Originally posted by smalldog
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
-
-
Around 1500 people used the MP scheme 2001 - 2008.
It's possible some have quietly settled with HMRC but they may still be on the mailing list.
MP are fully aware that once they release info to us it could end up anywhere.Comment
-
Originally posted by SantaClaus View PostOr maybe we are just sending Hector on a goose chase
It's like a Donald Rumsfeld moment. They know, we know, they know we know....
None of this is new, it's just not chrystallised. Anyways, the TC requires a written submission from both parties well in advance so MP and HMRC will know the grounds well before we get to court.
It's been around for a while now that BN66 is no more a clarification of Padmore than Man City is the same team as Man Utd. What that means legally and in our defence remains to be seen.
But consider this. One thing about retrospection is unless you burn the evidence, the facts as they were are still the same. Sure you can change the law retrospectively and we're all screwed but you cannot change what has been done or said (Hansard 1987). If I have to pay I want to have some pleasure in doing so. HMRC can argue or build a defence on the points raised as much as they like, but unless you re-write history, you cannot erase it. One of the better aspects of retro is to prove how it defies logic and if in doing so others get a kicking for using it then happy days.Comment
-
MP Circulars
Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View PostIncidentally, while we're on this subject.
I have it on good authority that HMRC are getting hold of the MP circulars from somewhere.
It seems not all of us can be trusted.
OIGComment
-
Originally posted by OldITGit View PostIf that is the case it would explain the lack of updates from MP and I would totally agree with that approach. I for one feel a little more at ease after the excellent work by TSBT re Hansard
OIG
It's one thing to have access to all the information on this dotted around the internet, in letters, documents etc., but completely another to be able to distill it into something concise and coherent.
Well done TSBT.Comment
-
Originally posted by BrilloPad View PostSo just to confirm you invested your risked money and now have a CTD or are getting one?
I'm going to have to put this Helen7 bird on ignore if I can work out how to. Everytime I start to feel good about myself, she pops up again .....
And before you say I'm being derogatory, check out her condescending posts...Comment
-
Originally posted by RingStinger View PostI seem to remember the BBC getting wind of her 300K+ liability, and then she said she'd spent it.....
I'm going to have to put this Helen7 bird on ignore if I can work out how to. Everytime I start to feel good about myself, she pops up again .....
And before you say I'm being derogatory, check out her condescending posts...
2. Click on her name
3. Click on 'View profile'
4. On the left side under her name click on 'Add to Ignore List'
Job done."I can put any old tat in my sig, put quotes around it and attribute to someone of whom I've heard, to make it sound true."
- Voltaire/Benjamin Franklin/Anne Frank...Comment
-
Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View PostIncidentally, while we're on this subject.
I have it on good authority that HMRC are getting hold of the MP circulars from somewhere.
It seems not all of us can be trusted.
The arguments being discussed this afternoon relate to how Parliament was misled - there are only two ways to have these heard. One is by writing to your MP (Have you done that yet?) and the second is via the Parliamentary Ombudsman. By the time the Ombudsman gets involved it will be too late.
The point that The Donkey keeps making is that Parliament HAS BEEN misled and has enacted s.58. These arguments do not change that - the law is the law. And it is the law that any tax court will enforce.
HMRC must be feeling very proud of themselves right now - they've found a way to defeat one of MTM's schemes. Have you written that letter yet?
Go see your MP - this won't fix itself.There's an elephant wondering around here...Comment
-
Originally posted by Toocan View PostMaybe someone who works for HMRC used the scheme too.
The arguments being discussed this afternoon relate to how Parliament was misled - there are only two ways to have these heard. One is by writing to your MP (Have you done that yet?) and the second is via the Parliamentary Ombudsman. By the time the Ombudsman gets involved it will be too late.
The point that The Donkey keeps making is that Parliament HAS BEEN misled and has enacted s.58. These arguments do not change that - the law is the law. And it is the law that any tax court will enforce.
HMRC must be feeling very proud of themselves right now - they've found a way to defeat one of MTM's schemes. Have you written that letter yet?
Go see your MP - this won't fix itself.Comment
-
Originally posted by Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing View PostFolks,
It's like a Donald Rumsfeld moment. They know, we know, they know we know....
None of this is new, it's just not chrystallised. Anyways, the TC requires a written submission from both parties well in advance so MP and HMRC will know the grounds well before we get to court.
It's been around for a while now that BN66 is no more a clarification of Padmore than Man City is the same team as Man Utd. What that means legally and in our defence remains to be seen.
But consider this. One thing about retrospection is unless you burn the evidence, the facts as they were are still the same. Sure you can change the law retrospectively and we're all screwed but you cannot change what has been done or said (Hansard 1987). If I have to pay I want to have some pleasure in doing so. HMRC can argue or build a defence on the points raised as much as they like, but unless you re-write history, you cannot erase it. One of the better aspects of retro is to prove how it defies logic and if in doing so others get a kicking for using it then happy days.
I'm sure others are already doing this, but anything of use on the HMRC website should be copied for posterity in case it gets changed or deleted by the HMRC time and space word mangler.
I can recommend Jet Screenshot for free and instant screen capture.'Orwell's 1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual'. -
Nick Pickles, director of Big Brother Watch.Comment
Topic is closed
- 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