BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[DonkeyRhubarb]

There's also the possibility that we can become the least worst option. By being a constant pain, and gradually forcing their hand to reveal more and more, it may eventually reach the stage that HMRC realise we are stripping them of their weaponary against Joe Public. Someone in there made the decision to mislead/misbrief ministers. Someone in there made the decision to ignore legal advice and all Human Rights concerns and ride rough-shod over the law. The longer we persist, the closer we get. It may reach the stage where the smarter thing for HMRC to do is back off, in case Joe Public gets a good clear sight of the power they wield and their abuse of it. Yep, it is a long shot, but every long shot we take raises our chances, and even long shots sometime hit their targets.

Very well put.

As an example of applying pressure...

I will be taking both of the following FOI requests to the Information Commissioner. The ICO will consider all the relevant documents in turn to see if HMRC has correctly applied the exemptions under the law. HMRC may be confident that their view will be upheld but there is always a risk that the ICO might see things differently when it comes to what is, and is not, in the "public interest".

Information on retrospective measure in BN66 - WhatDoTheyKnow
Information from 1 November 2007 meeting - WhatDoTheyKnow

You can bet your bottom dollar that the last thing HMRC would want is any form of disclosure.

[smalldog]

Very well put.

As an example of applying pressure...

I will be taking both of the following FOI requests to the Information Commissioner. The ICO will consider all the relevant documents in turn to see if HMRC has correctly applied the exemptions under the law. HMRC may be confident that their view will be upheld but there is always a risk that the ICO might see things differently when it comes to what is, and is not, in the "public interest".

Information on retrospective measure in BN66 - WhatDoTheyKnow
Information from 1 November 2007 meeting - WhatDoTheyKnow

You can bet your bottom dollar that the last thing HMRC would want is any form of disclosure.

DR Im assuming that most if not all of your requests for information have conveniently been classified as either too expensive to respond too or not in the public interest? If that is the case then what is the point in having the FOI in the first place, its too easy to avoid declaring information using either of these two excuses? Is it all just lip service to appear to be transparent

[DonkeyRhubarb]

DR Im assuming that most if not all of your requests for information have conveniently been classified as either too expensive to respond too or not in the public interest? If that is the case then what is the point in having the FOI in the first place, its too easy to avoid declaring information using either of these two excuses? Is it all just lip service to appear to be transparent

Almost.

If you ask the likes of HMRC to release information that they don't want to, then you can be sure they'll try every trick in the book to wriggle out of it. (It took Heather Brooke 5 years to nail MPs over their expenses.)

The real joke is that if they refuse to disclose, you first have to go through the utter charade of asking them to carry out an Internal Review.

Your only chance then is that the Information Commissioner might not agree with their reasons for withholding but here's the rub. There is such a huge backlog at the ICO that it can take up to a year for your complaint to be heard.

Fortunately, it doesn't matter in our case because this is going to go on for years, so the delays in the system don't work in HMRC's favour.

[smalldog]

Almost.

If you ask the likes of HMRC to release information that they don't want to, then you can be sure they'll try every trick in the book to wriggle out of it. (It took Heather Brooke 5 years to nail MPs over their expenses.)

The real joke is that if they refuse to disclose, you first have to go through the utter charade of asking them to carry out an Internal Review.

Your only chance then is that the Information Commissioner might not agree with their reasons for withholding but here's the rub. There is such a huge backlog at the ICO that it can take up to a year for your complaint to be heard.

Fortunately, it doesn't matter in our case because this is going to go on for years, so the delays in the system don't work in HMRC's favour.

its all just one big dirty seedy cover up isnt it....Im gonna kick back, relax and wait for HMRC's beating, it will catchup with them Im sure, could take years but I plan on hanging around to enjoy it when it happens. I think they probably realise even if they did win and we had to pay/make us bankrupt that would not be the end of the matter. We will absolutely not stop ever in getting justice.

I think We are all becoming terminators!

[Slobbo]

I love this reason "c) Section 31(1)(d) FOIA to a very small amount of information the disclosure of which
would or would be likely to prejudice the assessment or collection of tax. ".

This is exactly what we are trying to do.

So HMRC are saying by this admission that this information will probably wreck their case which of course will prejudice the collection of tax. Not very fair (there is that word again) on us is it.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

its all just one big dirty seedy cover up isnt it

In a word, yes.

I bet HMRC didn't bank on the Spanish Inquisition though.

I wonder, knowing what they know now, whether they would still have done it? Unfortunately, they're too pig headed to let it go now.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

So HMRC are saying by this admission that this information will probably wreck their case which of course will prejudice the collection of tax. Not very fair (there is that word again) on us is it.

HMRC's discussion with their legal advisors probably went something like this.

HMRC: what do you reckon are our chances of challenging the scheme?

LEGAL: you haven't got a prayer

HMRC: what, not even an outside chance?

LEGAL: nope

HMRC: so we'll have to get the Government to close the loophole?

LEGAL: yep, that's your only option

HMRC: what about all the people who've avoided tax over the past 7 years?

LEGAL: you'll just have to write that off

HMRC: are you saying there's absolutely nothing at all we can do?

LEGAL: not really

HMRC: what does "not really" mean?

LEGAL: well, it would be extremely dubious, but you could try retrospective legislation

HMRC: we don't have a problem with "extremely dubious", so that'll fit the bill nicely thanks!

[Emigre]

Are they at it again?

HMRC chasing tax on employee accommodation :: Contractor UK

I don't know whether this piece of legislation is retrospective or just plain retroactive but...

Don't you just love the way they say that paying the full amount of tax and interest will create certainty. So certainty only exists on HMRC's terms!

The wording in the last paragraph bears remarkable similarity to some of the missives we've received.

Dear HMRC. Certainty is created by properly drafted legislation where disputes are resolved in the proper (oh, and FAIR way) in the tribunals and courts. Certainty is not created by unilateral offers and the casting of bona fide tax avoiders as quasi tax evaders.

[Leyther70]

Bit of advice sought

Hello guys,

been a regular lurker on here for a while now and think you chaps(chapesses) are doing a splendid job, keep up the excellen work!

Im after a bit of advice, I know from Montp that the COA hearing is set down for Nov just wandered what happens in the event we loose that, will there then be a further appeal likely to go on longer and if so any idea on timescales or will the money become payable then?

Im in the dilema of wanting to try and offset the god awful interest that is accruing and hence I'm considering a CTD or an offshore account (im non resident now) paying 3.4% but which has a 12m tie in, hence if its all likely to be sorted in nov then the offshore account doesnt work.

Advice much appreciated.

Regards

Leyther

[Emigre]

Hello guys,

been a regular lurker on here for a while now and think you chaps(chapesses) are doing a splendid job, keep up the excellen work!

Im after a bit of advice, I know from Montp that the COA hearing is set down for Nov just wandered what happens in the event we loose that, will there then be a further appeal likely to go on longer and if so any idea on timescales or will the money become payable then?

Im in the dilema of wanting to try and offset the god awful interest that is accruing and hence I'm considering a CTD or an offshore account (im non resident now) paying 3.4% but which has a 12m tie in, hence if its all likely to be sorted in nov then the offshore account doesnt work.

Advice much appreciated.

Regards

Leyther

Hi and welcome to the Donkey sanctuary.

First of all the inevitable health warning about not giving advice. A recent post by DR reperformed the calculations of CTD vs bank deposit/offset mortgage (can't remember which). Counsel for HMRC has publicly committed to HMRC not seeking collection until all legal channels have been exhausted. This means if we lose at the CoA and we fail to appeal within the time limit set (probably 30 days), that would represent the end of legal channels. However, MontP have committed to supporting this case through The House of Lords (now the Supreme Court) and into the European Court of Human Rights if necessary. If it goes all the way you can ssume that it may take another 5 years.

I think your 12month fix is quite safe!

Must be a good feeling being resident somewhere away from Hector.