BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Hi there all - good to see the forum is as strong as ever. Little one has kept me busy but I am watching with anticipation.

Any news on a specific date for our case?

Fog

No, it's still floating either Tues 2nd or Wed 3rd. We probably won't know which until the day before.

[OnYourBikeGB]

Hes not shy of the Human Rights act either:

Last year, Sir Jeremy ruled that government control orders on six terror suspects were so strict that they broke Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which outlaws indefinite detention without trial.

He also dislikes procedural unfairness, which we have very much been victims of, seems like our kind of Judge to me:

At the High Court, he said Laurence and Rachel Banks, from Kent, were the victims of "procedural unfairness" after movement restrictions on their herd nearly put them out of business.

not so convinced about his choice of hobby tho??:

Sir Jeremy, who has been twice married, lists his hobby as the Wotton Light Railway in Buckinghamshire.

Just like to say, Sir Jeremy, if you happen to chance on our little forum, that we love all light railways, Wottons in particular. That Singh guy, he hates them (allegedly).

[SantaClaus]

On the subject of "fair share of taxes", I've paid stamp duty 4 times over, every time I've moved house.

Personally I still feel this case is going to Europe and only then will we get a fair outcome. I bet the verdict has already been decided by hushed whispers in the corridors of Whitehall.

Of course, I'd like to be proved wrong...

[scubadiver]

A couple of interesting links...

Lord Ashcroft (Conservative): "To Ask Her Majesty's Government whether they expect citizens to organise their tax affairs in order to maximise tax payable."

Lord Sassoon (Commercial Secretary, HM Treasury; Conservative): "The Government expect citizens to pay tax that is due by law. The Government will take action against tax avoidance schemes that claim to produce results completely at odds with the intentions of Parliament. That is why the Government support the Code of Conduct on Taxation for banks and is asking them to adopt it by the end of November 2010."

More details here.

And I couldn't help noticing the Google's effective tax rate was 2.4% (details here). Surely they've got that money saved away somewhere so when the various authorities realise this is unfair and retrospectively change the law to get their hands on this cash they can just hand it over. Or maybe it doesn't work that way if you're a big corporate...

[OnYourBikeGB]

Lord Ashcroft (Conservative): "To Ask Her Majesty's Government whether they expect citizens to organise their tax affairs in order to maximise tax payable."

Lord Sassoon (Commercial Secretary, HM Treasury; Conservative): "The Government expect citizens to pay tax that is due by law. The Government will take action against tax avoidance schemes that claim to produce results completely at odds with the intentions of Parliament. That is why the Government support the Code of Conduct on Taxation for banks and is asking them to adopt it by the end of November 2010."

More details here.

And I couldn't help noticing the Google's effective tax rate was 2.4% (details here). Surely they've got that money saved away somewhere so when the various authorities realise this is unfair and retrospectively change the law to get their hands on this cash they can just hand it over. Or maybe it doesn't work that way if you're a big corporate...

And if they don't, they're going to apply it retrospectively back to when the banks started to screw the economy, and destroy them? Or is that reserved for the little people?

[centurian]

Or is that reserved for the little people?

Yep...

[SantaClaus]

A little off topic, but interesting nonetheless. If you think we've got it bad, have a read at what's going on in America. The banks have decided to become tax collectors because there are huge profits to be made:

The New Tax Man: Big Banks and Hedge Funds | The Huffington Post Investigative Fund

Nearly a dozen major banks and hedge funds, anticipating quick profits from homeowners who fall behind on property taxes, are quietly plowing hundreds of millions of dollars into businesses that collect the debts, tack on escalating fees and threaten to foreclose on the homes of those who fail to pay.

The Wall Street investors, which include Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase & Co., have purchased from local governments the right to collect delinquent taxes on several hundred thousand properties, many in distressed housing markets, the Huffington Post Investigative Fund has found.
In many cases, the banks and hedge funds created new companies to do their bidding. They gave the companies obscure, even whimsical names and used post office boxes as their addresses, masking Wall Street’s dominant new role as a surrogate tax collector.

In exchange for paying overdue real estate taxes, the investors gain legal powers from local governments to collect the debt and levy fees. At first, property owners may owe little more than a few hundred dollars, only to find their bills soaring into the thousands. In some jurisdictions, the new Wall Street tax collectors also chase debtors over other small bills, such as for water, sewer and sidewalk repair.

Some states allow the investors to tack on as much as 18 percent interest and a passel of legal fees and other charges. When property owners fail to make full payment, the investors can sue to foreclose – in some states within as little as six months.

[FightBack]

All. I've signed up following a letter i have received from HMRC this week. I found this thread via google, and have read all posts since the end of September (date of the MP office raid)

First of all, by way of introduction;

I am not a contractor
I work in the City
I am advised by MP (as a derivatives trader)
I am due before the Tax tribunals in the near future (scheduled for a similar time to your BN66 CoA hearings from what i have read).

For reference, the letter from HMRC said "MP are under criminal investigations....investigating whether certain tax avoidance schemes have been implemented fraudulently". They go on state that they are seeking a postponement in my hearing (and that of other appellants).

Questions i have?
Who is the 60 year old from MP that was arrested and released?
Anyone any further information on which particular MP avoidance schemes HMRC have in their sights? (i have read about charity donation schemes, medical industry specific schemes, BN66 etc, but nothing specific).

Also, given my letter from HMRC appears economical with information as to why exactly they are seeking a postponement, I wonder if anyone would like to venture as to the pros & cons of agreeing to such a suggestion. (eg. looking to buy time on all MP schemes even if they only have 1 or 2 in the frame for fraudulent implementation).

Many thanks

I found this thread through searching on Montpelier. I am also an MP-advised derivatives trader however I have not heard anything from HMRC for a couple of years on the the matter. Interested to see that they have pursued you to a tribunal. I wonder why they went for you and not everyone? Please keep us informed. Do you have another thread or forum where this is discussed?

On BN66, if HMRC get this through then we might as well be in Russia or anywhere else where capricious authorities decide what happens to those without the money or influence to pursue "special deals".

There should be such things as property rights and freedom from persecution by the State. Retrospective legislation means that any future incoming government could damage those who legitimately enact things permitted by current laws. This way lies tyranny.

[swede]

Here we go....

BBC News - UK in talks over taxing Britons' Swiss bank accounts

"The UK would push for this to be a retrospective tax...."

[Fundamental Rights]

MP Search

I hear a temporary injunction has been granted in the IOM preventing release of any information taken as part of the recent search. This has been voluntarily extended to late November pending a Judicial Review of the lawfullness of the search. I guess there are parallel moves in the UK.