BN66 - Court of Appeal and beyond

[Ganimos]

I feel optimism too - but we've been here before havent we...
Lets face it the chancllor seems determined to do nothing and has already drawn a distinction between us and Vodafane.. i.e. Vodafone won in the courts...we lost in the courts, (completely ignoring the fact that that wasnt the right court,and that we have consistently been denied our real day in court). Thats all we want isnt it, to have our returns tested in tax courts according to the law as it stood. I just dont want to get too excited and have my hopes dashed... again

The other distinction between Vodafone and us is. Vodafone :- Bankruptcies 0 Us:- maybe 1000/1200 ?
Fodafone Children affected 0 Us:- maybe 7000

That's the message we need to get across.

[nolongerlurker]

Is it me or is it them?

The other distinction between Vodafone and us is. Vodafone :- Bankruptcies 0 Us:- maybe 1000/1200 ?
Fodafone Children affected 0 Us:- maybe 7000

That's the message we need to get across.


If Hector is trying to 'stick-it' to MontP (as previously suggested) then we are obviously being treated as cannon fodder, and caught in the crossfire!

A bit of clarity by Hector would help - is it MontP or 3000 small guys or both that they want to crucify (critical timing considering which weekend it is).

[nick4notax]

I feel optimism too - but we've been here before havent we...
Lets face it the chancllor seems determined to do nothing and has already drawn a distinction between us and Vodafane.. i.e. Vodafone won in the courts...we lost in the courts, (completely ignoring the fact that that wasnt the right court,and that we have consistently been denied our real day in court). Thats all we want isnt it, to have our returns tested in tax courts according to the law as it stood. I just dont want to get too excited and have my hopes dashed... again

Another question could be: how did Voda win and what point was their case fought on? I'm sure that could be of use to our cause.

Also, I sill little point in analysing HMRC's motives; whether it's against us, MP or both has become irrelevant, the line has already been drawn!

The optimist in me also likes to look towards victory and ponder what we can inflict on those b@stards who helped think this nightmare up. Given our claimed injustices, there must be some comeback to those fockers, aside from financial compensation to us......

Happy Easter all, even (slightly begrudgingly) to Hector's folk!

[Disgusted of Coventry]

CBI is signatory to letter to India PM.

UK did an India in 2008 to levy retro tax - The Times of India

This isnt looking too good for Mr Osborne. Gideon - either stop supporting Vodafone (and then carry on sending us letters via HMRC saying "you were warned, nothing we can do, sorry, now p**s off) or carry on supporting them and support us as well. You are currently "two timing."

Suddenly BN66 is getting international attention. Perfect timing for us, it really is.

I urge everyone to raise this particular matter with their MP's asap. This is extremely serious.

This is a letter from seven International Trade Groups to the Indian Prime Minister, objecting to India's use of retrospective law.

http://graphics.thomsonreuters.com/B...tionLetter.PDF

Interestingly, one of the signatories is our very own CBI.

Does the CBI have a stated position on s58 FA2008?

[SantaClaus]

This is a letter from seven International Trade Groups to the Indian Prime Minister, objecting to India's use of retrospective law.

http://graphics.thomsonreuters.com/B...tionLetter.PDF

Interestingly, one of the signatories is our very own CBI.

Does the CBI have a stated position on s58 FA2008?

We should definitely be questioning the CBI and other bodies for their stance on S58.

[Shropshire Lad]

MP letter

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...

Letter posted today 07/04/2012
MP Daniel Kawczynski
Shrewsbury and Atcham
Conservative
From earlier correspondence he seemed supportive of our case in terms of retrospection and a 'reliable' tax system but used the 'state of the public finances' as an excuse for apathy. I've used all the arguments from recent posts and thanks to DR for reviewing. I'll see what he comes back with and am continuing to ponder whether seeing him would help or harm our cause

[SantaClaus]

Let's go viral...

... and draw attention to our plight in any tax story that hits the wires, even if it is irrelevant to Section 58. Let's become a thorn in the governments side and aim to be no.1 in any search engine results for "UK" and "tax".

As an example, here's an article in today's telegraph:

Osborne 'very happy' for government to consider publishing MPs personal tax returns - Telegraph

And a comment I made:

Mr Osborne needs to examine his hypocrisy on tax.

On the one hand, he writes to the Prime Minister of India to demand they do not retrospectively tax Vodafone.

On the other hand he completely ignores that his own country had introduced retrospective tax in the form of Section 58 of the 2008 Finance Act. This was sneaked through parliament by HMRC and Stephen Timms who misled MPs by calling the measure a "clarification".

Unlike Vodafone, the UK's retrospective tax is soon to bankrupt 1000's of hardworking families.

And so we have born the new phrase, from India, "Clarificatory Retrospective Amendment".

A phrase worth taking note of by any company who are thinking of doing business in the UK.

[wertert]

Letter from Montp today.

Hi All

Sorry if this is old news. I had a letter from montp this am. i'm working anyway hence the post.

It makes 2 points with reference to payments on account following the refusal of the SC for permission to appeal.

Not sure how much detail I should post on a public forum !? Good idea !?

Thanks

Jeff

[javadude]

Some people had trouble downloading the previous one.

If you've written to or met your MP please fill this in and email it to me.

MP feedback form

Thanks
DR

donkeyrhubarb AT rocketmail.com

Received reply from Alok Sharma, MP for Reading West, today. He's written to George Osborne to ask if the government would consider amending section 58 in line with the Rees Rules.

I've emailed DR with the dates etc as requested

[SantaClaus]

Going viral

Whilst reading the latest Telegraph article about George Osborn and tax, I had an idea.

If we commented about Section 58 in the comments section of every news article regarding Osborn/UK/Cameron and tax (regardless of how relevant), the subject would soon start appearing at the top of Google searches.

Can you imagine the embarrassment every time anyone from government or business searched for UK and tax, and was hit by our story?

What we want to be is a thorn in the government's side that never goes away. One way we can do this is by dominating search engine results.

So... your homework for this weekend, should you choose to accept it is to comment on Section 58 of the 2008 Finance Act in the comments section of as many tax newspaper articles as possible:

Here's a list of articles to start you off:

http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2012/04/02/osborne-backs-vodafone-on-india-tax/#axzz1rMAWemoE


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...han-Singh.html

Osborne 'very happy' for government to consider publishing MPs personal tax returns - Telegraph

BBC News - George Osborne 'happy' to reveal politicians' tax data

George Osborne: Tax Returns Of Ministers May Be Published, Says Chancellor | Politics | Sky News

Osborne says leading politicians could be forced to publish tax returns after Boris and Ken revealed their finances | Mail Online

George Osborne's Budget blunder could allow firms to avoid £5billion in tax - Mirror Online

Action on tax avoidance ‘likely to backfire’ - FT.com

U.K.'s Osborne Raises Tax Issue With India - WSJ.com

UK, India Hold Economic And Financial Dialogue