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

[moira under the stairs]

On the face of it your right but scratch the surface and its not that simple at all:
What constitutes a scheme ?
Surely there are no scheme promotors just accountants and tax advisers telling you what the law states.
Is it just 'wholly artificial' schemes your referring to ? What does that mean ?
What constitutes avoidance ? Does arranging your affairs mean your practicing avoidance ? Where is this line drawn ?
I joined this scheme to give me certainty over IR35 yet the HR judgement reckons it was artificial.
Who decides ? A judge, Tribunals or HMRC ?
Who decides if the insurance pays out ? The insurance company or someone else ? When do they pay out ?
Why would the insurance compensate you ? I though the idea of insurance was to cover the scheme promotors liability to tax.
How does a so called scheme promoter decide if they need this insurance ? Sounds like the same ambiguities that IR35 produces to me.
Do you prefer these ambiguities to the certainty law is there to provide with qualified decisions made by Judges ?
Are umbrella companies scheme promotors ?

So in conclusion you seem to be buying into HMRCs arguments of 'pay what we think' instead of insisting that good laws are produced which we can all see, understand and abide by.

Spot on, but in the UK you will never get away from the US & THEM - PLEB & MASTER - DO AS WE SAY NOT AS WE DO syndrome.

[screwthis]

On the face of it your right but scratch the surface and its not that simple at all:
What constitutes a scheme ?
Surely there are no scheme promotors just accountants and tax advisers telling you what the law states.
Is it just 'wholly artificial' schemes your referring to ? What does that mean ?
What constitutes avoidance ? Does arranging your affairs mean your practicing avoidance ? Where is this line drawn ?
I joined this scheme to give me certainty over IR35 yet the HR judgement reckons it was artificial.
Who decides ? A judge, Tribunals or HMRC ?
Who decides if the insurance pays out ? The insurance company or someone else ? When do they pay out ?
Why would the insurance compensate you ? I though the idea of insurance was to cover the scheme promotors liability to tax.
How does a so called scheme promoter decide if they need this insurance ? Sounds like the same ambiguities that IR35 produces to me.
Do you prefer these ambiguities to the certainty law is there to provide with qualified decisions made by Judges ?
Are umbrella companies scheme promotors ?

So in conclusion you seem to be buying into HMRCs arguments of 'pay what we think' instead of insisting that good laws are produced which we can all see, understand and abide by.

Good points.

Ultimately if tax arrangements are to be rejected solely on the basis of 'wholly artificial' then there should be no "schemes" at all as they all aim to mitigate tax with no other business reason.
So they should shut down each and every scheme. They won't due to the us and them reasons previously stated ad nauseam.

[the great escape]

Good points.

Ultimately if tax arrangements are to be rejected solely on the basis of 'wholly artificial' then there should be no "schemes" at all as they all aim to mitigate tax with no other business reason.
So they should shut down each and every scheme. They won't due to the us and them reasons previously stated ad nauseam.

Exactly. Once they start taking the artificial highground then everyone will be up for a scalping. The law will be a starting point and HMRC will decide the end. That's the door to tyranny. Take your HMRC colleagues out for a victory lunch afterwards. "another round chaps?...don't worry, we'll just put it down as business expenses". Of course that's not artificial because you're legally entitled to it. The People's Republic of Britain, here we come.

[JaredM]

The BBC now get it?

BBC News - When is tax dodging illegal?

Tax avoidance is the arrangement of a taxpayer's affairs in such a way as to pay the least amount of tax legitimately.
...
It could be that the scheme takes advantage of some obscure loophole. In that case the tax people would get the Treasury to change the law, but the scheme's users would get away scot free until such an order was made.

Maybe someone needs to send in a correction about that last bit in light of s58...

[honeyridges]

Depressing tide of opinion in the UK

Has anyone seen this:
New Powers To 'Name And Shame' Tax Avoiders

Talk about swimming against the tide - the whole political establishment seems to have turned against tax planning. I for one feel no "shame" about minimising the tax I pay as long as it's done legally, as that benefits those who matter most to me - my family. But now apparently if HMRC decide they don't like what you're up to they can put you on a shame-list so the uneducated masses can presumably hurl abuse at you.

Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty, justice and the rule of law in this country?

[BrilloPad]

the whole political establishment seems to have turned against tax planning.

I have no issue with that - just as I had no issue with them changing the double taxation rules. What I object to is the retrospective element. Then pretending it makes no difference. And lying about what information was given to us to get retrospection justified.

Brannigan - you sad deluded

[moira under the stairs]

- the whole political establishment seems to have turned against tax planning.

Until it starts affecting them and the High society people, lets face it the two tier establishment in the UK stinks and its about time people woke up and smelt the coffee, this is all smoke and mirrors to protect themselves again.

[SantaClaus]

Gauke really needs to be made aware what a hypocrite he is:

This one deserves to go viral on Twitter, Facebook, etc. :

Naming and Shaming the “Morally Repugnant” David Gauke - Guy Fawkes' blog

[BolshieBastard]

Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty, justice and the rule of law in this country?

It was sacrificed on the high alter of austerity.

Nice to see gauke being the leading megamouth on this though. Duplicitous basturd.

[BrilloPad]

its about time people woke up and smelt the coffee, this is all smoke and mirrors to protect themselves again.

Ain't going to happen. While the proles have flat screen TVs and can afford football and beer they will be happy.