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

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Will we be able to access the full details on this "Notice of Ammendment" in terms of what all goes on and is said on the Tuesday?
Or is it all pretty private and not public record??

It's all public.

Should be able to listen to the debate live on the Parliament website.

It is the Finance Bill Committee, debating this year's budget.

[the great escape]

It's all public.

Should be able to listen to the debate live on the Parliament website.

It is the Finance Bill Committee, debating this year's budget.

...If anyone asks, I'll say I'm listening to the cricket.

[Basher]

Meeting MP tomorrow

Afternoon Gang...

I'm meeting my Conservative MP tomorrow and was wondering if anyone who has already met with their MP can offer any last minute tips/advice.

I'm currenlty making some notes based on the Toolkit and all the docs from the NTRT website, but I really want to make sure I make as much of this as possible.

Cheers in advance.

Basher.

[Dieselpower]

TIPS

Afternoon Gang...

I'm meeting my Conservative MP tomorrow and was wondering if anyone who has already met with their MP can offer any last minute tips/advice.

I'm currenlty making some notes based on the Toolkit and all the docs from the NTRT website, but I really want to make sure I make as much of this as possible.

Cheers in advance.

Basher.

Concentrate on the following:
HMRC knew about this since 1993 and did sod all about it until 2007. You need to stress that they included the scheme in their OWN 1993 Tax manual, and that their OWN TE63 document stated the unliklihood of them challenging it in tax courts (ie they knew it worked)
Even then they decided to take 4 test cases (as is normal practice)
Then without ANY warning or ANY notice they convinced Parliament to go retro

By doing this the Rees Rules were completely ignored.
By leaving matters to fester for 15 years HMRC were effectively telling us that they were tolerating the scheme

Then explain your own personal circs.
Then go thru Osbornes and Gaukes 2008 comments.
Then explain that their OWN MP Nigel Mills has tabled the request for Tuesday for a review of s58 and a proper Impact Assessment - a fair and reasonable request in view of the mounting evidence of HMRC wrongdoing.

FYI: Rees Rules = 1. CLEAR and PRECISE advance warning to be given by a minister that retro action is imminent.

It was legal. It was legal. It was legal. Morality doesnt come into it - just like a parent (Stphen Timms) putting his Ovum stake into trusts to avoid tax for his kids and wife maybe immoral, but parent trust funds (another clear tax avoidance scheme) are commonplace - immoral? Or normal? Gambling - legal? Moral?

Mr Barlow, Mr Carr: Would you like to save tax? Yes please, because I am not an idiot.

If you need more info PM me. One final thing - dont leave until he has definitively stated whether he supports you and whether he will speak to Gauke before Tuesday.

[Corrian]

Friday News

and if he refuses (which in my view would be suicidal) then everyone will smell something very fishy indeed and people will say " why the refusal, are you trying to cover something up, surely if its all above board there is nothing to fear" get out of that gaukey!!! thats why its a cunning stunt (carefully typed)!

The final genius being, as Diesel says is that it gives him an opportunity to get out of this mess by saying "now ive reviewed all the facts Im going to reverse it", without losing face.

Fridays just get better and better.

[Basher]

Thanks DP...

Some very good advice.

I was starting to get a bit lost in all the information, but this has helped a great deal and made things clearer.

Cheers

Concentrate on the following:
HMRC knew about this since 1993 and did sod all about it until 2007. You need to stress that they included the scheme in their OWN 1993 Tax manual, and that their OWN TE63 document stated the unliklihood of them challenging it in tax courts (ie they knew it worked)
Even then they decided to take 4 test cases (as is normal practice)
Then without ANY warning or ANY notice they convinced Parliament to go retro

By doing this the Rees Rules were completely ignored.
By leaving matters to fester for 15 years HMRC were effectively telling us that they were tolerating the scheme

Then explain your own personal circs.
Then go thru Osbornes and Gaukes 2008 comments.
Then explain that their OWN MP Nigel Mills has tabled the request for Tuesday for a review of s58 and a proper Impact Assessment - a fair and reasonable request in view of the mounting evidence of HMRC wrongdoing.

FYI: Rees Rules = 1. CLEAR and PRECISE advance warning to be given by a minister that retro action is imminent.

It was legal. It was legal. It was legal. Morality doesnt come into it - just like a parent (Stphen Timms) putting his Ovum stake into trusts to avoid tax for his kids and wife maybe immoral, but parent trust funds (another clear tax avoidance scheme) are commonplace - immoral? Or normal? Gambling - legal? Moral?

Mr Barlow, Mr Carr: Would you like to save tax? Yes please, because I am not an idiot.

If you need more info PM me. One final thing - dont leave until he has definitively stated whether he supports you and whether he will speak to Gauke before Tuesday.

[Ninja]

Advice when meeting MP

Afternoon Gang...

I'm meeting my Conservative MP tomorrow and was wondering if anyone who has already met with their MP can offer any last minute tips/advice.

I'm currenlty making some notes based on the Toolkit and all the docs from the NTRT website, but I really want to make sure I make as much of this as possible.

Cheers in advance.

Basher.

I met with my MP this afternoon.
But beforehand I spoke to Carl at NoToRetro/Whitehouse who gave me some specifics of what you want your MP to do.

He advised;
1. That your MP makes contact with any members of the Finance Committee which belong to theor party
2. Write to Gauke and request the he meet with NoToRetro Campaign team
3. Ask Parliamentary questions, i.e.
A Ask how much will this actually bring into the Treasury, bearing in mind all of the bankruptcies that will ensue. £200 is not a realistic number is it! What's the real number? (HRMC: 'Show your working')
B Ask about what Impact Assessment was done before implementing S58 (which we is none)

Good luck
C Any other ackward questions that you can think of to make them squirm.....

[Basher]

Thanks Nija !

[BolshieBastard]

So Whitehouse have primed the members of the committee with the materials ready to discuss the issue. Can we assume then that if the committee finds favour in our arguement, they'll take that arguement into the HoC with a view to securing an amendment...yes? It's not like we've only get one shot at it and gone straight to the voting stage.

Changes can be made at Committee stage or the Reporting stage but, no further changes can be made at what is called Thrid Reading by HoC.

Essentially, the chairman of the committee will select amendments for discussion and debate where the minutia of the Bill can be discussed. Only members of the committee can vote at this stage. Every clause in the Bill has to be agreed to, changed or removed. Once the changes are agreed, the bill is re drafted. This is the end of the Committee stage.

The revised Bill is then presented to the HoC where further changes can be debated or included. This is know as the Report stage. Once this is complete, Bills cannot be changed at Third Reading so, it's pretty much as is what will become legislation if passed by both Houses.

[not-a-penny]

Also met with my MP today ...

I met with my MP this afternoon.
But beforehand I spoke to Carl at NoToRetro/Whitehouse who gave me some specifics of what you want your MP to do.

He advised;
1. That your MP makes contact with any members of the Finance Committee which belong to theor party
2. Write to Gauke and request the he meet with NoToRetro Campaign team
3. Ask Parliamentary questions, i.e.
A Ask how much will this actually bring into the Treasury, bearing in mind all of the bankruptcies that will ensue. £200 is not a realistic number is it! What's the real number? (HRMC: 'Show your working')
B Ask about what Impact Assessment was done before implementing S58 (which we is none)

Good luck
C Any other ackward questions that you can think of to make them squirm.....

Had a face to face with my MP (Bob Ne1ll - Con) today. He knew the context well, was generally supportive of the priniciple that Law at the time is what matters and will contact D Gauke on Monday before the Big Day. Fingers crossed. Have a good weekend all...