BN66 - Court of Appeal and beyond

[SantaClaus]

Ken Livingstone is a

Non payer of
Taxes

Mod snip: rules is rules...

It's hard to describe red Ken without using a 4 letter word.

[SantaClaus]

For anyone going to see their MP (and needing to make them feel a little less self righteous), you might want to run their name through this first

Company Director Check - free company director search

Returns names quicker than you can say "Personal Service company".

[gooner]

IVA Possible?

Just wondering whether anyone knows if it comes to it, whether HMRC will accept an IVA for monies owed - roughly to the tune of 45k.

I'm thinking about what the options might be to try and pay up if / when a final demand hits the mat.

thanks all for the informative posts to date

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Just wondering whether anyone knows if it comes to it, whether HMRC will accept an IVA for monies owed - roughly to the tune of 45k.

I'm thinking about what the options might be to try and pay up if / when a final demand hits the mat.

thanks all for the informative posts to date

See page 23
http://taxaid.org.uk/wp-content/uplo...t-Nov-2011.pdf

[nick4notax]

Done it, have you ??? (http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/budget_representation.htm)

Excellent link, thanks. I'll be submitting mine by tomorrow's close of play. We should ALL fill one in, even if expectations are low.

I've submitted my request to this. Hope everyone else has done the same, or is planning to. I've also written to my MP as well as a few other individuals, once again. This issue is all I can think of at the moment, doubtless like many. These measures might prove pointless, fuitless, waste of time, etc, etc. But, at least, it makes me feel like I'm personally exhausting all avenues open to me.

So, please, fill in an online form here: Budget representation - HM Treasury

[Hmmmmm]

And so it starts

Were they just waiting to see if retrospection would get rejected?

""The Government wants to ensure that the tax system is fair for all and we will not allow those who seek to benefit from this aggressive avoidance to get an unfair advantage. We do not take today’s action lightly, but the potential tax loss from this scheme and the history of previous abuse in this area mean that this is a circumstance where the decision to change the law with full retrospective effect is justified."

Government action halts banking tax avoidance schemes - HM Treasury

[SantaClaus]

I've submitted my request to this. Hope everyone else has done the same, or is planning to. I've also written to my MP as well as a few other individuals, once again. This issue is all I can think of at the moment, doubtless like many. These measures might prove pointless, fuitless, waste of time, etc, etc. But, at least, it makes me feel like I'm personally exhausting all avenues open to me.

So, please, fill in an online form here: Budget representation - HM Treasury

Submitted mine for what it's worth. Quite happy for anyone to copy/amend my entry if it makes life easier. Come on, lets see 3000 submissions!

Dear sir/madam,

I would like to see the retrospective aspect of Budget Note 66 (2008 Finance Bill) removed in the 2012 budget.

Myself and 3000 other computer contractors have been unfairly targeted for the first ever retrospective tax and many of us will be bankrupted, having to sell our homes and ruin our children's future as a result.

It is completely fair that the tax avoidance loophole addressed by BN66 was closed in the 2008 finance bill, but I cannot see how the govt. can justify backdating the change 7 years priors to the bill.

At the very least, the Treasury should insert a clause into the 2012 budget stating that interest will not be chargeable on the retrospective tax. It is completely unreasonable to assume that it should be.

As you are aware this issue has now exhausted the UK courts and will eventually be heard in the European Court of Human Rights. No doubt, it will send a signal to businesses that the UK does not have a fair and transparent tax regime.

It is interesting that our political leaders in government and working for HMRC think it completely acceptable to use Personal Service Companies to reduce their tax bills whilst attempting to bankrupt the "little person" such as myself for using a tax avoidance scheme that was perfectly legal at the time.

[TalkingCheese]

Done.

I've submitted my request to this. Hope everyone else has done the same, or is planning to. I've also written to my MP as well as a few other individuals, once again. This issue is all I can think of at the moment, doubtless like many. These measures might prove pointless, fuitless, waste of time, etc, etc. But, at least, it makes me feel like I'm personally exhausting all avenues open to me.

So, please, fill in an online form here: Budget representation - HM Treasury

Done.

[jeanvaljean]

Quote for our letters

A tax expert or similar was quoted saying something along the lines that it wasn't so much as the government changing the goalposts as changing the rules of the game long after the final whistle.

Does anyone have a link to that quote? I like it. Retrospection goes completely against the traditional British virtue of fair play - something else to highlight in our letters. (Yes, some will mock but so what?)

Livingstone etc......I like the "full share" rather than "fair share". quote. Is that a disbenefit or possibly advantageous to us? What about if you look at his quote retrospectively? Did he pay his full share or fair share or neither? Was he avoiding tax? Should he be allowed in public office according to his own statements which, if quoted correctly, were shining bright in their clarity? Maybe he needs to change or clarify them. This gets very confusing..........

[TalkingCheese]

A tax expert or similar was quoted saying something along the lines that it wasn't so much as the government changing the goalposts as changing the rules of the game long after the final whistle.

Does anyone have a link to that quote? ...

In here:

http://www.tax.org.uk/Resources/CIOT...egislation.pdf