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

[DonkeyRhubarb]

You are aware that since Accelerated Payments came in most schemes aren't using DOTAS anymore.... They are trying to keep under the radar by not registering.....

Had a conversation with my brother-in-law recently who is ex-HMRC and, no joke, he said if people didn't want to pay tax they'd have been better off not disclosing it. Registering a scheme or declaring it on your tax return was always asking for trouble. If you want to pull one over on HMRC then it's better to be hard to find than trying to be a clever dick.

I suspect avoidance will become more evasive in future.

[DotasScandal]

You are aware that since Accelerated Payments came in most schemes aren't using DOTAS anymore.... They are trying to keep under the radar by not registering.....

True. David Gauke is out there boasting about the fall in numbers of DOTAS registered schemes. Surely he cannot ignore that he has merely pushed said schemes into the underground and off the radar (defeating the "official" original purpose of DOTAS).
Would it be cynical to wonder whether the real purpose of DOTAS was all along to mark targets for the Great Confiscation?

www.dotas-scandal.org

[DotasScandal]

Had a conversation with my brother-in-law recently who is ex-HMRC and, no joke, he said if people didn't want to pay tax they'd have been better off not disclosing it. Registering a scheme or declaring it on your tax return was always asking for trouble. If you want to pull one over on HMRC then it's better to be hard to find than trying to be a clever dick.

I suspect avoidance will become more evasive in future.

Anything you say can and will be used against you.

Always was, always will be...

www.dotas-scandal.org

[Manu]

You are aware that since Accelerated Payments came in most schemes aren't using DOTAS anymore.... They are trying to keep under the radar by not registering.....

I wasn't aware - but surely there will be some hallmark distinguishing the 90% payments they offer else how would u declare on SA. Anyways...the damage is done to thousands of lives because of the 'spirit of law' .

[jbryce]

the pond

You are aware that since Accelerated Payments came in most schemes aren't using DOTAS anymore.... They are trying to keep under the radar by not registering.....

...but the pool of people willing to sign up for these schemes is reducing very quickly. Everyone in the world of contracting, offshore/IT/medical knows someone who has been caught up in this.

Avoidance will always be around, the super rich will continue to use the schemes, but for the world of contracting - avoidance schemes are pretty much dead.

[eek]

...but the pool of people willing to sign up for these schemes is reducing very quickly. Everyone in the world of contracting, offshore/IT/medical knows someone who has been caught up in this.

Avoidance will always be around, the super rich will continue to use the schemes, but for the world of contracting - avoidance schemes are pretty much dead.

I would argue with that. In the world of experienced contractors it's dead, for new contractors they can see a safe easy option with the money they spend on advertising

[DotasScandal]

I wasn't aware - but surely there will be some hallmark distinguishing the 90% payments they offer else how would u declare on SA. Anyways...the damage is done to thousands of lives because of the 'spirit of law' .

This "spirit of law" rhetoric is the stuff tyranny is born of. Simply because you can make it anything you like, depending on necessities and the spirit of the TIMES.

The word of law is the only basis that can guarantee liberty.
If it's disregarded, then we are in effect not judged in a court of law anymore, but in the court of public opinion. Or David Gauke's opinion, as it appears.

Dumbfounded that supposedly intelligent lawyers look the other way on this. Maybe lacking that thing called "integrity".

www.dotas-scandal.org

[lucozade]

new letter sent to my MP

Dear Mark,

I write to thank you for your support.

I wish to further raise my concerns regarding the Governments attitude
towards the use of retrospective taxation and implore you to support me
with action and not with HMRC generated template responses.

I firmly believe that all members of society should expect to be judged
by the law as it stood at the time. Don't you?

There are a large number of unfair circumstances since S58 of Finance
Bill 2008.

Other schemes that have been hit by retrospection (back 1 year not 21
years ) have been fully warned and have been given plenty notice. In my
case I was given no warning of retrospection and never was I told I had
done anything legally wrong, instead HMRC had agreed to take 4 test
cases to tribune in 2007. These cases were not brought to tribune and
instead in 2008 retrospection was applied.

I feel this to be an extreme violation of my Human Rights putting me
and my family at high risk of loosing everything we have - for NOT
breaking the law as it stood at the time!

Furthermore, to ask for payment upfront in advance whilst I have not
been found guilty, followed all the rules, fully declared on every tax
return and complied with all of HMRCs requests is a honeytrap. Had I
not declared we would probably not even be talking.

The City of London Law Society, respresenting some 14,000 city lawyers
has recently responded to the content of the Finance Bill 2014 in which
they say:

"2. RECOMMENDATIONS: CERTAINTY, THE RULE OF LAW ETC

2.1 We have a broad concern, applicable to all taxes, that tax
policymakers are
insufficiently conscious of the importance of the rule of law – that
is, the
constitutional right of a citizen to determine the law applicable to
him at any given
date. Related to this is a similar problem of lack of respect for
legislation as the
only proper source of law, and over-reliance on guidance.

2.2 The current Government has legislated retrospectively against
certain types of
stamp duty land tax avoidance schemes, and also against what it
perceived to be
avoidance structures in the field of corporation tax on loan
relationships. In many
of these cases the relevant structures had been known to HMRC for some
time
prior to the retrospective change (although we would accept that HMRC's
internal
communication systems may have been inadequate to convey this knowledge
to
policymakers: improvements in this area of tax administration are
doubtless
necessary too). We do not consider that this is acceptable. Business
must know
that the law in place when transactions take place will be the law that
applies to
them. This principle is either absolute or it is nothing – once it has
been broken
once, further breaches are only questions of degree. It is not an
adequate
response to warn in advance on a generic basis that retrospective
legislation
might be applied in an area. It is hard to overstate how damaging to
business
perception of a jurisdiction it is if a government indulges in
retrospective taxation.

2.3 Even where legislation is not expressly retrospective, it can
effectively be so.
Probably the most egregious recent example of this was the last
government's
introduction of the Bank Payroll Tax (a remarkable tax in that its
entire charging
period had passed before it became law). As at the date of introduction
of the
tax, policy (let alone effective drafting) had not been finalised as to
what a "bank"
was and hence who might be subject to the tax. Our view is that the tax
system
should include administrative safeguards to prevent legislation being
introduced
with immediate effect where it has not been substantially finalised. "

I'm the victim! HMRCs introduction of IR35 caused chaos in the
self-employed community. Even HMRC are still playing around with the
legislation which got slammed by the House of Lords.

If we don't stand up to this mess now and act prospectively then we are
in danger of bankrupting thousands of innocent people.

[flamel]

Dumbfounded that supposedly intelligent lawyers look the other way on this. Maybe lacking that thing called "integrity".

www.dotas-scandal.org

What! You mean lawyers may not have scruples or integrity?
And many MPs are ex lawyers.
What is the world coming to?

[smalldog]

True. David Gauke is out there boasting about the fall in numbers of DOTAS registered schemes. Surely he cannot ignore that he has merely pushed said schemes into the underground and off the radar (defeating the "official" original purpose of DOTAS).
Would it be cynical to wonder whether the real purpose of DOTAS was all along to mark targets for the Great Confiscation?

www.dotas-scandal.org

not only will he have pushed this towards more avoidance, it will then become evasion pure and simple. People will start to not declare certain earnings on their SA in hope of getting away with it.