BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[normalbloke]

Excellent summary thanks !

To be honest I've never been too hopeful on defeating HMRC on the HR angle, rather its on the specifics of how HMRC have handled our SA's over this 7 year period, that is where I think they are on dodgy ground. Isn't the option still open to us of going to a Tax Tribunal where these issues could be more directly addressed or is that now nullified due to the current appeal process.

I believe MP did say that still going before tribunals etc WAS still an option pending any 'less than optimal' result from the HR angle... but I'm not that sure. Can DR or anyone confirm... ??

[OnYourBikeGB]

Utter BS Hartnett, it would be better for the Exchequer not to bankrupt me thus preventing me from ever working again in my field of expertise – as a result my family will become dependent on the state rather than contribute to it!!!! Now Dave “talks from the anus” Harnett, kindly explain to me how that’s better for the Exchequer….

Also, Mr Breath of farts Harnett, kindly compare the amount of backdated tax you and your cronies believe I owe as a result of BN66 to that you allowed Vodaphone to write off and explain to me how that’s fair!!! How is it fair to have one rule for big business and fat cats and another for individuals such as us who earn many orders of magnitude less, are less able to defend ourselves, and have more to lose!

Totally agree. This actually undermines the Parker 'fair share' argument. There's no such thing, and here it is in black and white, underlined, emphasised and shouted from the roof by hector himself. I hope COA judges are observing closely.

[SantaClaus]

"Mr Hartnett believes that it is better to do deals with companies in order to bring in revenue for the Exchequer, rather than get caught up in lengthy and expensive court battles."
Did I read this right? So what's going on via the courts with BN66 Dave?

Maybe we should pose this question to David Gauke, as he is the one who said "let the courts decide".

[smalldog]

bloody nose

Taxman dealt 'bloody nose' in IR35 fight :: Contractor UK

nice, wonder how much that little lost cost the taxpayer to fight...lets hope we manage to break it rather than bloody it with the COA!

[Lazylobster]

Taxman dealt 'bloody nose' in IR35 fight :: Contractor UK

nice, wonder how much that little lost cost the taxpayer to fight...lets hope we manage to break it rather than bloody it with the COA!

I'm more concerned that its taken 7 years to resolve. The stress and strain on the chap must have been none too pleasant.

They really are a bunch of fcukers. . . . .

[Buzby]

tax tribunal

Taxman dealt 'bloody nose' in IR35 fight :: Contractor UK

nice, wonder how much that little lost cost the taxpayer to fight...lets hope we manage to break it rather than bloody it with the COA!

This is why HMRC do not like tribunals, they would rather just change the law

[Emigre]

In order to separate two different topics for the benefit of all I have started a new thread for Loan arrangements. Please make loan related posts on the new thread. Thanks

Link to Loan Thread

[centurian]

Meanwhile this MP thinks that VAT evaders should be banged up

BBC News - MP Ian Liddell-Grainger says VAT cheats should be jailed

.. on the basis that the penalty for evasion is a mere £30...

Presumably your penalty for avoidance must be no more than a tenner then

[RichardCranium]

Meanwhile this MP thinks that VAT evaders should be banged up

BBC News - MP Ian Liddell-Grainger says VAT cheats should be jailed

.. on the basis that the penalty for evasion is a mere £30...

Presumably your penalty for avoidance must be no more than a tenner then

I'm inclined to agree with him. There is no such thing as "VAT evasion" or "VAT avoidance". It is theft. Claiming VAT when not VAT registered with the intention of pocketing it should be a prison sentence.

Yes there are way of reducing the VAT you send to HMRC such as the Flat Rate Scheme, but that is them letting you keep some of their VAT.

The risk here is such behaviour being branded "avoidance" such that "avoidance" comes to mean or imply "criminal activity" which it is not.

[centurian]

The point was that the MP thought/implied that these poeple get away with minimal fines, so how can it be that legal avoiders in this thread are facing bankruptcy.

He's right, but at the same time, he's being very dramatic in his use of numbers. Anyone doing this wouldn't get caught with one invoice, but year's worth, so would probably end up with a 6 figure fine.