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

[DotasScandal]

You clearly don't get the reason why I post here then. You don't just say that you will be voting against him you should be saying that without immediate help you will be actively working against his re-election emphasising to everyone how he did not help you...

It's one thing to say you will vote against him (big wow). Its another to say that as I will be bankrupt and hence unemployable next April I hope you will understand why I'm happy to spend that entire month actively campaigning against your re-election by telling people how you caused me to become bankrupt. And that would but the fear of God into many Conservative MPs...

Nowhere did I say he should merely say he would not vote for him, so it was unnecessary to "wow".
It's up to people to be creative to find how they can get their point across best . As for me, I would do precisely what you wrote.

www.dotas-scandal.org

[jbryce]

amendment?

More than you would think as I've actually discussed it with 3 MPs (all friends).. and because they are friends they actually listened and understand the initial cause and actual issues... BUT that is why I'm so pessimistic, even when they understand the issues they know APNs are inevitable as voting against them is potentially political suicide.

Which is why I've been trying to emphasis that its essential for people to do things now while its out of sight in committee..

I'm not sue I want them to vote against APNs, after all it's the best chance of making sure that any new schemes wither on the vine. I want them to vote for an amendment that removes the retrospective element of the legislation.

I think voting for proactive APNs (gives a kicking to new avoiders) would be popular as would voting against retrospective APNs (tells HMRC where to stick it and preserves justice) would also be popular.

The million dollar question is if such an amendment exists. If it did I can go and ask my MP to consider voting for it.....

[DotasScandal]

I'm not sue I want them to vote against APNs, after all it's the best chance of making sure that any new schemes wither on the vine. I want them to vote for an amendment that removes the retrospective element of the legislation.

I think voting for proactive APNs (gives a kicking to new avoiders) would be popular as would voting against retrospective APNs (tells HMRC where to stick it and preserves justice) would also be popular.

The million dollar question is if such an amendment exists. If it did I can go and ask my MP to consider voting for it.....

Absolutely. APNs are very unlikely to go away - it is a politically sensitive subject. Focusing on having the retrospective aspect removed should be the priority, as realistically it is the only way for MPs to vote in our favour without compromising themselves.

www.dotas-scandal.org

[bananarepublic]

Absolutely. APNs are very unlikely to go away - it is a politically sensitive subject. Focusing on having the retrospective aspect removed should be the priority, as realistically it is the only way for MPs to vote in our favour without compromising themselves.

www.dotas-scandal.org

I have written to my MP about this, but realistically how will this affect us? There are two aspects to the new legislation - follower notices and APN's. I can't see follower notices having any impact on people affected by S58. As for demands for payment via APN's, as they will be for the tax principle only not interest they may have the impact of postponing bankruptcy for those who can't cover the interest - particularly if HMRC go slow on the resolution of the appeals once they have the tax principle. Just playing devils advocate ....

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I have written to my MP about this, but realistically how will this affect us? There are two aspects to the new legislation - follower notices and APN's. I can't see follower notices having any impact on people affected by S58. As for demands for payment via APN's, as they will be for the tax principle only not interest they may have the impact of postponing bankruptcy for those who can't cover the interest - particularly if HMRC go slow on the resolution of the appeals once they have the tax principle. Just playing devils advocate ....

Follower notices could come into play if Huitson and/or Shiner lose their appeals.

Both these cases are already in the system so the timing is more down to the tax courts than HMRC. I don't think it will make any difference to the speed whether HMRC have collected the tax upfront or not.

A further minor point, it was announced in the Queen's speech that AP would be extended to NICs, so people could face APNs for tax + Class 4 nic.

[eek]

Follower notices could come into play if Huitson and/or Shiner lose their appeals.

Both these cases are already in the system so the timing is more down to the tax courts than HMRC. I don't think it will make any difference to the speed whether HMRC have collected the tax upfront or not.

A further minor point, it was announced in the Queen's speech that AP would be extended to NICs, so people could face APNs for tax + Class 4 nic.

There are an explicit set of tax avoidance schemes that were set up to avoid paying NIC on supply teachers and nurses. I believe the NI APN is targeted at the umbrellas and agencies who used them rather than the people here....

We discussed this in one of the HMRC enquiry threads last week...

[DonkeyRhubarb]

There are an explicit set of tax avoidance schemes that were set up to avoid paying NIC on supply teachers and nurses. I believe the NI APN is targeted at the umbrellas and agencies who used them rather than the people here....

Thanks I didn't know that.

NIC is not a big issue for BN66ers anyway, at least not compared to the tax and interest.

[jbryce]

Absolutely. APNs are very unlikely to go away - it is a politically sensitive subject. Focusing on having the retrospective aspect removed should be the priority, as realistically it is the only way for MPs to vote in our favour without compromising themselves.

www.dotas-scandal.org

so.......has anyone had any contact with an MP willing to propose such an amendment? I reckon I could convince my MP to vote for it - he won't raise it.

Anyone in contact with a sympathetic member of the finance committee?

[BrilloPad]

Here's a question: is this still likely to be rumbling on when the general election comes? If so have you lot considered whether voting the Tories out would be beneficial, purely to replace Gauke?

Gauke was in favour of us in opposition.

It makes no difference who we vote for.

[smalldog]

so.......has anyone had any contact with an MP willing to propose such an amendment? I reckon I could convince my MP to vote for it - he won't raise it.

Anyone in contact with a sympathetic member of the finance committee?

I have from my MP and he is willing to raise this at the reporting stage subject to timing etc. As others have said APN's will get voted through, its whether they are just prospective which is key.