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

[Disgusted of Coventry]

...
Interesting to note from the BBC article that the retro payments would need to be justified as "wholly exceptional" - that phrase again.

In 2012 (2012!) the Treasury Committee published a report on the budget which included the following:

"We recommend that the Government restrict its use of retrospective legislation to wholly exceptional circumstances, which should be narrow and clearly-defined.

The Treasury should set these out as soon as possible for consultation."

(I wonder how they're doing with that.)

[BrilloPad]

I didn't want to pollute this thread and upset helen7. But please take a look at this thread and comment :-

http://forums.contractoruk.com/gener...ax-pounds.html

Basically take that had their day in court without retrospective legislation. Which is all anyone on here wants.

Although imagine if Gary Barlow had been subjected to retrospective legislation!

[d000hg]

If they are using the scheme since 2010, even with going through the courts why is this not retrospective? Is it clear-cut that they broke existing laws - seems they are being asked to pay back tax they avoided?

Serious question.

[jlg15333]

HMRC Double Standards

If they are using the scheme since 2010, even with going through the courts why is this not retrospective? Is it clear-cut that they broke existing laws - seems they are being asked to pay back tax they avoided?

Serious question.

Like Mr Ecclestone before there seems to be a pattern here. We seem to have been chosen as a test case for retrospection which they will use from now on as and when they see fit.

[deckster]

If they are using the scheme since 2010, even with going through the courts why is this not retrospective? Is it clear-cut that they broke existing laws - seems they are being asked to pay back tax they avoided?

Serious question.

Yes, it's clear-cut that the scheme was ineffective as that is what the court has ruled. Not retrospective at all. In this case, HMRC decided they had a strong case and so went to court - no need any retrospection here. That's only brought out of the bag when HMRC think they might lose

[DonkeyRhubarb]

If they are using the scheme since 2010, even with going through the courts why is this not retrospective? Is it clear-cut that they broke existing laws - seems they are being asked to pay back tax they avoided?

Serious question.

It is not retrospective because the scheme was judged by the courts according to the law as it stood at the time they used the scheme.

[SantaClaus]

For those thinking of voting UKIP...

Ukip could back Tory government after 2015 election, says Nigel Farage | Politics | theguardian.com

[tax is taxing]

MP Visit

Meeting my MP this weekend. Printed out summary from a number of posts across various threads in this forum.

Hoping to explain the unfair suffering this legislation will bring, to me and my young family.

Particularly from the point that EBTs have yet to be proven illegal and the fact that should they stand the test of the court again, all the suffering my family would've gone through will be for no good reason.

Hope this plea opens his mind to the atrocipous possibilities this legislatioin has on normal law abiding people.

[DotasScandal]

Well done arranging a face to face meeting! That's the way to go.
We are putting together a "cheat sheet" of points to keep in mind when meeting your MP, it should be ready shortly.

In the meantime, feel free to check the "Facts" page on www.dotas-scandal.org, as well as the front page.

We tried to summarize the most important points there.

[PlaneSailing]

Dotas numbers

Looks like the DOTAS numbers are now officially a 'warning sign' and not merely a registration scheme. Is Hector trying to drive people off the radar?


Bottom of this article:
BBC News - Tax avoidance: What are the rules?