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

[honeyridges]

That blog URL

Cast your mind back to Spitting Image in the 1980's. It used satire and ridicule very effectively to explain quite complex politics to the average person in the street.

One of our videos has already appeared on the HMRC Is tulipe blog. I can imagine that quite a few publications could be interested in this style of media.

In just a few days we've had 550 views. With a viral campaign, the potential of these videos is enormous!

P.S. Unfortunately, there is no way of posting real name and URL for above site!

Suggest replacing the 'i' in the original URL with the numeral '1', and ask people to switch it back to the letter 'i' in their browser address bar.

The URL in question therefore is http://hmrcissh1te.blogspot.co.uk/

[DownButNotOut]

Any News

hey fellow BN66'ers. Does anyone have any news on whats happening with the tax tribunals or when collection is expected?

[BrilloPad]

hey fellow BN66'ers. Does anyone have any news on whats happening with the tax tribunals or when collection is expected?

Nothing posted recently. I think some people had their tax affairs moved to Bournemouth - but nothing since.

[reckless]

Latest Gauke Reply

I have just received a reply from Gauke, dated 6th July, via my MP (in response to my previously submitted Gauke Rebuttal Template Letter). As usual he is economical with the truth, trotting out the usual well worn 'explanations';

1) The previous Padmore legislation should have sent a signal that retrospective measures could be expected.

2) The courts did not find that Parliament was misled.

3) Impact Assessments need only be made if they affect the 'Compliant Tax Paying Public' - whoever they may be!

4) Public Policy implications justify retrospective measures

My MP ends her letter saying that the only means left appears to be through the courts and that appeals will be held at the end of the year or 2013. I have sent copies to Whitehouse.

We are certainly being uniquely targetted and persecuted on this one. Consistently since 2008, all normal rules of play appear to be have been suspended, whatever the colour of the Government. I just cannot understand how, despite overwhelming evidence supporting our case, such incompetence, failure and lies by HMRC can be ignored by Parliament. Maybe I am just naive.

Oh well, chin up I suppose!

[screwthis]

I have just received a reply from Gauke, dated 6th July, via my MP (in response to my previously submitted Gauke Rebuttal Template Letter). As usual he is economical with the truth, trotting out the usual well worn 'explanations';

1) The previous Padmore legislation should have sent a signal that retrospective measures could be expected.

2) The courts did not find that Parliament was misled.

3) Impact Assessments need only be made if they affect the 'Compliant Tax Paying Public' - whoever they may be!

4) Public Policy implications justify retrospective measures

1) Who amongst us would have even heard of Padmore? We did what any member of the public would do in regards to our tax affairs and that is to take advice from tax lawyers. If you are sick you take advice from a doctor you don't then expect to be told your treatment was wrong and this should have been obvious to you based on a little known obscure medical journal published in 1987.

2) The courts were not asked to look at possible misleading.

3) If we are not the tax paying pubic then how come we are being asked to pay tax?

4) No they do not. Nothing in law should ever justify retrospective measures. It is unfair and creates multiple paradoxes. You can't invent laws in the past and if it wasn't clear it wasn't clear.

[Buzby]

tax court

My MP ends her letter saying that the only means left appears to be through the courts and that appeals will be held at the end of the year or 2013

so tax tribunal, then appeal. wonder if we can appeal on grounds of waiting for ECHR?

[Buzby]

tax chambers

was looking into the tax tribunal process and found this:

http://www.taxchambers.com/sites/def...20Treaties.pdf

On page 2:

Written Statement: 9 September 2011
The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke):
On 1 August HMRC published for consultation a technical note and draft legislation outlining a proposed approach to combating tax avoidance arrangements which exploit the provisions of double taxation agreements (DTAs). The responses so far received have made it clear that the proposed legislation, as drafted, could cause significant uncertainty for compliant UK businesses and overseas investors about its intended scope and its practical effect.
The Government is committed to providing certainty to taxpayers and acknowledges the concerns raised in the responses to the consultation. It has therefore decided not to proceed further with the consultation on the proposed legislation and will not include it in Finance Bill 2012

so in 2011 they do not want to cause 'uncertainty', what about legislation from 2008?

our case gets a few mentions:

R on the application of Huitson v HMRC [2010] STC 715 at [64]. The point was not discussed in the Court of Appeal but will need to be reviewed if the case goes on to the supreme court.

The author of “Technical Exchange” - Issue 63 of 31 July 2002 (a HMRC document) thought that it was “extremely unlikely” that HMRC could apply s.739 where the person abroad was treaty non-resident; see R on the application of Huitson v HMRC [2010] STC 715 at [61]. The HMRC’s “Technical Exchange” is not public; an interested person might try a FOI application to obtain it.

[BolshieBastard]

hey fellow BN66'ers. Does anyone have any news on whats happening with the tax tribunals or when collection is expected?

Why the rush!?

The longer I hear nothing from them HMRC bar stewards, the better imo!

[MMSguru]

Why the rush?

Why the rush!?

The longer I hear nothing from them HMRC bar stewards, the better imo!

Can I ask, are those affected by BN66 using this time to save? Should we be saving, and making regular tax deposits?

[Retro]

Can I ask, are those affected by BN66 using this time to save? Should we be saving, and making regular tax deposits?

Everybody who can should be saving in case there is a travesty of justice.
Whether or not you purchase CTDs is more a matter for the individual.