BN66 - Court of Appeal and beyond

[SantaClaus]

What if they don't ?
I'm still not sure that the press is the right avenue at the moment. Thoughts anyone ?

I wouldn't have agreed in the past, but I do now.
Unless it's about cold cheese pasties, you are unlikely to get the public's sympathy.

Meeting your MP face to face as the Donkey has suggested is the best way forward.
Even if your MP is a prize twunt, go and see them and tell them why!

[wertert]

Hi All.

I must be thick but I have alot of trouble getting my head round all the various arguments on the table about BN66. ( retrospection aside!) I've tried drafting a letter to my MP a few times and ended up binning it !

This is him BTW - http://www.parliament.uk/biographies...rees-mogg/4099

Would anyone be willing to give me a list of points that should be included in my letter to my MP ? I just want to make sure that I give a fair argument and not come across like a desperate/ bitter nut case. Please PM me if you would prefer.

I also have a few mates who are not intending to write. They are very much in the -whats-the-point-it'll-make-no-difference camp. ( lazy ). I'm intending to hassle them into writing and this will be alot easier with something to 'guide' them.

Thanks in advance.

[TalkingCheese]

Keep hassling !

...I also have a few mates who are not intending to write. They are very much in the -whats-the-point-it'll-make-no-difference camp. ( lazy ). I'm intending to hassle them into writing and this will be alot easier with something to 'guide' them...

Every letter could make a difference. It is so easy to let MPs know what is going on and get a meeting.

[TAF4]

One of the subtleties of the point we are making came to the fore over the weekend when discussing our predicament with a close friend.

He assumed that I had avoided ALL taxation by the use of a 'clever' scheme. When I pointed out that during the period that the scheme had been in operation, 2001 to 2008, I had paid around 250k and Hector was demanding another six figures on top - the jaw dropped.

Even so his opinion swung between shock/horror that backdated tax liability could be legally enforced, and the view that I was a smart-arse that had it coming.

[Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing]

Interestingly enough neither am I!

The first thing the journo said was "Can I be blunt? There are alot of hard working families suffering and you are not paying your fair share." To which I pointed out that we were 100% behind the government in closing loopholes and it was the retrospective element that was the issue. He seemed to get that.

Sometimes things just feel right and you have to go with the flow! If I fook this up then you can all blame me.

Interestingly enough I agree 100% with Ganimos. Thing is it it almost impossible for most of you to grasp what they are trying to say - and I think this is the wrong thread for it. I met someone once who told me they had enough evidence to bring down the government and were kidnapped and placed in front of 3 doctors and sectioned. They then had to sign a retraction to be unsectioned. Not many people seem to realize that we are not living in a democracy.

Perhaps in these dark places, dark things happen. But that is not the place we're in, want to go or take anyone there. This is about drawing a tax legislation fault to the attention of those who can apply due process and address the issue. It's not Watergate or even Taxgate. It's about a piece of poorly thought through legislation that is no continuum of the law it draws upon. If someone in HMRC made an error then that is not Taxgate that is what happens. The fact is that the result of such an error or weak drafting will destroy many people. You don't need to be sectioned here. You just need to let the legislation stand. And there's no retraction option here.

If the normal process had been followed, we'd have had our day in court as the law stood and if we lost then so be it. That is fairness. Nobody even suggests that closing the loophole prospectively was wrong.

But to say that BN66 can be argued as the "Son of Padmore" is piffle. At best it's the illegitimate outcast of some swingers do. And yes, democracy may be a naiive word but it's all we have. Nothing is being brought down, except the curtain on this whole sorry affair with the same 100% transparency to argue our case as was used to lay claim to the tax relief that brought us here.

And if we want extremes of scenario then forget any of this. On December 21 this year the Mayan calendar ends and with it any further need to submit SAR's, invest in pensions or wear open toed sandles and worry about a polar bear that fell of a bit of ice once and all whilst twiddling your beard...

[TalkingCheese]

One of the subtleties of the point we are making came to the fore over the weekend when discussing our predicament with a close friend.

He assumed that I had avoided ALL taxation by the use of a 'clever' scheme. When I pointed out that during the period that the scheme had been in operation, 2001 to 2008, I had paid around 250k and Hector was demanding another six figures on top - the jaw dropped.

Even so his opinion swung between shock/horror that backdated tax liability could be legally enforced, and the view that I was a smart-arse that had it coming.

Something that bugs me is that the Court of Appeal said:

"...the liability of the claimant under the retrospective legislation of s.58 to pay the UK income tax that he would have had to pay, if he had not participated in the tax avoidance scheme, is no more an unjustified interference with his enjoyment of his possessions than the ordinary liability that his fellow residents in the UK are under to contribute..."

If you add on the tax that we did pay, plus fees to Montpelier, plus retro interest it is a great deal more than "...the ordinary liability that his fellow residents in the UK are under to contribute..."

[Ganimos]

Perhaps in these dark places, dark things happen..........

O k. Lets not go into those dark places, now we know about them. Lets get on with the job in hand. Not much time left before 21st December.

[Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing]

Something that bugs me is that the Court of Appeal said:

"...the liability of the claimant under the retrospective legislation of s.58 to pay the UK income tax that he would have had to pay, if he had not participated in the tax avoidance scheme, is no more an unjustified interference with his enjoyment of his possessions than the ordinary liability that his fellow residents in the UK are under to contribute..."

If you add on the tax that we did pay, plus fees to Montpelier, plus retro interest it is a great deal more than "...the ordinary liability that his fellow residents in the UK are under to contribute..."

It's a fair point as is the consideration of this:

"The legislation achieves a fair balance between the interests of the general body of taxpayers and the right of the claimant to enjoyment of his possessions, without imposing an unreasonable economic burden on him."

Well, it's a damn site more unreasonable than those who were offered the amnesty on tax evasion.

BTW, I have also wondered about the court comments about HMRC asking us to pay on account or 'put money aside'. Maybe we should have a poll on that. I never got such savvy financial advice from them.

Anyways, that was then, this is now. As a couple of mullered lads from Manc once said, "don't look back in anger...".

[silver_lining]

There is a much bigger purpose to writing to and meeting your MP.

Something is coming but I can't say what it is at the moment so please don't ask.

Watch this space...

I have continually been watching this space since 9.26.... and no update....

1. When will the space be updated?
2. Can I blink now.....?

This better be good as I am terribly excited

[Dieselpower]

MP responses

Chaps: for those of you who have seen your MPs and given feedback thank you - the feedback is vital for obvious reasons. For those of you that have not yet seen your MP's please please please do so - it really matters a very great deal. There are only a few hundred MP's - yet there are 3000 victims. We really need to get to every single MP. So please dont rest on your laurels and think "let someone else do it".
Its making a big difference already.
Thanks
DP