Another attack on 'schemes'

[JamJarST]

All I'll say is that nothing that HMRC has published in the last few months since the Dec 9th change in legislation even comes close to troubling most providers.

Of course it doesn't, it is the contractors that are at risk not you.

[AtW]

I make no bones about the fact that I hate HMRC (probably even more than AtW hates us BN66ers)

Is there a point to all this bumph your posting Lisa

It's on homepage news - Revenue targets IT contractor tax saving scheme :: Contractor UK
- very relevant to this forum.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

HMRC have tried a lot of things in recent years to try and get on top of tax avoidance but none of it has really worked.

They brought in the disclosure regime DOTAS. This didn't curb it.

They tried retrospective legislation. Even this didn't put people off.

Now they want to list schemes as "High Risk" with the threat of additional charges. Will this work? Well not if past initiatives are anything to go by.

Perversely, it seems the harder they try and crack down on it the more popular it becomes.

[sal626]

I guess what HMRC don’t have, is case law on their side…they can say what they want in spotlights, but its only their opinion.

Even the BN66 decisions in their favour are being appealed so it can’t be used for case law….yet. On EBT, there are actually two decisions against HMRC.

The real fight on tax avoidance is going to be in the courts, not on these forums…

[Vallah]

I guess what HMRC don’t have, is case law on their side…they can say what they want in spotlights, but its only their opinion.

Even the BN66 decisions in their favour are being appealed so it can’t be used for case law….yet. On EBT, there are actually two decisions against HMRC.

The real fight on tax avoidance is going to be in the courts, not on these forums…

Indeed sal, I firmly believe that one of the reasons that HMRC would find it impossible to retrospectively attack EBTs for example is that there is sufficient existing case law that clarifies the position on EBTs from an income tax point of view. Most scheme providers have looked at the lessons on BN66 and tailored their schemes accordingly.

[Alan @ BroomeAffinity]

Still, to earn money in a country and not pay tax on it is morally indefensible. Nothing to boast about imo.

[AtW]

Most scheme providers have looked at the lessons on BN66 and tailored their schemes accordingly.

What was the lesson of BN66 in your opinion?

[OnYourBikeGB]

I wonder how many corporations will be tackled in this new found zealous period of Hector activity, or are they still colluding to help corporations avoid tax, like the good old days?

Nick Davies — How the Inland Revenue helps corporations avoid tax

Personally, I'm morally outraged etc.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

What was the lesson of BN66 in your opinion?

Good question.

People have argued that BN66 was a special case - there were particular features of the scheme which made it possible to legislate with retrospective effect, and this wouldn't apply with other types of scheme.

Even the Government and HMRC have taken the same line saying that this is not the thin end of the wedge, and it doesn't signal a move towards more frequent use of retrospective legislation.

[Vallah]

What was the lesson of BN66 in your opinion?

Make sure all income is taxed at UK rates.