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

[moira under the stairs]

Thanks for newsletter, very informative!

Which newsletter would that be ?

[centurian]

I doubt we'd get any firm commitment and, even if they did get back in, Treasury mandarins would soon make them see "sense".

WDRS

Be under no illusions - Labour are using this as a political football to embarrass George Osbourne / David Cameron for their past comments on BN66. If an election were held today and Labour win, they woud not be repealing s58.

[travellingknob]

Which newsletter would that be ?

You didn't subscribe to NTRT ?

[moira under the stairs]

You didn't subscribe to NTRT ?

Oh yes I have...... with an increased subscription

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Which newsletter would that be ?

(I have forwarded it to you)

Whitehouse emailed a campaign update to members yesterday.

If anyone didn't send receive this send an email to info AT notoretrotax.org.uk

[slogger]

response from MP

response from my MP below after me chasing him again a couple of weeks ago..

Dear Mr xxx,

Thank you for contacting me about Section 58 of the Finance Act 2008.

British residents are taxable on their income wherever it arises across the globe, including through foreign partnerships. Section 58 was introduced in order to help put this beyond any doubt and it is a reasonable response to a wholly artificial tax avoidance scheme. It clarified existing legislation and therefore has not affected any UK taxpayer’s tax position. The Government does not have any plans to change this.

A proposed amendment to the Finance Bill, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer shall review the implementation of section 58 of the Finance Act 2008, and the impact of its retrospective nature on the taxpayers involved, was withdrawn. I know this may not be the answer you were hoping to hear, but it is important that the UK collects the tax it is owed by its citizens.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.

Yours sincerely,



xxx MP
(Dictated by xxx and sent on his behalf)

[smalldog]

response from my MP below after me chasing him again a couple of weeks ago..

Dear Mr xxx,

Thank you for contacting me about Section 58 of the Finance Act 2008.

British residents are taxable on their income wherever it arises across the globe, including through foreign partnerships. Section 58 was introduced in order to help put this beyond any doubt and it is a reasonable response to a wholly artificial tax avoidance scheme. It clarified existing legislation and therefore has not affected any UK taxpayer’s tax position. The Government does not have any plans to change this.

A proposed amendment to the Finance Bill, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer shall review the implementation of section 58 of the Finance Act 2008, and the impact of its retrospective nature on the taxpayers involved, was withdrawn. I know this may not be the answer you were hoping to hear, but it is important that the UK collects the tax it is owed by its citizens.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.

Yours sincerely,



xxx MP
(Dictated by xxx and sent on his behalf)

Brilliant so already they are throwing the amendment withdrawal around, to me it sounds like we're properly f#cked now. Courts say its fine, and even the anti's in the hoc have withdrawn their arguments according to the government as part of the finance bill review, at least that's the governments new stance....I'm really not seeing an upside to the end of this now....before government just used hmrc and courts as justification for non reversal, now they are even using the hoc withdrawal, so who is exactly on our side?

Sorry my fight is wavering, I'm not seeing the woods for the trees anymore. As of last week according to this latest comm another official body said "yeh ya right it's not worth arguing, well withdraw the amendment", at least that's now the governments tack to the situation, and who outside of us will realise that's tulipe?

Anyone reviewing the facts will say:
Hmrc say your wrong
Courts say ur wrong
Now mps say your also wrong as they didn't have the commitment to follow thru with the amendment at the bill stage

So how on earth can we convince anyone outside we are right?

[slogger]

Brilliant so already they are throwing the amendment withdrawal around, to me it sounds like we're properly f#cked now. Courts say its fine, and even the anti's in the hoc have withdrawn their arguments according to the government as part of the finance bill review, at least that's the governments new stance....I'm really not seeing an upside to the end of this now....before government just used hmrc and courts as justification for non reversal, now they are even using the hoc withdrawal, so who is exactly on our side?

Sorry my fight is wavering, I'm not seeing the woods for the trees anymore. As of last week according to this latest comm another official body said "yeh ya right it's not worth arguing, well withdraw the amendment", at least that's now the governments tack to the situation, and who outside of us will realise that's tulipe?

Anyone reviewing the facts will say:
Hmrc say your wrong
Courts say ur wrong
Now mps say your also wrong as they didn't have the commitment to follow thru with the amendment at the bill stage

So how on earth can we convince anyone outside we are right?

yup - at first reading I'm quite shocked by its harshness (he was the Tory minister for small business and an ex contractor so did have some hope he'd be more onside) - off to chase bank re my remortgage anyway!!

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Sorry my fight is wavering, I'm not seeing the woods for the trees anymore.

You are thinking too much, and it will do your head in.

Leave the strategy to Whitehouse.

We just need to send the letters when we are asked to.

[OnYourBikeGB]

Just to add a more upbeat statement, I received a letter from my MP last week. I believe that he is speaking for both himself and another MP I met with recently.

I fully endorse the stance they have taken [Mills et al] and I believe that they have made a compelling case against the retrospective nature of this legislation. Please be assured of my continuing support in this matter and do not hesitate to contact me again if I can be of further assistance in this matter.

I should add that the meetings I had were before the amendment was tabled, but we discussed the tabling of the amendment. We all agreed that it was unlikely to go anywhere. However, that doesn't mean support for us is not there. It's given some who were going to bash us anyway another peg to hang their hat on, but realistically as far as they were concerned, it's made no difference.

Quick edit: I'm not saying the probing amendment was pointless, btw, just that it was not intentioned to go anywhere. It was a tactical move, nothing more.