BN66 - Court of Appeal and beyond

[Cornish Cream]

HMRC Email

HI have contacted HMRC to see what my options were - in summary this is the response...

- currently unable to agree a time to pay agreement until open enquiry/appeal is closed down - a formal agreement can potentially then be made but they are not guaranteed and are based on individual circumstances
- can make payments on account now
- can purchase a CTD

CC

[marcuss]

'Positive' article

You may or may not have seen this article (Evening Standard 29Feb12) of a couple of days ago which agrees with legitimate tax avoidance loopholes to be closed but does not like retrospective nature of laws to close them!



"Now the Government is to introduce retrospective legislation to punish Barclays for its schemes. This is unjust and sends a discouraging message to potential investors in Britain: they need a stable legal and fiscal environment in which to do business, not one prone to disruption by retrospective laws."

[bombaycat]

Reveal everyone not paying max possible PAYE until people realise they won't escape

I think that all the ridiculous press about anyone using a Ltd company for any business whatsoever being deemed to be a tax dodger could actually be something we should look at from the other angle.
Obviously it's idiotic to brand all people working through Ltd co.s as immoral tax dodgers, BUT, if more and more people are "exposed" then perhaps they will start to realise what has been going on to other people like us and see the whole thing more as the thin end of a wedge.
i.e. legal and legitimate behaviour is being incorrectly reclassified after the fact as somehow wrong.
Once a really large number of high profile people are affected with this kind of campaign perhaps they will start to be more sympathetic to us and less to the HMRC thug squad and the establishment that they seem to have in their pocket somehow.

For example the Today presenters probably work as freelance through service companies - they are forced day after day to ask questions about people not paying fair tax, what do they really think about the vilification of anyone who happens not to work as an employee? In fact this probably goes for many many journalists, so what is their view when this stuff starts to come after them and reclassified them as employees of the BBC and the like and demands retro tax with interest?

Does anyone know how to contact these types of people and how to canvass their private opinions and maybe even get some info on how to organise a really effective media campaign?

It seems to me you get an expert to advise when you are about to embark on an activity outside your own field of expertise (as ironically we did for tax advice) - now we need media advisers. But rather than pay why not illustrate that they are not far down the line if this stuff continues unchallenged. Get them on board in some way even if only to advise us what to do or not do.

Thoughts?

[ir35amnesia]

HMRC – from all accounts related to me- have an incredibly arrogant attitude to this situation.
An example of this would be to ask why it took so long to do anything about the scheme when HMRC knew all the details even before the scheme was launched.
That sounds like a fantastic claim – have a look at paragraph 143 on the following link:
Isle of Man Judgments Online

I agree.
Paragraph 1660 of HMRC International Tax Manual (which was published before 2000) commented on the Padmore Case (involving a Jersey Partnership). The important part of para 1660 read:
"The legislation is written in terms of United Kingdom residents who are partners but some tax planners have already suggested that it may be possible to develop the Padmore principle to apply to other situations where there are primary and secondary taxpayers for example where there is a trading trust with non-resident trustees and the profits pass to a United Kingdom resident life tenant. These further refinements will be kept under review. It has also been suggested that the legislation has not succeeded in overriding the treaties…."

HOWEVER Mr Gittins told the Isle of Man Court (Isle of Man Judgments Online) that the above paragraph did NOT reveal/describe the Montpelier IR35 Scheme. Maybe this claim by Mr Gittins assisted HMRC in the Huitson Case.

[Toocan]

HOWEVER Mr Gittins told the Isle of Man Court (Isle of Man Judgments Online) that the above paragraph did NOT reveal/describe the Montpelier IR35 Scheme. Maybe this claim by Mr Gittins assisted HMRC in the Huitson Case.

The scheme the was the primary focus of the case was not the same as the Montpelier scheme. I don't think the quote can assist HMRC - it refers to a concept rather than the exact details of the scheme.

In other words, HMRC were aware that such schemes were possible even though they did not know the details of the specific scheme. Of course, as soon as the scheme started they did know the exact details. Certainly years before section 58 was wheeled out.

Was your scheme the one described in the IoM case or was it the same as the Montpelier scheme?

[freedomfighter]

Occupy HMRC

I am surprised that so many people are not voting to stick a tenner into the PR campaign - it is looking to me like so many people are just resolved to their fate - yet in so many cases throughout history - and in all lines of business - you have to fight and fight and fight to get what you want. Giving up when there is so much at stake is crazy. Its nuts. Collectively we have a "voice" - individually we are useless.

I certainly do not intend languishing in apparent defeat, because this matter is far from over. I intend fighting tooth and nail to save my ar*e on this one.

So I have voted Yes.

I absolutely agree and was about to post something on a similar line. I think HMRC are bullying us into paying because they think/know we won't fight. I think we should and I have voted for the PR campaign and happy to pay towards it. I only used the scheme in question for 9 months but still the bill is high - and what worries me is what they're planning next - since I continued to use MP for another 2.5 years. I'm just angered and fustrated with the whole situation and HMRC and government tactics and double standards.The fact that we're treated like criminals - all avenues for appeal have been closed to us in the UK. The fact that HMRC knew of the scheme and sat on it - maybe to make a profit - interest - or because they knew they could not do anything and then did the most unjust thing – change the law and apply it retrospectively, and as we can see the floodgates have opened.
The fact that introducing such an ill-conceived legislation like IR35 which caused many people to use tax planning companies. They're hypocrisy in using PSC themselves and not only paying themselves and their partners but their children and possibly their dogs as well. Oh and not forgetting the Expenses scandal and how they have pretty much gotten away with it! I think we should make people aware of what's happening here if the media is the was so be it. If standing outside HMRC doors in protest so be it - whatever it takes - Occupy HMRC perhaps. Although the Occupy movement is not really getting much press in the west surprisingly (I watch RT news). I also think the BBC may not be the best news station to go with - after all they are an extension of the Government and I wouldn't trust them, maybe an independent station, and newspapers like the Guardian or the Economist?

Out of interest has the Double Tax agreement with IOM been closed or is that still open - so that large companies can still use it?

[Disgusted of Coventry]

Is this worth a try? (how to contact Newsnight).

Am I being optimistic to think that if Jeremy Paxman had been aware of our case that he could have made much more of that Inetrview (re Gauke on Barclays).

Has anyone contacted Newnight?

This is how to contact Newsnight.

BBC News - Newsnight - How Newsnight investigates

"We act on tip-offs, follow any leads that preliminary research throw up, gather all the evidence we can to prove the story is correct and then present the allegation to whoever we are accusing of wrongdoing. "

Jeremy Paxman, when interviewing Gauke about the Barclays business, was extremely exercised by the wrongness of retrospective taxation in general. He seemed to be of the opinion that retrospective tax hadn't been applied in the recent past.

Has anyone tried to contact Newsnight?

[BrilloPad]

If standing outside HMRC doors in protest so be it - whatever it takes - Occupy HMRC perhaps.

To get the press interested you need an angle - I do have a few ideas. As indicated above I think protest/press could easily be counterproductive - but to show solidarity I would get involved(and I still have access to the f4j brains/brawn). Remember that Mr B is reading this ( ) and if there is any nonsense talk I will pull straight out.

Out of interest has the Double Tax agreement with IOM been closed or is that still open - so that large companies can still use it?

Closed

[SantaClaus]

Just one thing to be aware of. If we embark on a PR campaign, be prepared for HMRC to crank up the printing presses and start spinning negative propoganda.

No doubt they have a direct line to the mouthpiece of the government, the BBC.

[bombaycat]

Ah yes the BBC

Just one thing to be aware of. If we embark on a PR campaign, be prepared for HMRC to crank up the printing presses and start spinning negative propoganda.

No doubt they have a direct line to the mouthpiece of the government, the BBC.

I don't disagree but it would seem to be pretty easy to counter.....and what choice do we have other than to make a noise, we've tried the polite route of using the so called justice system?

Big-earning BBC stars set up companies to escape high tax bills | Mail Online

so what kind of legs exactly would they be standing on and who would they get to interview us who isn't in exactly the same type of position i.e. not working as an employee?

Anyone know if all these people are still working through service companies? And anyone know how worried they are about a retrospective change in the law to re-tax them as employees, with interest of course? 1987 to 2012 I make that 25 years working for the same client JH (whom incidentally I really respect and admire) but how is that not within IR35?

Can these guys and girls really not see our position and feel not a bit worried about their own?

Can auntie Beeb afford to piss the whole lot of them off by campaigning against us? Or can they afford to pay them extra to trash talk us when they themselves are in a similar boat - well maybe a couple but I can't believe they would all go for it as investigative journalists.....some of them must have gone into it as a vocation.

Retrospection could affect a lot of people....those people need to be woken up.