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

[DonkeyRhubarb]

And to demonstrate your point...

Gerard Depardieu arrives in Russia to collect his passport from Putin - Telegraph

"Russian President Vladimir Putin granted Russian citizenship to Mr Depardieu ... who objected to the new tax on millionaires planned by France's socialist government."

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Latest Gauke letter

Will anyone who got this please email it to me.

Thanks
DR

Basic points made are :
- he chose to use wholly artificial scheme to avoid the tax due
- HMRC do not accept as misleading or inaccurate information.
- Prev Govt gave full consideration and he (DG) does not propose to "disturb this outcome".
- Treasury officials are meeting the campaign organisers. But will not focus on wider aspects raised by them.

[Disgusted of Coventry]

Will anyone who got this please email it to me.

Thanks
DR

Basic points made are :
- he chose to use wholly artificial scheme to avoid the tax due
- HMRC do not accept as misleading or inaccurate information.
- Prev Govt gave full consideration and he (DG) does not propose to "disturb this outcome".
- Treasury officials are meeting the campaign organisers. But will not focus on wider aspects raised by them.

There's something missing from that list:

- he, and ~3000 others, asked the exact same question of their tax advisors, namely "Is this legal? Is this within the law?". If s58[4] prevails, that question will no longer carry any meaning.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Gauke letter

Will anyone who got this please email it to me.

Thanks
DR

Someone has kindly forwarded this on.

Cheers
DR

[Morlock]

So has Montp got any technical arguement left to deliver or is everything hanging on a 'no to retro' thread? For me sometimes, it's almost like the act of retrospection has overun everything and the focus is on what effect the retrospection is having/will have and whether that's justified. But how can something perfectly legal be overidden by the morality of tax avoidance, unless the current govt is trying to cash in on the austerity vibe. Behold the answer from my Gauke brainwashed MP in his rejection of my briefing invite...

By way of background, the govt is having to make tough decisions to deal with the deficit left by the last govt., and it is determined to collect those taxes which are legally incurred by business and individuals

So when the country was flush circa 2000 - legal avoidance perfectly acceptable. 2010 everyone skint, not much tax coming in - time for reinterpretation of the law. We must be living in Holland - loads of Tulip everywhere.

Interesting to see David Cameron on the Andrew Marr Show, saying that in times of austerity it's only fair that rich families should lose child benefit.

He seems to think that the definition of fairness can vary according to the economic climate.

[BrilloPad]

Our problem was we didn't know our place.

+1000

If we had to summarise our situation in a nutshell then this would be it.

I reckon Brannigan must be getting a bit hacked off by now - we have not folded. But what he has missed is that I have no choice. Its fight or bankruptcy. And even those who can afford it are not go.

I can't see HMRC ever getting a penny.

[travellingknob]

+1000

If we had to summarise our situation in a nutshell then this would be it.

I reckon Brannigan must be getting a bit hacked off by now - we have not folded. But what he has missed is that I have no choice. Its fight or bankruptcy. And even those who can afford it are not go.

I can't see HMRC ever getting a penny.

Unfortunately I can. Nonetheless, its cause and effect, those that cant pay will be bankrupted as you say and the money will get paid out in benefits instead.

[BrilloPad]

Taxman to grill Montpelier clients :: Contractor UK

"a legal representative reportedly estimated 200 interviews under caution would be held this month."

[eek]

Taxman to grill Montpelier clients :: Contractor UK

"a legal representative reportedly estimated 200 interviews under caution would be held this month."

What on earth do they expect 200 interviews to do apart from proving people didn't know much at the time and thought it was fine.

And showing HMRC to be the bunch of vindictive bastards we know they are.

[cojak]

What on earth do they expect 200 interviews to do apart from proving people didn't know much at the time and thought it was fine.

And showing Inland Revenue to be the bunch of vindictive bastards we know they are.

CE may be hard bastards but they know how to use the law.