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

[freedomfighter]

Zac Goldsmith

I got this response from Zac Goldsmith. Should I say it's okay for him to send the info
I attached from notoretro to HMRC and co?

>>>>>>>>>>>>
I will read through your information. In the meantime, and with your permission, I will relay your feedback to the HMRC, and to Mark Hoban at the Treasury for their direct response. Please let me know.
Very best wishes,
Zac Goldsmith
>>>>>>>>>>>

[moira under the stairs]

I'm getting myself prepared for my MP meeting on Saturday morning.

Taking along the following key documents:

H004-HMRC_letters_A_+_B_-_from_taking_4_cases_to_SC_to_BN66_with_no_warning .pdf
H006-HMRC_contradictions_re_dates.pdf
I009-_HMRC_knew_about_the_scheme_for_14_years.pdf
Local MP lobbying toolkit - April 2012.pdf
Presentation to MPs - April 2012.ppt
Toolkit for responding to Gauke standard response - May 2012 (4).doc

From my own perspective the thing that really bugs the life out of me is that "we" were all pushed into schemes as a result of the totally uncertainly over IR35. Here we are some time on fighting for having been in a scheme and yet new IR35 guidelines have come out to what amounts to more uncertainty.

I really want to ask - "Is the Government intent in destroying small businesses as I cannot see anyway of operating correctly even if I do pay more NI/PAYE I feel I won't have paid the right amount or that I'll be targetted in the future with some other nonsense approach by HMRC"

The shear mention of IR35 was enough for my MP to raise the eyebrows,

I told my MP that the introduction of an unthought out policy such as IR35 (which the CBI warned was UN-workable) was the main driver for me to join the scheme to have some certainty of Tax payments closely followed by My Tax & NI (double NI) was going through the roof.

The only small business's the government's are interested in is those that can employ many people above the threshold that they can of-course 'tax'.

[TalkingCheese]

I say "Aye!"

I got this response from Zac Goldsmith. Should I say it's okay for him to send the info
I attached from notoretro to HMRC and co?

>>>>>>>>>>>>
I will read through your information. In the meantime, and with your permission, I will relay your feedback to the HMRC, and to Mark Hoban at the Treasury for their direct response. Please let me know.
Very best wishes,
Zac Goldsmith
>>>>>>>>>>>

The more evidence we can get in front of the Treasury the better I believe. As for info to HMRC I dont see any harm in sending it to them. If they want to they can get it anyway (I am sure they are fine with spending £200 of taxpayers money... no skin off their noses and no individual/family will go without or be made bankrupt. Besides, they have already spent plenty on this sorry episode).

[moira under the stairs]

The more evidence we can get in front of the Treasury the better I believe. As for info to HMRC I dont see any harm in sending it to them. If they want to they can get it anyway (I am sure they are fine with spending £200 of taxpayers money... no skin off their noses and no individual/family will go without or be made bankrupt. Besides, they have already spent plenty on this sorry episode).

... and we will all wait for the spin HMRC will put on it !!! The more Treasury members and MP's we can get this in front of the better.

[TalkingCheese]

... and we will all wait for the spin HMRC will put on it !!! The more Treasury members and MP's we can get this in front of the better.

I can be fairly objective even under these trying circumstances. I am willing to take on board reasonable answers that HMRC have but the fact they (HMRC/Osborne/Gauke etc) wont answer any of our questions directly suggests to me that there are no reasonable answers and the further it cements our case. The longer this goes on the more I believe in the injustice of it.

[Fog]

Priority?

Anyone have any ideas how we can make this a Gauke priority? I'm guessing there are other 'things' he has to deal with - but what?

[moira under the stairs]

I can be fairly objective even under these trying circumstances. I am willing to take on board reasonable answers that HMRC have but the fact they (HMRC/Osborne/Gauke etc) wont answer any of our questions directly suggests to me that there are no reasonable answers and the further it cements our case. The longer this goes on the more I believe in the injustice of it.

I don't disagree with you !!

[javadude]

Anyone have any ideas how we can make this a Gauke priority? I'm guessing there are other 'things' he has to deal with - but what?

It sounds like he's busy making charities angry from this Times article... http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/p...cle3405565.ece

[nevergiveup]

Anyone have any ideas how we can make this a Gauke priority? I'm guessing there are other 'things' he has to deal with - but what?

Your having a laugh. I've been waiting for a response from my MP and Gauke since the 9th of March. I recon my letter has fallen down the back of his sofa!

[Emigre]

Zac Goldsmith

I got this response from Zac Goldsmith. Should I say it's okay for him to send the info
I attached from notoretro to HMRC and co?

>>>>>>>>>>>>
I will read through your information. In the meantime, and with your permission, I will relay your feedback to the HMRC, and to Mark Hoban at the Treasury for their direct response. Please let me know.
Very best wishes,
Zac Goldsmith
>>>>>>>>>>>

We cannot expect MPs to get answers to our issues if we tie their hands behind their backs. If we have information and evidence, we must expect it to reach HMRC sometime. We are confident that the evidence is true and accurate and that there is very little spin room for them. Ask him to forward the evidence. The key is to try and ellicit a detailed response rather than "the Courts have decided". Has Zac seen the Gauke rebuttal?

I am meeting Zac with another NTRT member next Friday. Out of interest, what did you send him? It will be useful to know.

Thanks