BN66 - Court of Appeal and beyond

[Guttersnipe]

Some people who were in the scheme for a short time wont have big exposure so can reluctantly pay what they owe. The fact there are not 3000 contractors contributing to this thread is a tacit indicator to this imo.

My first post is going to be quite a contrary one, so apologies in advance for that.

Not much of my work went via the scheme and my exposure to this is in five rather than six figures... but I can't afford it and will quite possibly have to sell my house and uproot my family (not many houses round here and none that I can afford after this so we'd be looking at new schools, etc.).
I follow the board but don't post partly because it would be unpopular at work and partly because the posters here are already speaking my mind for me. Please don't think that the community of posters on here is the limit to the community of those who are taking action... I've contacted Newsnight and am lobbying my local MP. I would encourage every person affected to do so - if 20 MPs contact Mr Gauke for clarification rather than 2 then there's more chance of something happening.

Deeply appreciate all that is said and done on here.

[SantaClaus]

I know people who were in the scheme, who dont know about this thread and depend on MP for information.

Some people who were in the scheme for a short time wont have big exposure so can reluctantly pay what they owe. The fact there are not 3000 contractors contributing to this thread is a tacit indicator to this imo.

I wasnt going to bother writing a letter to my M.P. until I thought what the heck. I can afford to pay but the retrospective interest is just so wrong it made me think again.

You could be right Bolshie, that maybe some don't have much exposure and will just roll over and take it. Would have thought though that anyone even doing a cursory Google search for BN66 would have been directed to this forum.

As for me, my exposure is large, but I consider even disputing parking tickets as a sport

[portseven]

Letter sent to local MP, he didn't even respond to my last one, but made it a bit more personal this time, maybe he will take notice.

Tempted to put something in local paper around Tories being two faced and comparing the Barclay's deal with ours, both wrong, but they came down harder on us (the small guys)

[gooner]

Not really - retrospection is a time machine - all bets are off when this happens.

The current DTA scheme was either new or it was a modificaiton of the Padmore scheme. When the Padmore scheme was closed retrospective legislation was used but it was used in a way that meant that no one paid any more tax. The retrospection simply prevented people who had not made a claim from then making one.

It is HMRC who are at fault here - they have misrepresented the Padmore legislation (which they did not even mention to us prior to section 58) to Parliament in order to get section 58 enacted. That complaint can only be made to your Member of Parliament.

If you haven't written already, get your quill out. If you have, write again to David Gauke, George Osbourn, David Cameron, Nick Clegg, and to the Treasury Select Committee who are holding an enquiry into retrospective legislation.

We'll probably all have HMRCs next tax demand by the end of the month - this is five minutes to midnight.

I'm not disagreeing with you ... just that if the NICs were dropped ( and MP must have had method behind the madness in stating they wouldn't be payable if all went belly up ) it would be a considerably less amount of money that I havent got that I'll need to find from somewhere.

.. desparation is obviously kicking in :-|

[Disgusted of Coventry]

I can't understand people who won't write a letter or send an email.

I can undertand it perfectly. It's called paralysis of will, and it's brought about by unbearable anxiety about something beyond your control.

For anyone who wants to write a letter/email but doesn't feel able, here is the best advice so far...

Make it personal. If you are facing bankruptcy and/or losing your home, say so.

Put it in your own words. And forget the detail. Keep it short and to the point.

You don't have to write an intellectual treatise - you're trying to appeal to the humanity and decency in people. And there are MPs out there who possess those qualities.

If you simply cannot bring yourself to write a letter or an email, then ask a relative or a friend to do it for you. There's no shame in that - the shame lies with HMRC & Co. You've done NOTHING WRONG.

Above all, don't be fooled by the hideous value-system that HMRC projects. They don't represent the civilised world. They don't understand mature, adult methods of conflict resolution. They have zero morality (despite their best efforts to claim otherwise).

This is about ordinary people exercising their right to tell Parliament about the awful, personal consequences of injustice.

[not-a-penny]

Keep it up ...

In light of the Barclays crackdown, the Treasury Committee is going to be looking at the issue of retrospective tax.

Why not drop them an email about Section 58 Finance Act 2008.

Make it personal. If you are facing bankruptcy and/or losing your home, say so.

Point out that HMRC are demanding 7 year's retrospective interest as well as tax.

treascom AT parliament.uk

Done! Lurkers of the world, UNITE.

[bananarepublic]

Mr Fallon

My MP is Mr Fallon who is an influential member of the Treasury Committee. I've previously been in touch with him regarding S58 but I've rehashed some of our arguments in my new letter. More pertinently I have asked him to clarify with HMRC what is happening with the payment demands as this explicitly appears to breach an undertaking HMRC made in open court.

BTW, if you have money locked away in a notice account, check you can withdraw it easily. I've got a notice account with Investec and they will not return the money early, with or without penalty under almost any circumstance - certainly not a tax bill.

[WavesAtPlay]

Clutching at straws

This may be a last resort but I highly recommend everyone read the information in the link below relating to "legal fictions" and the illusion of the "strawman".

Law & Order

A Statute is a rule created by a representative governing body of a society designed to create common goals, which carries the force of law by the consent of the governed. This means that a Statute only applies to you if you give your consent to it.

I have not seen this but apparently there is a good video Meet Your Strawman! - YouTube which explains the fiction of the strawman legal document.

[bananarepublic]

I'm not disagreeing with you ... just that if the NICs were dropped ( and MP must have had method behind the madness in stating they wouldn't be payable if all went belly up ) it would be a considerably less amount of money that I havent got that I'll need to find from somewhere.

.. desparation is obviously kicking in :-|

I've no idea what it is, but apparently there is an argument against the levy of NI on the trust income. Prior to receipt of closure notices and S58, HMRC provided me with a "statement" of the interest I owed, but never mentioned NI. But hey presto they chucked it on post S58 - they really want to stiff us.

Anyway, we could appeal the NI aspect - might enable us to defer payment on it for a while - long enough to scrape the cash together - would help me out.

[Sad Old Fella]

One Law for Bankers and another for tax avoiders

You may all be interested in the following link re retrospective legislation to be considered by parliamentary committe before budget -

http://ww w.accountingweb.co.uk/article/mps-investigate-retrospective-tax/525074

Probably worth holding a watching brief to see what happens there in case it could be used as a wedge for a more lenient treatment than is expected for the Montpelier avoidance users.