BN66 - Round 2 (Court of Appeal)

[Doug1965]

Different treatment

The Plumbers Tax Safe Plan gives plumbers and associated workers until the end of May to disclose any undeclared tax owed. If they come clean they will be charged an additional 10 per cent to 20 per cent of what they owe as a penalty.

However, Revenue & Customs has said that the same deal can be broadly applied to those in other industries coming forward with a disclosure.

So, it seems if you don't declare you income and evade tax, you will get a lesser punishment that us; who fully delcared all our income and were told what we were doing was perfectly legal.

My accured interest is around 30% of my tax owed (reduced by having a CTD for the last 2 years).

So, can this rule apply to us if we choose to 'come clean'? Could save some people a huge amount in interest.

If we are not offered the same deal then are there grounds for a complaint due to different treatment, especially after we had made a full disclosure ?

[theoctopus]

If we are not offered the same deal then are there grounds for a complaint due to different treatment, especially after we had made a full disclosure ?

The Plumbers Tax deal is for the unpaid tax + interest + 10-20% penalty, so it is a worse deal than we are facing ie we are 'only' being asked to pay the tax and interest.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Interest and penalties ain't the same thing.

We're "only" being charged interest. Any plumbers who come forward will be charged interest as well as the penalty.

Also, if a plumber has deliberately hidden income (rather than made a mistake), then HMRC will go back 20 years.

See page 20.

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/trades-disclo...dance-pack.pdf

The offer doesn't look so good when you read the small print.

Caveat emptor!

[smalldog]

carpe diem DR, hopefully the day of the COA judgement!

[Toocan]

Enterprise

As both s.58 (considering who is affected by it) and IR35 are anti-enterprise, this is an interesting story:

BBC News - David Cameron says enterprise is only hope for growth

[Emigre]

As both s.58 (considering who is affected by it) and IR35 are anti-enterprise, this is an interesting story:

BBC News - David Cameron says enterprise is only hope for growth

Its sad that it takes a politician to make it all sound like new economics every few years. The last Govt. told us they were encouraging small business growth but did everything to kill off small business.

I see that OFT (Office of Tax Simplification) are expected to make their recommendations on Son of IR35 on 10 March...maybe some of these things are delaying the CoA decisions?

[stuffed]

Interesting read around retro tax etc

Does anyone know if the Banks are fighting this in the courts?

Sounds very similar to our issues in a way.

Senior bankers at JPMorgan could yet be obliged to pay income tax obligations dating back up to SIX YEARS | News | www.eFinancialCareers.co.uk

[screwthis]

Does anyone know if the Banks are fighting this in the courts?

Sounds very similar to our issues in a way.

Senior bankers at JPMorgan could yet be obliged to pay income tax obligations dating back up to SIX YEARS | News | www.eFinancialCareers.co.uk

Under a law passed in 2004, the UK government is able to claim payment for income tax retrospectively if schemes are found to have been created for tax avoidance purposes.

What law is this and I wish seeing as my tax years in the scheme are all before 2004.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Under a law passed in 2004, the UK government is able to claim payment for income tax retrospectively if schemes are found to have been created for tax avoidance purposes.

What law is this and I wish seeing as my tax years in the scheme are all before 2004.

This is a load of crap. I suspect what they are referring to is Dawn Primorola's statement in 2004.

War on tax avoidance will bring in £1bn a year | Business | The Guardian

"I am therefore giving notice of our intention to deal with any arrangements that emerge in future designed to frustrate our intention that employers and employees should pay the proper amount of tax and NICs on the rewards of employment. Where we become aware of arrangements which attempt to frustrate this intention we will introduce legislation to close them down, where necessary from today."

This only applied to employees and was NOT a law.

[Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing]

This is a load of crap. I suspect what they are referring to is Dawn Primorola's statement in 2004.

War on tax avoidance will bring in £1bn a year | Business | The Guardian

I think this point is rather good in the Guardian article:

The Inland Revenue has not made retrospective tax changes since the 1960s. It has been advised in the past that retrospective taxation could be challenged in the European Court of Human Rights.

Sorry, what was it that was said? We should have known retrospection could happen. And a war? Blimey, going to war on something legal. Dawn Rollmeover really didn't get it.