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

[Buzby]

jk email

Just read the above document. The responses to the FOI requests are simply staggering.

As well as dodging every request, they maintain the following assertion:

"It [HMRC] strongly believes that [blah blah] none of the scheme users could have been in any doubt that they were deliberately flouting the clear intention of the 1987 legislation"

and that we "ought to have been aware of the likely consequences of their [our] wilful attempt to flout the law."

I strongly suspect that none if any scheme users had even heard of the 1987 legislation at the time. It's not really something you need to be familiar with to be an IT contractor or property developer. (C++, Java, SQL yes... obscure legislation not so much). Plus the intention of the 1987 legislation (as well as not applying to us) is anything but clear. Hence the need for the "clarification".

Then to saw we wilfully flouted the law.... We believed (as we still do) that the we engaged in perfectly legal avoidance measures. If we wanted to deliberately flout the law we would have evaded tax.

It's amazingly arrogant that they can pass this nonsense off as answers to clear and acceptable questions...

hopefully the ombudsman would be able to get the minutes to the meetings HMRC had with Jane Kennedy. in her email she states

I remember the debate and was content that, having questioned officials closely on the impact of this proposal, very few would be affected, certainly not in the way that your attachment is suggesting.

the attachment referred to was the financial impact done for JCHR

[BarneyCool]

I dont want to be defeatest and have great hopes given the info recently but I feel a little like we are flogging a dead horse at the moment. It has a couple of breaths left and I believe it needs some mouth to mouth ! (Dodgy analogy to writing to MPS ) Why is no-one listening to this obvious wrong-doing ?

It seems like they (HMRC, Osborne, Gauke, Parker etc) have convinced themselves/been brainwashed of the above. When you look at the facts, let alone the subjective view that not being legal/tax folk we wouldnt have known this detail at the time, we had absolutely no clue from HMRC/IR to believe what we were doing was not going to be accepted until 2007. We certainly had no reason to suspect Padmore until march 2008 some 7 years later, which by the way, is when the scheme disbanded !

Pre 2007 the only info I had from HMRC/IR was that they were enquiring into my returns and furthermore they "want to make sure you pay the right tax, not too little or too much..." (Nov 2006). I have had enquiries when permy which were dropped once relevant info/explanations were supplied. HMRC/IR gave me no reason to believe the same wouldnt happen here.

I really want to get a reply through an MP or two on this obvious discrepancy. Hopefully it is coming...

Yes I am also waiting for a reply which has been over 7 weeks now and no doubt will be the standard bull that has been fed to everyone else.

[Emigre]

hopefully the ombudsman would be able to get the minutes to the meetings HMRC had with Jane Kennedy. in her email she states



the attachment referred to was the financial impact done for JCHR

Let's be clear here. I used to believe that JK was the one that pushed this through. I now realise that could not be further from the truth. JK was the Minister, but she was fed a complete line by HMRC on all the facts.

There is no doubt in my mind that HMRC have maladministered this whole sorry saga and as a result has caused UK plc immeasurable harm (what will be the final cost of the Vodafone India mess?) The cost of that alone makes the claims made against us look pathetically insignificant.

Hartnett was accused last year of misleading Parliament over the Goldman Sachs affair. Such actions seem to sit quite comfortably with him, perhaps even to the point that it is becoming institutionalised. Certainly HMRC are displaying an inbred belief that they are entitled to wag the dog.

[TAF4]

Hartnett was accused last year of misleading Parliament over the Goldman Sachs affair. Such actions seem to sit quite comfortably with him, perhaps even to the point that it is becoming institutionalised.

For this level of arrogance to be consistently and confidently portrayed it has to be within the HMRC culture. Why is it that I smell whiffs of Gordon Brown's arrogance and detatchment in the position HMRC took then and are maintaining now?

Perhaps 10+ years of GB and his 'taxation by stealth' tactics has imbued Hector with a sense of being above the law.

(Hi )

[p4nd4b34r]

members email addresses

Apologies if this is already common knowledge but one of the docs contained an mp's email address.
It looked to be a fairly standard format so I tried it on my MP Andrew Stunell and it was correct
ie my mp's email is stunella@parliament.uk, in case anyone wants to badger them further...

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I dont want to be defeatest and have great hopes given the info recently but I feel a little like we are flogging a dead horse at the moment. It has a couple of breaths left and I believe it needs some mouth to mouth !

The bottom line is we need more people writing to their MPs. At the moment I'm guessing only a hundred or so have done so.

We are working behind the scenes to get the message out there.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I have updated the 1st post of the thread.

http://forums.contractoruk.com/accou...ml#post1530143

[TalkingCheese]

I have updated the 1st post of the thread.

http://forums.contractoruk.com/accou...ml#post1530143

Thanks DR. Do we know if HMRC are talking to Montpelier yet re: next steps ?

I wonder if HMRC are playing for time at the moment. Looking for another light bulb to switch itself on ? Seems so odd we havent heard anything from them.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Thanks DR. Do we know if HMRC are talking to Montpelier yet re: next steps ?

I wonder if HMRC are playing for time at the moment. Looking for another light bulb to switch itself on ? Seems so odd we havent heard anything from them.

They are in no rush. The longer it takes the more interest accrues and the more people are screwed.

I don't know if I mentioned this before but my brother-in-law used to work for HMRC investigations so I have an inside view of the mentality. :nazi:

[BrilloPad]

They are in no rush. The longer it takes the more interest accrues and the more people are screwed.

I don't know if I mentioned this before but my brother-in-law used to work for HMRC investigations so I have an inside view of the mentality. :nazi:

You make it sound like they have a plan. I believe they dont have a clue what they are doing. All they know is that they are right and we are wrong.