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

[Emigre]

Rees Rules

what are the rees rules??

Take a look at http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/budget-update...other-6655.pdf. It is all about the new HMRC protocol on retrospective tax changes. Page 7 refers to Peter Rees.

A copy can also be found at I002 on the No To Retro Tax website.

[Emigre]

Montpelier Letter

I have just received a letter from Montpelier alerting me to the NoToRetroTax Campaign and recommending that I take a look at the No To Retrospective Taxation | Campaign Against Retrospective Tax Legislation website.

Has anyone else received one?

[portseven]

Take a look at http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/budget-update...other-6655.pdf. It is all about the new HMRC protocol on retrospective tax changes. Page 7 refers to Peter Rees.

A copy can also be found at I002 on the No To Retro Tax website.

Cheers for that, so looks like they were introduced in 2010 - after BN66, is it not a flawed argment to say that parliment should have introduced legistlation in line with the rees rules that were not in place at that time.

Then again it could be a good way to illustrate our own position!

[Emigre]

Cheers for that, so looks like they were introduced in 2010 - after BN66, is it not a flawed argment to say that parliment should have introduced legistlation in line with the rees rules that were not in place at that time.

Then again it could be a good way to illustrate our own position!

Hansard records that the Opposition, led by Gauke, argued that BN66 was not in line with the Rees Rules. Jane Kennedy, at the time Exchequer Secretary, argued that BN66 was a clarification of Padmore in 1987, and not a change, and that Padmore had been the notification.

This could not have been further from the truth. All of this information is available in the Key Documents folder on the NoToRetroTax site.

[PlaneSailing]

Cheers for that, so looks like they were introduced in 2010 - after BN66, is it not a flawed argment to say that parliment should have introduced legistlation in line with the rees rules that were not in place at that time.

Then again it could be a good way to illustrate our own position!

Rees rules came in around 1978 if memory serves.

[BettySwollocks]

Hi Betty

Firstly, please edit your earlier post today to remove the amount paid through the trust. It could help HMRC identify you.

Second, you have asked a valid question. However, let's suppose you set yourself up a limited company on 6 April 2007 and operated that way for the tax year. Surely, that is the point in time that defined your tax basis for the year? You need to follow the money in this. During 2007/08 your receipts were made up of your income from self-employment and receipts from your family trust. The cashflows of those passed through a partnership, to the trust and being an Interest In Possession trust were passed on to you or your nominated beneficiaries. That is a true reflection of what you actually did in 2007/08. To say it was something else would be inaccurate and thus inappropriate. Even today, the changed tax legislation arising from S58 has not been tested at the Tax Tribunal. There are several people who are prepared to argue that S58 does not apply to us.

I don't want to raise your hopes in that area but it is quite possible.

I agree with everything you've stated above regarding the cash flow although I would maintain that there was still a choice to be made at the time of submitting the return whether or not to to invoke the IOM DTA as a means of not having the money from the trust taxed further. This is where my confusion and currently pessimistic view of my 2008 return derive from.

Incidentally, I never received CNs for the other two years (I asked again at the start of the year like DR suggested and they only sent me a copy of one) - Hector's using Discovery for these which I challenged in Jan 12 and asked for them to be withdrawn and still haven't heard.

I also asked them to refund a large chunk of money they're holding as a result of over charging me after I switched to the dark (PAYE) side in 09 and I've not heard a squeek out of them regarding that either - I hope it's offsetting a little of the interest that's ticking...

[Morlock]

...I would maintain that there was still a choice to be made at the time of submitting the return whether or not to to invoke the IOM DTA as a means of not having the money from the trust taxed further....

So let's say you'd realised that your dual-taxation claim was likely to be challenged. What would you have done differently when filling in your SA return?

[travellingknob]

CN 2008 just received

I have just received a Closure Notice for 2008.

I was in a the scheme for several years before, never heard a word from anyone about the enquiries until July 2007 when I had an enquiry opened on my 05 return. After responding, I got another letter saying the enquiry would be kept open and would not be resolved for a very long time. Then during the next 2 months they opened enquiries into both earlier and later years. Thats the first I ever knew of a problem.
In July 08 I received closure notices for all enquiry years except 08. They never actually opened an enquiry into my 08 return but now I have a closure notice for that year anyway.

Of course HRMC told me the scheme didn't work and informed to pay on account all the way through those early years. NOT !!!

[DonkeyRhubarb]

They never actually opened an enquiry into my 08 return but now I have a closure notice for that year anyway.

HMRC have already conceded that Closure Notices are invalid if there was no prior enquiry.

Two people have had CNs withdrawn for this reason, and saved themselves 4-figure sums.

It is definitely worth pursuing this.

[OldITGit]

Me Too

I have just received a letter from Montpelier alerting me to the NoToRetroTax Campaign and recommending that I take a look at the No To Retrospective Taxation | Campaign Against Retrospective Tax Legislation website.

Has anyone else received one?

Received the same letter today
OIG