BN66 - Court of Appeal and beyond

[Emigre]

I for one would be happy to pay the tax outstanding if we could reach an agreement about the interest charged and use of pension provisions.

I would be happy to negotiate with HMRC. However, I'm not prepared to roll over. My negotiations begin and end at NO LIABILITY. Why? Simple. What I did was within the law at the time that I did it and HMRC have not even made an attempt to prove otherwise. They have sought to treat us less favourably than those that evade their tax liabilities, in complete contradiction of their own stated processes. Quite apart from their lies, deceit and cowardice in introducing retrospective legislation cloaked as not being so, they show an extraordinary lack of ethical or moral backbone. They cannot be trusted, should not be trusted and should simply be disbanded for incompetence.

Putting their hand up and admitting they screwed up would be worth far more in PR than the reportedly lost £200m which once ability to pay comes into play would probably only realise 50%.

If you want to nestle down with the devil, get on with it. This case plus that of Gaines-Cooper and the countless failed attempts to stick IR35 on innocent people are clear indicators of a morally bankrupt department sending the biggest possible signal to potential inward investors to go somewhere else.

[sjw]

I would be happy to negotiate with HMRC. However, I'm not prepared to roll over. My negotiations begin and end at NO LIABILITY. Why? Simple. What I did was within the law at the time that I did it and HMRC have not even made an attempt to prove otherwise. They have sought to treat us less favourably than those that evade their tax liabilities, in complete contradiction of their own stated processes. Quite apart from their lies, deceit and cowardice in introducing retrospective legislation cloaked as not being so, they show an extraordinary lack of ethical or moral backbone. They cannot be trusted, should not be trusted and should simply be disbanded for incompetence.

Putting their hand up and admitting they screwed up would be worth far more in PR than the reportedly lost £200m which once ability to pay comes into play would probably only realise 50%.

If you want to nestle down with the devil, get on with it. This case plus that of Gaines-Cooper and the countless failed attempts to stick IR35 on innocent people are clear indicators of a morally bankrupt department sending the biggest possible signal to potential inward investors to go somewhere else.

Emigre - I dont disagree with your sentiments but quite frankly, I've got better things to do with my life.

[BolshieBastard]

You do possibly have other options which are more beneficial in the event of a win. To chuck 50K into a CTD will give you no interest in the event of a win, hence its better to try and put your money somewhere that will give you > 3% return. If you have a mortgage with offset and you are paying more than 3% then your money would be better off in the offset, alternatively if you can get a bank account paying more > 3% then this may also be more beneficial (you need to take tax into consideration on your interest mind!). From both you will get the benefit of compound interest, the mortgage is probably the best option if its open to you.

Im probably one of the lucky ones in that I no longer reside in the UK and hence have offshore savings accounts available to me, these tend to be paying 3.5%+ and hence are looking favourable but I need to be careful not to fall foul of my residency tax laws.

Alternatively you could try your hand on the stock market or just put it all on the 3.30 at Newmarket :-)

Why cant it just be simple!

The cTD is the only guaranteed way to negate interest on the tax 'debt.'

[BolshieBastard]

I'm sure that instead of whinging through an anonimous forum, if you make a complaint through the relevant channels you'll be satisfied that they're doing the best with the information they've got.

LOL! That's really funny seeing as the anonymous comments you have left! Pot, kettle, black

[BolshieBastard]

Probably a question for MP, but I have a discrepancy between what the HMRC gateway is telling me and what the 'Liability Interest Calculator' Excel spreadsheet received from MP is telling me. Can anybody advise which to treat as definitive - the HMRC portal or the MP spreasheet? There's about a 100k difference.

Dont know if this has already been answered but I'd base anything on HMRC's portal. Looks like MP have told me a figure which is short compared to HMRC so my CTD doesnt cover the whole sum. Why am I not surprised seeing as MP havent got a single thing correct so far?

[Leyther70]

Split

I hope someone from MP is taking note of this, there is now quite clearly a split in the views of 'their' clients, I would hazzard a guess its probably close to 50/50 too, hence there is a real need for them to address this ASAP.

I for one would like to know what if any chance there is of doing a deal with HMRC and what this would likely entail. We paid you to be Tax Consultants so please start consulting with us!

We cannot make informed judgements on the best way forward for our own personal circumstances if we are not advised on the options that *may* be available to us.

[Emigre]

Emigre - I dont disagree with your sentiments but quite frankly, I've got better things to do with my life.

The problem is that many people cannot afford to negotiate. The poll at the top of the previous thread showed circa 60% would lose their homes. Of that a good proportion would be bankrupt. Payment for most others would involve serious destruction of their retirement funds.

What most of this comes back to is that there will be an increase in long term reliance on the State for provision than might otherwise have been the case. There are those facing bankruptcy where some work in the banking sector - they would no longer be able to sell their core skills. Banks simply do not employ people with CCJs let alone bankruptcies or repossessions. In addition, I know of one or two accountants who would be unable to ply their trade as accountants following bankruptcy.

Background checks these days necessarily include financial checks to weed out those that might be more tempted by financial impropriety. Bankruptcy increasingly means unemployment.

This isn't overplaying the situation. The poll on the last thread shows the results of 260 odd people and the JCHR reported similar findings. There are approximately 2,500 people impacted by this travesty.

[BolshieBastard]

Thanks DR but since I paid Montpelier over 10K per year for 5 years to manage my tax affairs I find it really hard to understand why I would need to do this.

And in response to not pointing the finger at Montpelier I have two observations to make - firstly I was told on joining the scheme that the numbers of invitations would be limited to 100 for obvious reasons. It turns out that not only was the scheme used by at least 10 times that number, but it was already shining brightly on HMRC's screen at that point in time. Secondly I was told (in black and white - I still have the presentation) that even if the worst came to the worst we would be able to restate our returns on a self employed basis which increased our liability but was still tax efficient. What happened to that avenue?

And don't even get me started about the 4% charge...

Finally - I don't see the Supreme Court as our last chance - I see it as our last bargaining chip. Someone said that HMRC dont care when they collect - well yes, probably true, but I suspect with today's resource and funding limitations they would be more than happy to wind it up and move on. I for one would be happy to pay the tax outstanding if we could reach an agreement about the interest charged and use of pension provisions. After all, they did it for Goldman's bonus scheme, and one of the original arguments levied against us was that we were taking advantage of a tax treatment not open to other UK residents - so surely that argument can be applied in reverse?

I was told by WG in Liverpool 2001, the scheme would be limited to 300 contractors to keep it low profile and they were almost at that total. In other words, the people who attended the same presentation as me were likely to be amongst the last ones admitted to the scheme.

After I left the scheme (MTM \ MP left me high and dry after I had started a contract and told me I'd 'have to find my own solution but MTM \ MP would not work with the agent') I found out nearly a 1000 people were in the scheme!

[moira under the stairs]

I hope someone from MP is taking note of this, there is now quite clearly a split in the views of 'their' clients, I would hazzard a guess its probably close to 50/50 too, hence there is a real need for them to address this ASAP.

I for one would like to know what if any chance there is of doing a deal with HMRC and what this would likely entail. We paid you to be Tax Consultants so please start consulting with us!

We cannot make informed judgements on the best way forward for our own personal circumstances if we are not advised on the options that *may* be available to us.

Peeps, Emotions are still running high for everyone at this moment in time for all concerned, we all knew deep down that this was for the long haul, if you didn't you were a fool. Yes agree that we should receive a full statement and guidance for MP and I'm sure we will get something shortly.

The judgments to date have been carried out by people that work within laws and guidelines that are set out before them, a little like working in IT with people hiding behind policies and procedures, in that instance its the Architects that make the changes for the masses to follow, OUR Architects sit in either the SC or EU they are the Authority that would dare to challenge the ruling and Goverment.

Or have my rose tinted glasses misted ?

[Cantthinkof1]

I hope someone from MP is taking note of this, there is now quite clearly a split in the views of 'their' clients, I would hazzard a guess its probably close to 50/50 too, hence there is a real need for them to address this ASAP.

I for one would like to know what if any chance there is of doing a deal with HMRC and what this would likely entail. We paid you to be Tax Consultants so please start consulting with us!

We cannot make informed judgements on the best way forward for our own personal circumstances if we are not advised on the options that *may* be available to us.

Yep, think it is about 50/50. I would now be up for a deal. Like a lot of people I am just a little weary!! I have just turned 60, so not got as much fight in me as I had 20 years ago.
I note one posting saying that some people just don't have the money to negotiate, and while I can understand that, is it not the case that we could be even worse off financially in a couple of years time or as long as it takes to finally resolve this matter? .....