Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Loans from EBTs and other Trusts
Collapse
X
Collapse
-
-
Originally posted by Vallah View PostI think it would be a huge step, seeing as the legislation specifically mentions employment income. That wouldn't require clarification, it would need a complete rewrite of the income tax legislation.Comment
-
Originally posted by Vallah View PostI think it would be a huge step, seeing as the legislation specifically mentions employment income. That wouldn't require clarification, it would need a complete rewrite of the income tax legislation.
Huitson has demonstrated that Parliament is supreme in this regard.
In a couple of years HMRC will be faced with a stark choice. Litigate, almost certainly lose and right off several hundred £million. Or...
The longer the scheme operates, the more likely it is HMRC will opt for the nuclear option.Comment
-
Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View PostAre you saying that this scheme cannot be closed through legislation? Because if it can be closed prospectively, it can be closed retrospectively.
Huitson has demonstrated that Parliament is supreme in this regard.
In a couple of years HMRC will be faced with a stark choice. Litigate, almost certainly lose and right off several hundred £million. Or...
The longer the scheme operates, the more likely it is HMRC will opt for the nuclear option.Last edited by Vallah; 9 November 2012, 21:01.Comment
-
Originally posted by Vallah View PostNo, I am not arguing that self-employed schemes cannot be closed by legislation. I am arguing against your assertion that they could be retrospectively included in the legislation that shut down EBTs. Just as I am arguing that it would be extremely unlikely that EBTs will be attacked retrospectively. Lots of schemes are rendered obsolete by changes in legislation, but so far not many have been challenged retrospectively. Not much comfort for those caught up in the nightmare of Huitson of course, but that doesn't mean that all schemes are the same.
However, the post-Dec 2010 self-employed schemes are clearly designed to frustrate the DRL and that, in my opinion, puts them at significant risk.
If I was in one of these self-employed schemes, and under enquiry, I would be seriously thinking about demanding closure notices from HMRC and forcing them to either accept my SARs, with no amendment, OR take me to a tax tribunal.
Parliament would be highly unlikely to legislate with retrospective effect while a taxpayer was appealing to the tax courts.Comment
-
Originally posted by Vallah View Post...and HMRC would find it impossible to attack EBTs retrospectively.
http://forums.contractoruk.com/accou...ospection.htmlComment
-
I know of 5 promoters offering self-employed loan schemes, and there are probably more. I know one has around 1000 users, and the other two have at least another 1000 between them.
If there were say 3000 users in total, and the average tax saving was £30k/year, then that would be £90M/year in lost tax revenue. Call it £100M.
The schemes have already been running 2 years, so that's £200M.
If HMRC sit on this another 3 years, then we're talking £½Bn.
Now tell me that they wouldn't consider dusting off the time machine for that amount, especially when they can justify retro on the basis that the new schemes were clearly designed to flout the disguised remuneration regulations. They've also got the BN66 Huitson court judgments on their side.
Don't get me wrong. I am totally against retro in all circumstances and I don't seek to scaremonger but there are things people can do to safeguard against this eg. asking HMRC to put up or shut up (litigate or close their enquiries).Last edited by DonkeyRhubarb; 12 November 2012, 10:40.Comment
-
EBT Ruling Hits Thousands of Banking Staff
I'm not sure why JPM have caved in.
EBT Ruling Hits Thousands of Banking StaffComment
-
Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View Post"I hope Celtic realise that, if their team is good enough, they will win. If they're not good enough, they'll not win - and they can't look at anybody else, whether it is referees or any other influence." - Walter Smith
On them! On them! They fail!Comment
-
Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View PostI'm not sure why JPM have caved in.Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment