BN66 - Court of Appeal and beyond

[Dulakipper]

The future is Grey

We could do with one of those UK electoral boundary maps that change colour in line with their particular political persuasion as the ballots come in on election night

Those areas sympathetic to our plight could turn a beautiful Donkey Grey (or brown, I'm colour blind!)

I bet DR already has one (continually updated by nubile young women a la James Bond) in his nerve centre HQ

[Morlock]

Hollow-bone? Is that a similar condition to spineless-ness?

QUOTE from SleepingFireman;1528980

Another cut and paste load of bollox from Gauke via my MP Phillip Hollobone.
[ditto, rx yesterday]

A shame my MP felt no need to comment on Gaukes response other than enclosing a compliments slip!
[ditto]

So HMRC always told us the scheme didn't work. Therefore if the scheme was fully disclosed from 2000 onwards how come I only got a letter in July07 making enquires into my 05-06 tax return.
[ditto, more or less]
...
I'll be responding to my MP highlighting the above.
[don't know if I could be ar**ed given his complete apathy so far...]

[TalkingCheese]

I'll be responding to my MP highlighting the above.
[don't know if I could be ar**ed given his complete apathy so far...]

I am getting a very apathetic response from my MP at the moment since my first meeting, but I want to know if he agrees with the legislation or not. If so I want to meet him to discuss next steps. If not, I would like to meet and answer his questions and perhaps address his reasons for agreeing with the legislation. It's gotta be worth persuing.

[nevergiveup]

QUOTE from SleepingFireman;1528980

Another cut and paste load of bollox from Gauke via my MP Phillip Hollobone.
[ditto, rx yesterday]

A shame my MP felt no need to comment on Gaukes response other than enclosing a compliments slip!
[ditto]

So HMRC always told us the scheme didn't work. Therefore if the scheme was fully disclosed from 2000 onwards how come I only got a letter in July07 making enquires into my 05-06 tax return.
[ditto, more or less]
...
I'll be responding to my MP highlighting the above.
[don't know if I could be ar**ed given his complete apathy so far...]

Have you had a face to face with him yet?

[BarneyCool]

I am getting a very apathetic response from my MP at the moment since my first meeting, but I want to know if he agrees with the legislation or not. If so I want to meet him to discuss next steps. If not, I would like to meet and answer his questions and perhaps address his reasons for agreeing with the legislation. It's gotta be worth persuing.

Someone needs to go and see Gauke face to face. If anyone has him as their MP I'd be very interested to know exactly what he says and exactly how he explains his Bi-polar stance to wrecking peoples lives.

[PlaneSailing]

Some Good News

At last, someone is listening:

MPs slam government over Budget retrospective tax - FTAdviser.com

The Treasury Committee Report is here (page 38)

http://www.parliament.uk/business/co...-publication-/

[Buzby]

treasury committee

At last, someone is listening:

MPs slam government over Budget retrospective tax - FTAdviser.com

The Treasury Committee Report is here (page 38)

Treasury Committee publishes report into 2012 Budget - News from Parliament - UK Parliament

does this sound familiar:

It is possibly a solution for some lazy drafting of legislation, because you could in extremis get to the stage of, "Well, it doesn't really matter what the legislation is, because we can always correct it later, and correct it retrospectively.

So in 1987 legislation was passed with known holes, then 2008 'correct' it.

[zippo]

At last, someone is listening:

MPs slam government over Budget retrospective tax - FTAdviser.com

The Treasury Committee Report is here (page 38)

Treasury Committee publishes report into 2012 Budget - News from Parliament - UK Parliament

Quote from the above:

Retrospective taxation
We recommend that the Government clarify what retrospection is proposed with regard to stamp duty.

We recommend that the Government restrict its use of retrospective legislation to wholly exceptional circumstances, which should be narrow and clearly-defined.

The Treasury should set these out as soon as possible for consultation.

"Retrospective tax legislation conflicts with the principles of tax policy recommended by this Committee and with those laid down by the Chancellor.

We therefore have serious reservations about retrospection in the tax system."

[Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing]

Wholly Exceptional Circumstances

So the TSC states the above as a case for application of retrospection and use the word extreme also. Well, looks like they got this with BN66 then.

I'd agree that misleading Parliament is wholly exceptional and extreme to say the least.

BTW, the post that referred to defects and loopholes in the 1987 legislation was not wrong. In fact Norman Lamont confirmed to the Committee in 1987 that such was "not the Committee's main concern". True, true. The main concern was as we know the issue of "admittedly a restricted class of person - 15,000 partners in foreign partnerships" to quote him. And that is what the 1987 legislation did and exactly what it said on the tin and nothing more. Heck, even the HMRC witness testimony for the JR confirms that 1987 made no mention of 'member of a firm', you know, the bit now used to try and make tax demands stick. Of course 1987 made no mention of it (explicitly or implied as the witness statement says). Why? Because of the quoted comments above. There is nothing to imply implicitly, explicitly, retrospectively or in a wet dream about 'members of a firm' meaning us. It never was, was never intended and would never have been without the 'clarification' on BN66.

Oddly, this should have been part of the JR case for us IMO. After all, whilst A1P1 affords the state a wide margin of appreciation on state taxing matters, I doubt anything can be that wide as to allow a wholly artificial untruth to be use dto justify retrospective taxation.

Might need to ask DG how he thinks his boilerplate letter explains that one (or whoever wrote it for him).

[stuffed]

Will this effect us and our ECHR application

Council of Europe set to endorse UK-led reforms of human rights court | Law | guardian.co.uk