BN66 - Court of Appeal and beyond

[swede]

It's ok, he moved in way before he became a tax *dodger*.

I would say careful what you wish for. It would be very easy for a journalist to twist that around - something like "ALthough HMRC have bodged their dealings with Vodafone and Golides, they don't always screw things up. Look how dilligently they have been at chasing down this bunch of evil tax dodgers. Bravo to them - and more of the same please".

In the current "hang a tax dodger" climate, what do you think would sell more newspapers.

At the very least, be careful who you target it to.

I very much agree.

I *currently* live in a nice house that I bought way before I was involved with anything to do with any scheme - I don't think a picture of it appearing in the press, accompanied by a suitable tax-dodger-lives-here-but-will-have-to-sell headline would attract much sympathy.

Time and effort might be better spent lobbying MPs.

Clearly I'll be living in a cardboard box soon anyway, but you get my point.

[SantaClaus]

I very much agree.

I *currently* live in a nice house that I bought way before I was involved with anything to do with any scheme - I don't think a picture of it appearing in the press, accompanied by a suitable tax-dodger-lives-here-but-will-have-to-sell headline would attract much sympathy.

Time and effort might be better spent lobbying MPs.

Clearly I'll be living in a cardboard box soon anyway, but you get my point.

Maybe we should start a cardboard box city outside Westminster. That might get some attention

[Disgusted of Coventry]

It would be very easy for a journalist to twist that around - something like "ALthough HMRC have bodged their dealings with Vodafone and Golides, they don't always screw things up. Look how dilligently they have been at chasing down this bunch of evil tax dodgers. Bravo to them - and more of the same please".

You think so? Journalists deal with extremes, don't they?

It's not so much about what's happening now (although, heaven knows, that's bad enough), it's about what's likely to happen next.

The State, and particularly HMRC, are in the process of being handed an UNBELIEVABLE amount of power to retrospectively 'deprive persons of the peaceful enjoyment of their possessions'. And they're using this power to clobber the little guy, not Vodafone etc.

[seadog]

Argument in the Tax Tribunal

MP's argument is that the prior to BN66 the scheme worked. All the evidence including comments in the JR & CoA suggests that was the likeley outcome in the tax courts.

That of course is why HMRC pulled the 4 test cases and then got S58 passed.

It has already been confirmed that before HMRC can collect some test appeals must go through the tax tribunal.

All that MP want to do is to have the scheme tested under the pre S58 legislation. As I understand it one HMRC have issued closure notices thy must say on what grounds they have issued teh closure notice.

There are some closure notices which have been issued prior to S58 and if these are used by MP to go to the appeals procedure I cannot see how HMRC can use the S58 argument.

That of course it is why HMRC re-issued the 4 test cases post S58.

MP must ensure they take some pre BN66 appeals to the tribunal

[screwthis]

Still waiting for my brown envelope.

I haven't been this excited since I was a kid waiting for my Dennis the Mennace Fan Club membership to arrive.

[nevergiveup]

Maybe we should start a cardboard box city outside Westminster. That might get some attention

Sounds a good idea but can we wait till Spring though as it's a bit warmer!

[screwthis]

MP's argument is that the prior to BN66 the scheme worked. All the evidence including comments in the JR & CoA suggests that was the likeley outcome in the tax courts.

That of course is why HMRC pulled the 4 test cases and then got S58 passed.

It has already been confirmed that before HMRC can collect some test appeals must go through the tax tribunal.

All that MP want to do is to have the scheme tested under the pre S58 legislation. As I understand it one HMRC have issued closure notices thy must say on what grounds they have issued teh closure notice.

There are some closure notices which have been issued prior to S58 and if these are used by MP to go to the appeals procedure I cannot see how HMRC can use the S58 argument.

That of course it is why HMRC re-issued the 4 test cases post S58.

MP must ensure they take some pre BN66 appeals to the tribunal

But would a positive ruling in that case be helpful to those who received closure notices after the legislation?

I received all my enquiries before but CNs only came after what I did magically became illegal.
I assume this is the same for most people.

In general does anyone know if there are any fair and equitable treatment laws when it comes to tax? I.e. If certain scheme users manage to get CNs dropped due to reasons/technicalities specific to them (for example as above), is there an argument to be had that all should receive the same fair and equal treatment?

[Doug1965]

...In general does anyone know if there are any fair and equitable treatment laws when it comes to tax?...

It tax rules were fair and equitable we wouldn't be in this situation

[PlaneSailing]

But would a positive ruling in that case be helpful to those who received closure notices after the legislation?

I received all my enquiries before but CNs only came after what I did magically became illegal.
I assume this is the same for most people.

In general does anyone know if there are any fair and equitable treatment laws when it comes to tax? I.e. If certain scheme users manage to get CNs dropped due to reasons/technicalities specific to them (for example as above), is there an argument to be had that all should receive the same fair and equal treatment?

Last time, HMRC asked if we would abide by the decision of the test cases.

[BrilloPad]

Maybe we should start a cardboard box city outside Westminster. That might get some attention

Some might not get a choice before too long.

I f**king hate waiting! I just wish MP would tell us when a letter will be out.....