Originally posted by moira under the stairs
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
No To Retro Tax – Campaign Against Section 58 Finance Act 2008
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
Topic is closed
-
-
Meeting with my MP today (Con)
Saw my MP today (post Gaukes standard letter). I have been writing to my MP for three years now (letters going back from Timms, Darling etc). After making me wait 40mins, he seemed totally unprepared (who I was, why was I here to see him). After spending a few minutes brining him up to speed - he made a few comments:-
1) “Using a off-shore scheme is not good” (I informed him it was completely legal, declared to HMRC and mentioned TE63 etc etc)
2) “Having lost the court cases, how was I going to pay my 100K bill?”
3) “Have I asked a bank loan me the money?”
4) “What savings do I have?”
5) “Have I asked HMRC for payment terms?”
After informing him that I was here for his help – I went through things like “HMRC never told me that the scheme did not work” or “that they would Retro tax me from 2002 to 2008”…..
He agree that Gauke should indeed answer the shortcomings in his latest standard letter and that he would write to Gauke ASAP and get his answers.
I mentioned Jane Kennedy and her emails etc and lack of HMRC Impact assessment or not using the Rees Rules (which he had never heard of) – all to which he said NOTHING and just made a strange noise in mouth – I pushed the issue and at which point I was informed my time was UP (10 minutes) and did I know that there where 3 other people waiting to see him☹Comment
-
Originally posted by warlord View PostSaw my MP today (post Gaukes standard letter). I have been writing to my MP for three years now (letters going back from Timms, Darling etc). After making me wait 40mins, he seemed totally unprepared (who I was, why was I here to see him). After spending a few minutes brining him up to speed - he made a few comments:-
1) “Using a off-shore scheme is not good” (I informed him it was completely legal, declared to HMRC and mentioned TE63 etc etc)
2) “Having lost the court cases, how was I going to pay my 100K bill?”
3) “Have I asked a bank loan me the money?”
4) “What savings do I have?”
5) “Have I asked HMRC for payment terms?”
After informing him that I was here for his help – I went through things like “HMRC never told me that the scheme did not work” or “that they would Retro tax me from 2002 to 2008”…..
He agree that Gauke should indeed answer the shortcomings in his latest standard letter and that he would write to Gauke ASAP and get his answers.
I mentioned Jane Kennedy and her emails etc and lack of HMRC Impact assessment or not using the Rees Rules (which he had never heard of) – all to which he said NOTHING and just made a strange noise in mouth – I pushed the issue and at which point I was informed my time was UP (10 minutes) and did I know that there where 3 other people waiting to see him☹
Disgraceful.Comment
-
Originally posted by warlord View PostSaw my MP today (post Gaukes standard letter). I have been writing to my MP for three years now (letters going back from Timms, Darling etc). After making me wait 40mins, he seemed totally unprepared (who I was, why was I here to see him). After spending a few minutes brining him up to speed - he made a few comments:-
1) “Using a off-shore scheme is not good” (I informed him it was completely legal, declared to HMRC and mentioned TE63 etc etc)
2) “Having lost the court cases, how was I going to pay my 100K bill?”
3) “Have I asked a bank loan me the money?”
4) “What savings do I have?”
5) “Have I asked HMRC for payment terms?”
After informing him that I was here for his help – I went through things like “HMRC never told me that the scheme did not work” or “that they would Retro tax me from 2002 to 2008”…..
He agree that Gauke should indeed answer the shortcomings in his latest standard letter and that he would write to Gauke ASAP and get his answers.
I mentioned Jane Kennedy and her emails etc and lack of HMRC Impact assessment or not using the Rees Rules (which he had never heard of) – all to which he said NOTHING and just made a strange noise in mouth – I pushed the issue and at which point I was informed my time was UP (10 minutes) and did I know that there where 3 other people waiting to see him☹MUTS likes it HotComment
-
Originally posted by warlord View PostSaw my MP today (post Gaukes standard letter). I have been writing to my MP for three years now (letters going back from Timms, Darling etc). After making me wait 40mins, he seemed totally unprepared (who I was, why was I here to see him). After spending a few minutes brining him up to speed - he made a few comments:-
1) “Using a off-shore scheme is not good” (I informed him it was completely legal, declared to HMRC and mentioned TE63 etc etc)
2) “Having lost the court cases, how was I going to pay my 100K bill?”
3) “Have I asked a bank loan me the money?”
4) “What savings do I have?”
5) “Have I asked HMRC for payment terms?”
After informing him that I was here for his help – I went through things like “HMRC never told me that the scheme did not work” or “that they would Retro tax me from 2002 to 2008”…..
He agree that Gauke should indeed answer the shortcomings in his latest standard letter and that he would write to Gauke ASAP and get his answers.
I mentioned Jane Kennedy and her emails etc and lack of HMRC Impact assessment or not using the Rees Rules (which he had never heard of) – all to which he said NOTHING and just made a strange noise in mouth – I pushed the issue and at which point I was informed my time was UP (10 minutes) and did I know that there where 3 other people waiting to see him☹
I wonder if your MP feels it is acceptable to mislead Parliament?There's an elephant wondering around here...Comment
-
Originally posted by Toocan View PostMPs are there to represent you. If you were a plumber and refused to "plum", or a joiner and refused to "join" - you'd be out of a job pretty quickly.
I wonder if your MP feels it is acceptable to mislead Parliament?'Orwell's 1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual'. -
Nick Pickles, director of Big Brother Watch.Comment
-
Document B025
Can you believe this? It's the definition of duplicity. Paragraph 7 of B025 reads...
"7. Before any cases were listed, however, the Government announced in the Budget of 12th March 2008 proposals to introduce legislation retrospectively to put beyong doubt the question of the validity of claims such as those made by the claimant."
Whereas it ought to read like this...
"7. HMRC reneged on its agreement, however, and instead deceived the Government into announcing in the Budget of 12th March 2008 proposals to introduce legislation retrospectively to negate the validity of claims such as those made by the claimant."
Unbelievable!Comment
-
Originally posted by SantaClaus View PostMaybe we should put up our own candidates in those constituencies where an MP can just about string a sentence together.Comment
-
Tory MPs
Some Tories have been supportive but there is a bit of a pattern emerging.
I get the feeling they are being urged to discourage us. I'm not sure if this is coming from Gauke & Co in the Treasury or Tory Central Office.
If your MP is being unhelpful they may need a bit of prodding to do their job ie. represent you as their constituent.Comment
-
Originally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View PostSome Tories have been supportive but there is a bit of a pattern emerging.
I get the feeling they are being urged to discourage us. I'm not sure if this is coming from Gauke & Co in the Treasury or Tory Central Office.
If your MP is being unhelpful they may need a bit of prodding to do their job ie. represent you as their constituent.
The way to approach an apathetic MP is by going on about the fact that Kennedy spouted a load of patently incorrect information, which then caused Parliament to vote in favour of a bill on false pretences.Join the campaign at
http://notoretrotax.org.ukComment
Topic is closed
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment