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

[TalkingCheese]

You're not alone.

Still, a long shot has to be better than nothing though. This is why I've made an appointment to see my MP. A bit daunting Yes, but I would not be doing right by my family if I sat back and let this happen without knowing that I had done EVERYTHING possible in my power - I just hope I can remain rational in my meeting :-)

Lets look at the facts:
- Hmrc and parliament knew they left "loopholes" (lord lamont) open in 1987 when they legislated against padmores specific arrangement (see Hansard, professional press, and probably countless internal meeting minutes at inland revenue)
- they were to keep its use under review
- no one owed back tax as a result of that legislation
- Hmrc knew of Montpellier's arrangements use (different to padmores in the way Hansard and professional press describe) since the early 1990s (in their tax manual)
- they issued a warning to tax offices in 2003
- they accepted many claims after enquiry and left many many more unchallenged both leading to legitimate expectation
- they first stated that they didn't accept that the arrangement was legal (and by didn't accept I mean the first time they didnt state that they didn't want individuals to pay too much or too little tax) in may 2007.
- this was also the first time they offerred taxpayers to make payment on account
- in march 2008 they announced they were to change the law retrospectively. Not a clarification, as they told parliament, but a change in the law.
- they now argue it was always parliaments intent to tax in this way but as seen above this is not true.
- people are suffering stress. Lives are at best on hold. Families are breaking up. People face bankruptcy, and a lot worse!

Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong!

[Disgusted of Coventry]

Will the FTT publish their judgement ? How will we know what arguments they heard and what they didn't ?

Presumably HMRC won't be invoking section 58 since (according to them) it doesn't affect anyone's tax position.

[swede]

Presumably HMRC won't be invoking section 58 since (according to them) it doesn't affect anyone's tax position.

Can anyone remember where did this originally came from? I'd like to mention this to my MP when I meet them...

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Can anyone remember where did this originally came from? I'd like to mention this to my MP when I meet them...

I think it was HMRC who first coined it but it was also in this parliamentary answer from Gauke.
Finance Act 2008: 17 Jul 2012: Hansard Written Answers and Statements - TheyWorkForYou

[smalldog]

I would quite like to know my total exposure but don't want to wake the tiger. Is there a specific dept. at hmrc to contact if I do want an Upto date statement?

[slogger]

I would quite like to know my total exposure but don't want to wake the tiger. Is there a specific dept. at hmrc to contact if I do want an Upto date statement?

If you log on to the hmrc online portal (you'll have access to this if you do your own self assessment - if not then registration is free)
You can then go back through the relevant years and it shows amounts on appeal...

However I dont think this includes the interest from the date of appeal
cheers
Slogger

[smalldog]

If you log on to the hmrc online portal (you'll have access to this if you do your own self assessment - if not then registration is free)
You can then go back through the relevant years and it shows amounts on appeal...

However I dont think this includes the interest from the date of appeal
cheers
Slogger

Hi slogger, I've done that already but as you say there are no interest charges shown, so it's not a realistic figure. I'm looking for a total calc inc interest.

[Ninja]

Whitehall-man speak with forked tongue

I think it was HMRC who first coined it but it was also in this parliamentary answer from Gauke.
Finance Act 2008: 17 Jul 2012: Hansard Written Answers and Statements - TheyWorkForYou

Gauke chooses his (HMRC's) words carefully
"...Section 58 of Finance Act 2008 was enacted to help put that beyond doubt and in so doing, made dear that a wholly artificial tax avoidance scheme involving a foreign partnership comprised of foreign trustees did not work. As section 58 retrospectively clarified existing legislation, its introduction had no affect on any taxpayer's tax position..."

What he actually means is that HMRC thought that you owed the money to start with, therefore S58 just confirms this (albeit retrospectively; ah but who cares!) therefore no change to the taxpayer. Ta-da!

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Hi slogger, I've done that already but as you say there are no interest charges shown, so it's not a realistic figure. I'm looking for a total calc inc interest.

You can get a pretty accurate estimate of the interest by applying the following uplifts to each tax year.

2001/2 - 58%
2002/3 - 51%
2003/4 - 45%
2004/5 - 38%
2005/6 - 31%
2006/7 - 24%
2007/8 - 16%

[smalldog]

You can get a pretty accurate estimate of the interest by applying the following uplifts to each tax year.

2001/2 - 58%
2002/3 - 51%
2003/4 - 45%
2004/5 - 38%
2005/6 - 31%
2006/7 - 24%
2007/8 - 16%

If this does eventually go against us they can at the very least wipe out interest payments since s58 became law, I.e. from 2008 to the final closure. That's the absolute minimum I'd expect and think is totally reasonable even for hmrc!