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

[Emigre]

At best, that's highly optimistic. Anyone that votes to remove the retrospection will almost certainly be labelled as being soft on tax avoidance in many tabloids.

Whether thats true or not is irrelevant - tabloids rarely let facts get in the way of a good story.

That's the fundamental problem. Many MPs privately disagree with s58, but how many are prepared to put themselves in firing line for it and actually vote to remove it.

That is as close to the truth as we have seen throughout this sorry mess. Compromise becomes the key word. Gauke's head on a plate won't happen and should not be a target. The information presented to MPs is extremely compelling and probably accounts for the favourable feedback from MPs that attended.

Repealing s58 would leave the tabloids shouting about Tories letting off tax avoiders, even though under HMRC's own definition we fall into the category of tax planning.

[centurian]

We don't want retrospection removed, we want it applied in line with accepted practice, i.e. retrospectively act back to 2008, any earlier is purely hector blind siding and misleading the last and this Government, they all recognise that this can not happen again because of the approach now adopted, so surely a minor technical ammendment in the finance bill to clarify retrospectively the approach to retrospection....

All sounds perfectly reasonable and logical - but that's not how tabloids will spin it.

[TalkingCheese]

All sounds perfectly reasonable and logical - but that's not how tabloids will spin it.

Although it seems like it sometimes, tabloids dont run the country.

[smalldog]

I understand gawkes door is still closed so its much too early to be anything other than neutral to negative on whether NTRT will get a result. I guess he spoke against it at the time so it might happen but rather than getting rid of retro completely i think it more likely some sort of su moto deal could be reached. Would still leave a bitter taste and utter distrust but solutions come from compromises
Fantastic work by NTRT nonetheless

they can get F***ed IMHO, in it to the end now Im all in (to use a poker term)!

[BrilloPad]

At best, that's highly optimistic. Anyone that votes to remove the retrospection will almost certainly be labelled as being soft on tax avoidance in many tabloids.

Whether thats true or not is irrelevant - tabloids rarely let facts get in the way of a good story.

That's the fundamental problem. Many MPs privately disagree with s58, but how many are prepared to put themselves in firing line for it and actually vote to remove it.

I disagree. Once the full story about HMRC lying comes out they will have no other choice.

[Fireship]

they can get F***ed IMHO, in it to the end now Im all in (to use a poker term)!

Same here, I'm in it till the bitter end!!!

[nevergiveup]

Same here, I'm in it till the bitter end!!!

Think most of us are!

[OnYourBikeGB]

Think most of us are!

+1

Besides, I'm not so sure that it matters how the tabloids spin it, even if they spin it at all. The Government could stuck to their 'only affects a small number' line. We're not celebrities, and the MPs can point to how this legislation negatively affects investment prospects, while not condoning tax avoidance etc. they can blame HMRC for the mess and take swift action to ensure ludicrous retrospective periods are not used to cover up incompetence. Besides, the influence if the tabloids has substantially waned. They're not the power they used to be. I was surprised at the number of people who came out in support of Gary Barlow for example. People don't like tax avoidance, but as the Government are being seen as squeezing unfairly, the defence if 'but it was legal' carries more and more weight.

[deckster]

the defence if 'but it was legal' carries more and more weight.

You must be reading different papers to me then. Amazon, Starbucks and Jimmy Carr may have a different opinion on the way that the press will see this.

[BrilloPad]

You must be reading different papers to me then. Amazon, Starbucks and Jimmy Carr may have a different opinion on the way that the press will see this.

I understand what you are saying - but IMO the retrospection and HMRC lieing will carry alot of weight for us.