• 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!

No To Retro Tax – Campaign Against Section 58 Finance Act 2008

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    BBC news report on HMRC's tax avoidance

    In a news report on tax avoidance on the BBC website, I have just read that HMRC have stated ...

    "HMRC is extremely effective at shutting down tax avoidance schemes fast and effectively."

    Comment


      Originally posted by WavesAtPlay View Post
      In a news report on tax avoidance on the BBC website, I have just read that HMRC have stated ...

      "HMRC is extremely effective at shutting down tax avoidance schemes fast and effectively."

      I commented on the same statement within the article on the daily mail website.

      Comment


        Originally posted by WavesAtPlay View Post
        In a news report on tax avoidance on the BBC website, I have just read that HMRC have stated ...

        "HMRC is extremely effective at shutting down tax avoidance schemes fast and effectively."

        That's true - they are. So why didn't they close down the DTA scheme in 1987, or 1998, or 2001, or 2002, or 2003, or 2004, or 2005 / 2005, or 2006 or 2007?

        They knew about it. So what was the reason? There must be a reason because they are clever people.

        Why did they decide to tolerate it?

        Why did they decide to tolerate income splitting between married couples for decades and then come up with a completely new meaning for s.660? [Arctic Systems]

        They've never explained that either.

        Thank goodness the Courts told them where to go.

        Perhaps they should think about British values and improve their organisation:

        Ten core values of the British identity - Telegraph
        There's an elephant wondering around here...

        Comment


          Immediate Response from MP re. Amendment

          "I’m still pursuing this and will write to the Minister again with your email.

          I hope they accept the amendment.

          Best wishes,

          Ian Murray [Labour]"


          At this stage of the game,can't ask for any more than that - to be honest he has been supportive in two previous meetings and through correspondence as well.

          Comment


            It would be great but I cant see Gauke just turning around next week and saying yes I support you. Who knows. I agree with everyone else though..... the more people writing and the more communications landing at his desk the more likely it is that he'll look deeper into it and reconsider his current position. Keep up the good work everyone.

            Comment


              Email earlier and just got a reply from my MP saying 'I'll do as you ask'.

              That'll be a first then.

              Comment


                Originally posted by portseven View Post
                Just curious what does 'table an amendment' mean in practice?

                Will an MP stand up in house of Commons and propose the amendment, and then all get to vote on it? Or is it more of a corridor discussion, or comittie in Portcullis House, etc.
                Effectively yes, this is what happens. If you are a member of a club and go to an AGM, any new rules are read out so all present know 'what's what' and given a chance to debate the rule. Someone may suggest a slight change and after discussion, a vote may be taken to agree the change or the chairman may say if no one dissents, the change is made. Then, a separate vote is made on the new changed rule.

                In Parliament, the Speaker will be made aware of the tabled amendment and ask members to to 'yay' or 'nay' it. If they yay's' (yes') are the majority, the tabled amendment is accepted then the debate continues on the Bill.

                Depending on the importance of the Bill, a 'division' or vote is called where members have to go into one of two 'lobbies,' one for yes and one for no.

                Re the email, I've sent it twice seeing as Wallace is ignoring my mails. So, one via own email, one by the Write to them website.
                I couldn't give two fornicators! Yes, really!

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Toocan View Post
                  That's true - they are. So why didn't they close down the DTA scheme in 1987, or 1998, or 2001, or 2002, or 2003, or 2004, or 2005 / 2005, or 2006 or 2007?

                  They knew about it. So what was the reason? There must be a reason because they are clever people.

                  Why did they decide to tolerate it?
                  And why the retrospective sledgehammer? Equally irrational behaviour!

                  Comment


                    Have emailed my MP. Let's hoping this amendment gets through.

                    Comment


                      E-mail sent....

                      Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View Post
                      Urgent Call to Action


                      Please can everyone email this to their MP now. The amendment will hopefully be tabled next Tuesday 26th June, hence the urgency.



                      Thanks!
                      DR
                      E-mail Sent.....

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X