BN66 - Court of Appeal and beyond

[ir35amnesia]

I don't think so. Alan, to his credit, doesn't have a pop at us in this way, he's more focussed on why we are wrong legally, and of course he's out for revenge on WG.

Thanks. I think the efficacy of the scheme should be tested in Court AND everyone complaining about retro nature of BN66 should lead with this point i.e we only wish to avoid tax if scheme actually worked. Plus i guess that in future there will be no need for retro once GAAR is implemented - which gives Gov opportunity to be flexible on past actions.

[p4nd4b34r]

why is osbourne being such an HMRC puppet

Personally I dont hold out any hope parliament will do anything. They seem very determined NOT to.

I still dont get why a tory chancellor isnt sorting this mess out.. maybe we havent been clear enough until now that all we want is the right to a fair day in court, which S58 denied us. (this is perhaps the fight that should have been fought by MP all along - just my thoughts).

I am also wondering why HMRC havent sent any brown envelopes out yet, this gives me hope they are at least waiting for the outcome of tribunals. Gives me a few more months to make some arrangements... Are there any thoughts on the timescales before tribunals are heard and the attack dogs are released.

[mrkitchen]

ECHR

From what I understand, our case would have been thrown out by Europe if we hadn't exhausted the UK courts process first (which we obviously have now).

I have not received anything as yet from MP, is this going to Europe and if so, is the 3 months up on the 20th May ?

[SantaClaus]

I have not received anything as yet from MP, is this going to Europe and if so, is the 3 months up on the 20th May ?

I think one of the other scheme promoters filed 3 years ago with the ECHR, Steed perhaps?
So our best hope is joining their appeal I would guess.

But maybe someone more knowledgeable could correct me.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

The time limit for applying to Europe is 6 months, not 3.

I understand Steed are asking Strasbourg if Montp can be included in their application.

[TalkingCheese]

What a nice person...

From George Osborne: I'm going after the wealthy tax dodgers - Telegraph

"it_contractor

7 minutes ago

Yes. I attended the sales pitch they ran at the start of the scheme a good few years ago now as an undercover interested party.

I've been following them ever since and have been assisting various parties with the information gathered.

This work has been bearing fruit of late and it's only a matter of time before the parasites are forced to give up their ill gotten gains. "

He encourages others to have a laugh at this thread and those being made bankrupt.

He is also under the illusion that those affected have a few houses and plenty of money to pay. He hears only what he wants to hear and it is unfortunate that we are up against this sort of ignorance. We must educate those that have this opinion and the starting point is your MP.

[OnYourBikeGB]

Hi OYBGB,

I get your point about not being too arrogant, which I am not, and I am sure many others are not. For me I come from the working classes, and found a LEGAL way to be more tax efficient, no crime there.

However, how come for the likes of me, the lower classes, it is seen as unacceptable, but for the top notch or the elite, it is seen as being perfectly LEGAL?

I would like to think that even in these days, most people would support the underdog, in this case I talk about myself.

Hi Alba

I've taken some soundings from friends and colleagues recently. The overwhelming feeling I have got is that if we put this before the public and are seen to be demanding a right to avoid tax, we will simply turn everyone against us. That was my main concern. My feeling is that we don't want the focus to be on us, we want it to be on HMRC (hell, everyone dislikes them already) and the Government. If we play this wrong, we will make them seem like defenders of the public purse, as opposed to being two-faced hypocrites.

We are quite insular here, and we reinforce our own beliefs a lot. But our views are not nessarily the same as Joe Public, I just think we should proceed with caution and place the focus on the double standards. Anyone out there with a professional marketers view?

[moira under the stairs]

From George Osborne: I'm going after the wealthy tax dodgers - Telegraph

"it_contractor

7 minutes ago

Yes. I attended the sales pitch they ran at the start of the scheme a good few years ago now as an undercover interested party.

I've been following them ever since and have been assisting various parties with the information gathered.

This work has been bearing fruit of late and it's only a matter of time before the parasites are forced to give up their ill gotten gains. "

He encourages others to have a laugh at this thread and those being made bankrupt.

He is also under the illusion that those affected have a few houses and plenty of money to pay. He hears only what he wants to hear and it is unfortunate that we are up against this sort of ignorance. We must educate those that have this opinion and the starting point is your MP.

TC .. I wouldn't take too much notice of someone like IT_Contractor, he has written enough himself to indicate that an alternative agenda is afoot, the intelligent will read between the lines. Do what you would with an irritating bug... brush it aside and ignore !!!

[helen7]

TC .. I wouldn't take too much notice of someone like IT_Contractor, he has written enough himself to indicate that an alternative agenda is afoot, the intelligent will read between the lines. Do what you would with an irritating bug... brush it aside and ignore !!!

You can bet your last time that he works for the PCG (The leeches who make plenty of money out of IR35 and have nightmare's about it ever being scraped)

[Emigre]

Hi Alba

I've taken some soundings from friends and colleagues recently. The overwhelming feeling I have got is that if we put this before the public and are seen to be demanding a right to avoid tax, we will simply turn everyone against us. That was my main concern. My feeling is that we don't want the focus to be on us, we want it to be on HMRC (hell, everyone dislikes them already) and the Government. If we play this wrong, we will make them seem like defenders of the public purse, as opposed to being two-faced hypocrites.

We are quite insular here, and we reinforce our own beliefs a lot. But our views are not nessarily the same as Joe Public, I just think we should proceed with caution and place the focus on the double standards. Anyone out there with a professional marketers view?

You are right of course with your views. However, we are not asking the Government to let us off the tax demanded under s58; we are suggesting that we have at all times behaved within the law and would like the position pre-BN66 to be reinstated so that our belief that what we did was legal can be proven or otherwise.

In the event we lose in the proper court, the tax court, then those that can pay will have to pay. Those that can't will need to come to some arrangement with HMRC. That may be bankruptcy, or it it may be some sort of charge over your property.

Of course we believe that what we did at the time we did it was legal. If we didn't I suspect that this thread would have packed up a long time ago. By making s58 FA2008 retrospective I suspect that a large number of us, who have never broken a law in our lives (other than a bit of speeding), feel we have been criminalised. All I want is the opportunity to demonstrate on public record that I complied with all laws as they were stated. HMRC and S58 FA2008 has made me feel like I have broken the law; my friends and family, who do not understand all the technicalities and cannot believe that the UK Government would do what they have done, therefore struggle to believe me.