Originally posted by centurian
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
BN66 - Court of Appeal and beyond
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
Topic is closed
-
-
Originally posted by OnYourBikeGB View PostNo, we're not arguing that they should give us anything other than the right to fight our case on the same legal basis as everybody else. We could still lose. It is a longshot, but I'd rather go down kicking.
The Government are in a win-win situation at the moment by letting the courts decide this.
1) If HMRC win, they get to (notionally) collect £300M. They've already put in place a Protocol to allay fears that this would set a precedent for further retrospective legislation.
2) If HMRC lose, then the Government can reverse BN66 without any loss of face or negative PR. After all, they did vote against it in opposition, so this wouldn't be a U-turn. And any flak for letting us off would be directed at the Judges.Comment
-
Steed/KPMG's ECtHR application
There's nothing much to report.
It was submitted January 2009. They received an acknowledgement, so it's in the system.
As far as I know, they are challenging BN66 using the same HR argument as us (Huitson).
Given the enormous backlog at ECtHR, it's debatable whether the application would even be considered before our case reaches the Supreme Court.Comment
-
Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View PostThere's nothing much to report.
It was submitted January 2009. They received an acknowledgement, so it's in the system.
As far as I know, they are challenging BN66 using the same HR argument as us (Huitson).
Given the enormous backlog at ECtHR, it's debatable whether the application would even be considered before our case reaches the Supreme Court.Comment
-
letter from MP
Have just received a very comforting and reassuring letter from MP. It reveals none of their ammunition but commits to taking the cases (Huitson & Shiner) to the SC. It also appears to extend the MP commitment potentially into Europe if necessary.
Bravo and thanks.
Comment
-
Originally posted by TAF4 View PostHave just received a very comforting and reassuring letter from MP. It reveals none of their ammunition but commits to taking the cases (Huitson & Shiner) to the SC. It also appears to extend the MP commitment potentially into Europe if necessary.
Bravo and thanks.
Comment
-
Originally posted by TAF4 View PostHave just received a very comforting and reassuring letter from MP. It reveals none of their ammunition but commits to taking the cases (Huitson & Shiner) to the SC. It also appears to extend the MP commitment potentially into Europe if necessary.
Bravo and thanks.
Thanks for updating us with the great news!!Comment
-
Originally posted by smalldog View Postsplendid, hopefully that will calm some of the nerves from last week...good job MP and thanks for keeping up the fight!!
Comment
-
Originally posted by smalldog View PostIS it one of the cases considered by HMRC to be part of the judicial process which stops them collecting?
If the SC was lost then an extension would have to be negotiated with HMRC.
It also depends what happens to Steed's application in the mean time. If it was accepted by Strasbourg then I think HMRC would continue to postpone collection.
If the application is still pending in 18 months time then HMRC might not be so amenable. Although it could be argued that by then the application had been in the system 4 years and a decision would be more imminent.
It may also be possible to petition Strasbourg to try and prevent enforcement.
Remember, HMRC know that enforcing collection could involve asset seizures and bankruptcy. It wouldn't look good if they did this before the court had even heard the case.Comment
-
Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View PostThis my understanding.
First MP have to ask the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal. Don't ask me why because this is nearly always refused.
They have to get this in by tomorrow.
Assuming it is refused, they will then have 30 days to apply to the Supreme Court.
So, we're looking at a deadline of roughly end of August.Comment
Topic is closed
Partners
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment