeal -
how did the scheme work and why did they lose??? Are there any similarities to our case??Originally posted by Overwhelmed View PostComment
-
I'm not sure what involvement Montpelier had in this was, since it was KPMG who took it to court.Originally posted by Overwhelmed View Post
(NB. RDS stands for Relevant Discounted Security)
Tax judges blockComment
-
No relation to our scheme, and completely different points of law.Originally posted by smalldog View PostComment
-
Election
Heres hoping that Timms doesn't get elected again! Anyone from East Ham?
Wonder what he will do will if he is not elected, go back to Logica?Politicians are wonderfull people, as long as they stay away from things they don't understand, like working for a living!Comment
-
election result
Did anyone ask the SNP what their view on BN66 is ?Comment
-
My local MP is now Tory, might pop him a letter congratulating him on his win and also telling my BN66 storyPoliticians are wonderfull people, as long as they stay away from things they don't understand, like working for a living!Comment
-
Might be worth holding fire for a few days just until the dust settles.Originally posted by portseven View Post
A couple of us have already drafted a letter template, and I am also in contact with Montp about this.Comment
-
Not entirely different I think, judgement turned on scheme must stand up to commercial scrutiny, although this is not mentioned in the law. MontP had an identical scheme. Their letter of yesterday acknowledges KPMG case, and simply instructs to pay HMRC.Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View PostComment
-
I think THE big difference is the retrospective element of BN66. I also note that in this case HMRC went theOriginally posted by Overwhelmed View Post
normal route via the commissioners, and did not jump straight in with a change in the law.Comment
Comment