Originally posted by lucozade
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
No To Retro Tax – Campaign Against Section 58 Finance Act 2008
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
Topic is closed
-
-
Originally posted by redkieran View PostIt is perfectly acceptable to legally avoid tax. Isn't that our argument?Comment
-
Originally posted by redkieran View PostIt is perfectly acceptable to legally avoid tax. Isn't that our argument?Comment
-
Contribution to the economy
Originally posted by lucozade View PostIndeed. However, Google spun it as being ok because of what they bring to the economy.
I see the difference now. Quite obvious when you think about it.Comment
-
Fabian Hamilton is still supporting us
I noticed my MP is no longer a member of the Finance Bill Committee, but emailed him to confirm he us still supporting our campaign. Here is his response:-
Finance Bill Committee members do vary from Bill to Bill but as I am no longer a member of the Shadow Treasury Team, I didn't think I would be on this Bill Committee.
Of course you may rely on my continued support – an injustice is always an injustice and as I have previously told you, I am strongly opposed to any form of retrospective legislation.
With best wishes,
Fabian Hamilton
Labour Member of Parliament for Leeds North EastComment
-
Whitehouse
If you are waiting for a response from Whitehouse please can you cut them some slack. Over the next 2-3 weeks all of their focus will be on the finance bill amendment.
This may be our last chance to table such an amendment, so I hope you will all understand why this has to take priority over everything else at the moment.
Thank you for your patience.
DRComment
-
Or so you think....
Anyone seen this? An interesting article and I think most will agree with the gist of it - but it appears the author has not been following this forum: The tax avoidance arms race is MAD: mitigation, avoidance and disclosure
Excerpt:
Governments draw the line at retrospective tax legislation. So far.
Historical precedent shows us that governments can legislate at will and there is little taxpayers can do about it. In theory, the Treasury could decide that all income splitting by married couples is unacceptable and, via parliament, force through legislation saying that the settlements legislation does apply to spouses and civil partners who should all now pay taxes, penalties and interest going back six years.
It would be like the government deciding that, as of a month ago, the speed limit on the motorways was 60 miles per hour (mph), and then prosecuting everyone ‘caught’ going over 60 by a speed camera in the last 31 days.
Fortunately, in the interests of a stable tax regime with mostly compliant taxpayers, even the most overzealous Chancellor has yet to impose genuinely retrospective tax legislation. ()
So, in the arms race which is the tax avoidance industry, the Treasury can only prevent taxpayers from benefitting going forward, and cannot go back in time. This also means that contractors joining schemes that are legal at the point of joining, and leaving when the scheme is closed down, do not have to fear retrospective taxation.Comment
-
Originally posted by honeyridges View PostAnyone seen this? An interesting article and I think most will agree with the gist of it - but it appears the author has not been following this forum: The tax avoidance arms race is MAD: mitigation, avoidance and disclosure
Excerpt:
Governments draw the line at retrospective tax legislation. So far.
Historical precedent shows us that governments can legislate at will and there is little taxpayers can do about it. In theory, the Treasury could decide that all income splitting by married couples is unacceptable and, via parliament, force through legislation saying that the settlements legislation does apply to spouses and civil partners who should all now pay taxes, penalties and interest going back six years.
It would be like the government deciding that, as of a month ago, the speed limit on the motorways was 60 miles per hour (mph), and then prosecuting everyone ‘caught’ going over 60 by a speed camera in the last 31 days.
Fortunately, in the interests of a stable tax regime with mostly compliant taxpayers, even the most overzealous Chancellor has yet to impose genuinely retrospective tax legislation. ()
So, in the arms race which is the tax avoidance industry, the Treasury can only prevent taxpayers from benefitting going forward, and cannot go back in time. This also means that contractors joining schemes that are legal at the point of joining, and leaving when the scheme is closed down, do not have to fear retrospective taxation.Ninja
'Salad is a dish best served cold'Comment
-
Originally posted by Ninja View PostHas anyone put the author, Mr David Colom, straight about the facts regarding retro legislation?
Tweet sent.Comment
-
Ninja
'Salad is a dish best served cold'Comment
Topic is closed
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Andrew Griffith MP says Tories would reform IR35 Oct 7 00:41
- New umbrella company JSL rules: a 2026 guide for contractors Oct 5 22:50
- Top 5 contractor compliance challenges, as 2025-26 nears Oct 3 08:53
- Joint and Several Liability ‘won’t retire HMRC's naughty list’ Oct 2 05:28
- What contractors can take from the Industria Umbrella Ltd case Sep 30 23:05
- Is ‘Open To Work’ on LinkedIn due an IR35 dropdown menu? Sep 30 05:57
- IR35: Control — updated for 2025-26 Sep 28 21:28
- Can a WhatsApp message really be a contract? Sep 25 20:17
- Can a WhatsApp message really be a contract? Sep 25 08:17
- ‘Subdued’ IT contractor jobs market took third tumble in a row in August Sep 25 08:07
Comment