BN66 - Court of Appeal and beyond

[centurian]

So will they base interest charges on the difference from when they re-issue the CN - or from 2008.

Think I probably know the answer.

[Toocan]

Just heard from MP that HMRC are reissuing some of the 2007/8 CNs because they cocked them up the first time round. Apparently they forgot to include Class 4 NICs.

If you get a revised CN for a larger amount you know why.

And by the way, don't expect an apology or anything.

Are they allowed to do that? They knew the position when the issued the CLOSURE notice.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Are they allowed to do that? They knew the position when the issued the CLOSURE notice.

This is not the first time. They issued CNs to the 4 test cases back in 2006 citing a load of tosh as to why they believed tax was due.

A couple of months ago they reissued these CNs this time citing the retrospective legislation.

They've also issued enquiry notices outside the 12 month enquiry window. And they've issued CNs to people who received no prior enquiry.

They obviously think they can do as they please.

[smalldog]

This is not the first time. They issued CNs to the 4 test cases back in 2006 citing a load of tosh as to why they believed tax was due.

A couple of months ago they reissued these CNs this time citing the retrospective legislation.

They've also issued enquiry notices outside the 12 month enquiry window. And they've issued CNs to people who received no prior enquiry.

They obviously think they can do as they please.

yep and as ive said many times before they need someone to keep them in check. they are a law unto themselves.

[SantaClaus]

yep and as ive said many times before they need someone to keep them in check. they are a law unto themselves.

That's like asking Don Corleone to come up with a citizens charter.

[bombaycat]

That's like asking Don Corleone to come up with a citizens charter.

but presumably the more mistakes they make and rules and checks they contravene the better for any potential case at tribunal, so don't look a gift horse in the proverbial....

[DonkeyRhubarb]

No deals for Montpelier customers

A number of people have recently suggested trying to negotiate a settlement with HMRC.

Well, someone took the initiative and employed a leading firm of tax specialists to explore this option.

The answer from HMRC could not be clearer.

I put it to him that we would want to settle the tax, I suggested
that perhaps as a concession he would allow us not to pay interest and
he was just not interested whatsoever. In fairness to him he said
there were no concessions available even though I discussed that
perhaps a group of people, say 200, had this money and wanted to
settle a substantial amount for the Treasury, but <name removed> was quite
emphatic when he said there were no deals on the table for Montpelier
customers.

[reckless]

No deals

How times change. Back in 2002 during an MTM roadshow I asked about what would happen if the scheme was found not to work. The reply I got at the time was 'well, if all else fails, we always negotiate in the final instance.' I suppose this just shows agressive the Inland Revenue have become over the intervening years since their merger with the Customs and Excise rotweilers!

At least everyone now knows that there is no point in either attempting appeasement or throwing in the towel. We might as well go down fighting (or hopefully not go down at all).

[DonkeyRhubarb]

At least everyone now knows that there is no point in either attempting appeasement or throwing in the towel. We might as well go down fighting (or hopefully not go down at all).

Yes, and all the whingers should be bloody grateful to the person who actually got off their arse and tried because it cost them a lot of money to find out.

[Cantthinkof1]

Confused !!

Bugger, I thought it was 2.5% not 3%

Don't have an offset so can't quite keep up with that

DR - send you a PM about whether this is 2.5% or 3% ...