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

[bananarepublic]

Did I read somewhere that the APN is 50%. I reckon my tax bill is 50k (plus the interest), not sure now much the NI bill is (first I have heard of this NI). So if MY APN is say 25k I can maybe get this (maybe), but 30/40/50k etc or more, then its bailiffs as I understand HMRC first attack, then maybe a charge on the house deeds or Bankruptcy. Grim times ahead.

No. You were probably thinking about the penalty for ignoring a follower notice.

The APN is likely to cover every year since 04/05 tax year.

[warlord]

No. You were probably thinking about the penalty for ignoring a follower notice.

The APN is likely to cover every year since 04/05 tax year.

Oh dear. So thats 50k then. Plus interest (when its due, of another 50k maybe more by now)
How do I work out the NI part? ( not seen this before from HMRC)

[bananarepublic]

Oh dear. So thats 50k then. Plus interest (when its due, of another 50k maybe more by now)
How do I work out the NI part? ( not seen this before from HMRC)

NI should have been in your original closure notice calculation. The bastards added it on as an after thought.

At least you won't have to pay the interest until the process is over. Not sure actually whether in practice that will work to our advantage.

[dezze]

Oh dear. So thats 50k then. Plus interest (when its due, of another 50k maybe more by now)
How do I work out the NI part? ( not seen this before from HMRC)

I don't think the interest is going to be as much as you say. I understand the rate HMRC have used for ages has been 3% a year, and this is not compounded.

[nevergiveup]

I don't think the interest is going to be as much as you say. I understand the rate HMRC have used for ages has been 3% a year, and this is not compounded.

Maybe the FTT will reduce/remove the interest due to how long this crap has been going on for. It's happened before in the FTT.....

[centurian]

On the CTD vs APN front, I have thought of some scenarios which make the exchange of a CTD for an APN very problematic. This might explain why the CTD department are having a hard time getting their head around it.

Now all of this is pure conjecture and may turn out to be complete and utter tosh, but bear with me.

For most affected by BN66, there is one scheme, several CN's for various years resulting in one APN demand. Most BN66 users that purchased CTD's probably bought a single CTD several years ago. In this case, an exchange is simple - just the payment date of the APN is back dated to that of the CTD - and if that isn't enough to cover the APN, then an additional payment is made with the actual payment date - simple

I cannot see why HMRC would not want to do this - it would completely undermine the whole premise of CTD's to do otherwise.

Now here's where it gets complicated. Imagine a user in 4 different schemes spanning several years. The chances of all 4 schemes being defeated is quite low, but the chance of 1 scheme being defeated is reasonable, so they take out a CTD many years ago to cover about 40% of the total liability of the 4 schemes.

4 APNs arrive (probably not at the same time), resulting in the remaining 60% being due. The person pays the other 60%, but how does the original CTD payment date get apportioned to the 4 different APNs - is it proportional - is it in the order the APNs were received.

And here is why it matters. Remember that from a paperwork point of view, a CTD has zero connection to a particular tax demand / open enquiry. The last APN to arrive (by which time the CTD kitty would be "used up" covering the earlier APNs) might be the first (and only) scheme to be defeated in court, resulting in a big interest bill even though the user paid HMRC more than that amount of money several years earlier.

So I'm not sure an "exchange" arrangement is going to work. HMRC might need to have a system whereby you retain the CTD - but it becomes "locked" so you cannot cash it in - and your APN payments are reduced, but you can still use the CTD to make the final payment should any of the APNs be lost in court.

This is an administrative nightmare - and I suspect none of HMRCs systems are designed to cope with it.

I doubt the complex scenario outlined above affects many BN66 users, but it might explain why the CTD department are struggling to give a simple answer.

In short, the whole thing is a right #@&%$ mess.

[zaphrus]

If that's what your accountant thinks I suggest that he sticks to doing accounts!!

Where an enquiry is open or an assessment under appeal HMRC can go back to the start of the DOTAS regime. That is for normal APNs. For an APN raised as the result of a Follower Notice HMRC can go back before DOTAS.

The 2014 Finance Act is there for anyone to view. Look at section 212 - it's plain enough.

Of course where HMRC have not yet opened an enquiry the normal time limits apply.

I missed the last line of your post the first time, I went through S212 a few times, and each time I came to the conclusion that they must have an open case against you for a given year for a follower and/or an APN to apply. I'm not a 100% certain though, as your language seems to imply that even where HMRC don't have a case open, they can go back to years where the time limits have expired? Could you clarify please?

[bananarepublic]

I missed the last line of your post the first time, I went through S212 a few times, and each time I came to the conclusion that they must have an open case against you for a given year for a follower and/or an APN to apply. I'm not a 100% certain though, as your language seems to imply that even where HMRC don't have a case open, they can go back to years where the time limits have expired? Could you clarify please?

I would not like to comment on the situation where HMRC have never opened an enquiry for a particular year, sorry. I would presume that to issue an APN the year would have to be under enquiry but I have not studied the mechanics of how HMRC would go about opening one. HMRC always queried my returns within the 12 months allowed.

[varunksingh]

All this chat about the fine details of payment really doesn't matter to so many I expect. Interest payments or not I don't have the funds end of story. How many more of us in similar situations where bankrupcy is the only option?

Mate if you are in a working age, through Bankruptcy HMRC might be able to get 2 or even 5 year period in all your earning apart from basic needs go to HMRC.
In my understanding Bankruptcy should only be an option for someone totally incapable of paying back. Personal Bankruptcy are not pretty!

[BrilloPad]

Mate if you are in a working age, through Bankruptcy HMRC might be able to get 2 or even 5 year period in all your earning apart from basic needs go to HMRC.
In my understanding Bankruptcy should only be an option for someone totally incapable of paying back. Personal Bankruptcy are not pretty!

Its not that bad. Though its easy for me to say. Ive got no savings atall. £30k equity in the house - my wife wants that in the divorce. HMRC can take what I offer(£1 a year) or I will go on the dole - taking 2 ex-wives and 3 children with me. They will spend tens of thousands in fees and get fook all.

Best of all I have credit cards worth tens of thousands - I intend to max them all out.

Now I live in an unknown address. Unknown to me and my landlord. All my post goes to my work address.

Do all you want HMRC. I have been reached around. Now I intend to reach back.

I strongly advise anyone with money to p*ss it all on drugs and hookers. Then squander the rest. Or go abroad.