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

[centurian]

If you just have a single CTD which covers tax years pre and post 2004, I think you should be able apportion part of it to post 2004 and retain the balance in the CTD.

This is where things can get really complicated with the whole CTD-swap-for-APN thing - especially if you don't have enough to cover the maximum possible liability - the sum of all the possible APNs

What if you use a CTD to pay APN1, but don't have enough left to pay APN2, so you stump up the cash.

You subsequently lose APN2, but win APN1 - might seem unlikely, but MTM are making different arguments for different years.

Your CTD was used for the APN1 which you won so you get the cash back, but you then get hammered for interest on APN2 - even though you never actually paid a penny late of your total, final liability, because the CTD would have covered APN2.

One would hope HMRC would see common sense and allow the CTD to be reassigned again if they have to pay back an APN, but...

[Ooops]

Another accelerated payment notice

Oh it is real!!

I have received my accelerated payment for the years I was with degraaf.

Heads up everyone.

[SantaClaus]

Oh it is real!!

I have received my accelerated payment for the years I was with degraaf.

Heads up everyone.

Hi Ooops, is it an actual APN or a letter warning of impending APN?

[bananarepublic]

This is where things can get really complicated with the whole CTD-swap-for-APN thing - especially if you don't have enough to cover the maximum possible liability - the sum of all the possible APNs

What if you use a CTD to pay APN1, but don't have enough left to pay APN2, so you stump up the cash.

You subsequently lose APN2, but win APN1 - might seem unlikely, but MTM are making different arguments for different years.

Your CTD was used for the APN1 which you won so you get the cash back, but you then get hammered for interest on APN2 - even though you never actually paid a penny late of your total, final liability, because the CTD would have covered APN2.

One would hope HMRC would see common sense and allow the CTD to be reassigned again if they have to pay back an APN, but...

So are you saying that we get a different APN for each tax year post 2004 we were in the same scheme rather than a single APN with all years lumped together?

As I understand it the CTD is effectively encashed for tax when settled against the APN *NOT* when the final tax liability is decided. I asked HMRC this question when researching the CTD-APN interaction last year.

Surely in your example however HMRC would keep the money paid by the CTD with its earlier payment date and refund the cash paid later to the extent that it refunded the successful appeal?

Your scenario seems a bit far fetched for users of only the DTA avoidance scheme but a definite possibility for those who progressed from the DTA scheme to a different DOTAS scheme. But I doubt it adds an extra problem.

[bollox]

So am I the only Montpelier scheme user to have received an APN letter?

Mine is for 2008 tax year....

[DonkeyRhubarb]

So am I the only Montpelier scheme user to have received an APN letter?

Mine is for 2008 tax year....

No. Several Montpelier users have reported getting the letter.

[centurian]

As I understand it the CTD is effectively encashed for tax when settled against the APN *NOT* when the final tax liability is decided.

Exactly - that's the problem. APNs and CTDs are very similar in that they are a deposit in lieu of a final tax settlement - but a CTD can be used for any final tax settlement, whereas an APN is tied to a specific demand.

So you are taking something which could have been used for any demand - and locking it into a particular demand.

If you have enough CTDs to pay for all potential APNs you might receive - no problem.

But if you end up having to buy a "new" APN to cover any shortfall - that one won't have the original CTD interest stopping date - and even if you win the other cases and get the CTD/APN money refunded, you may still be on the hook for years of interest on the new APN you paid.

Your scenario seems a bit far fetched for users of only the DTA avoidance scheme but a definite possibility for those who progressed from the DTA scheme to a different DOTAS scheme. But I doubt it adds an extra problem.

Agreed - it's more likely for those that have multiple schemes, especially as those people may take a (perfectly valid) risk assessment that it's unlikely that all the schemes would be defeated, so the CTD only needs to cover a portion of the maximum possibly liability.

However, if HMRC are sending out multiple APNs for different years in the same scheme - the underlying issue remains if you don't have 100% CTD coverage.

[bananarepublic]

However, if HMRC are sending out multiple APNs for different years in the same scheme - the underlying issue remains if you don't have 100% CTD coverage.

Perhaps you are party to some inside knowledge to the affect that we could win our appeals for some years we used the DTA scheme but not others?

Otherwise I can't see a problem using CTDs to settle the liability - if the scheme succeeds or falls as a whole.

On further point. Are HMRC going to dribble the APNs one year at a time for users of a particular scheme? That could be a pain...

[DownButNotOut]

got mine

So am I the only Montpelier scheme user to have received an APN letter?

Mine is for 2008 tax year....

arrived yesterday (weekend special) what's the next move my NTRT brothers in arms?

[Ooops]

Hi Ooops, is it an actual APN or a letter warning of impending APN?

Hi SantaClaus. It's a letter warning of an impending APN, due in 4 weeks.