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

[nevergiveup]

TC, I've seen the tweet on the NTRT website. I can confirm that nobody "on the inside track" knows anything about any big news anytime soon.

If there is some big news coming, I don't know what it is and nor do the Group behind the campaign.

Let's not get excited about something that is as far as is known - a non story.

Good weekend all.

Can we get that tweet deleted as it's giving people false hope of good news? Also find out who put it on and why? We don't need this cr@p.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Can we get that tweet deleted as it's giving people false hope of good news? Also find out who put it on and why? We don't need this cr@p.

I'm a luddite when it comes to twitter but I've asked someone if it can be deleted. I've no idea who tweeted it or why.

[lucozade]

Met with my MP - Mark Menzies this morning

Things were a bit rushed it has to be said. He's already fully aware of the issue as at least 2 others have had meetings with him. So good efforts all round.

What I brought to the table was something a bit different. I gave him all my HMRC letters which do not ever show that they "had warned us". He liked them.

What was also key was that he felt that HMRC should be encouraged to do a deal with us all instead of chasing for money they will never get. I've advised him they already did do a deal with Suo Moto and that's when I really got his attention.

He's promised to arrange a meeting with Mr Guake and go through the issues and report back to us.

No offer of supporting the campaign but he definately was totally against retrospective taxation.

I presented him with the evidence HMRC knew about the scheme for a very long time too. Which seemed to help my argument some what.

I don't exactly feel mega positive but felt the meeting went well.

I could have done things a lot better but having only been given a 15 minute slot it's hard to get this kind of point across.

[nevergiveup]

Things were a bit rushed it has to be said. He's already fully aware of the issue as at least 2 others have had meetings with him. So good efforts all round.

What I brought to the table was something a bit different. I gave him all my HMRC letters which do not ever show that they "had warned us". He liked them.

What was also key was that he felt that HMRC should be encouraged to do a deal with us all instead of chasing for money they will never get. I've advised him they already did do a deal with Suo Moto and that's when I really got his attention.

He's promised to arrange a meeting with Mr Guake and go through the issues and report back to us.

No offer of supporting the campaign but he definately was totally against retrospective taxation.

I presented him with the evidence HMRC knew about the scheme for a very long time too. Which seemed to help my argument some what.

I don't exactly feel mega positive but felt the meeting went well.

I could have done things a lot better but having only been given a 15 minute slot it's hard to get this kind of point across.

Well done. Why should we do a deal. We did nothing wrong and besides, unless it was a very small % of what the majority owe people still would struggle to cough up...

All or nothing as far as I'm concerned!

[TalkingCheese]

Things were a bit rushed it has to be said. He's already fully aware of the issue as at least 2 others have had meetings with him. So good efforts all round.

What I brought to the table was something a bit different. I gave him all my HMRC letters which do not ever show that they "had warned us". He liked them.

What was also key was that he felt that HMRC should be encouraged to do a deal with us all instead of chasing for money they will never get. I've advised him they already did do a deal with Suo Moto and that's when I really got his attention.

He's promised to arrange a meeting with Mr Guake and go through the issues and report back to us.

No offer of supporting the campaign but he definately was totally against retrospective taxation.

I presented him with the evidence HMRC knew about the scheme for a very long time too. Which seemed to help my argument some what.

I don't exactly feel mega positive but felt the meeting went well.

I could have done things a lot better but having only been given a 15 minute slot it's hard to get this kind of point across.

Good one. Sounds fairly positive to me. Great that he is going to chat to gauke.

[Dieselpower]

No deal or no deal

Things were a bit rushed it has to be said. He's already fully aware of the issue as at least 2 others have had meetings with him. So good efforts all round.

What I brought to the table was something a bit different. I gave him all my HMRC letters which do not ever show that they "had warned us". He liked them.

What was also key was that he felt that HMRC should be encouraged to do a deal with us all instead of chasing for money they will never get. I've advised him they already did do a deal with Suo Moto and that's when I really got his attention.

He's promised to arrange a meeting with Mr Guake and go through the issues and report back to us.

No offer of supporting the campaign but he definately was totally against retrospective taxation.

I presented him with the evidence HMRC knew about the scheme for a very long time too. Which seemed to help my argument some what.

I don't exactly feel mega positive but felt the meeting went well.

I could have done things a lot better but having only been given a 15 minute slot it's hard to get this kind of point across.

Very gd meeting Lucozade - i personally would rather go bust than borrow money off people to pay HMRC having done a deal. Gauke must be feeling the heat here - everyones writing him letters and lots of MPs are demanding answers.

[the great escape]

Well done. Why should we do a deal. We did nothing wrong and besides, unless it was a very small % of what the majority owe people still would struggle to cough up...

All or nothing as far as I'm concerned!

Agree. It's pleasing to hear that Lucozade has made it to 2nd base and the MP was sympathetic. But for me they've got to believe totally in the injustice of the ruling. From the Clause 55 transcript and related readings, MPs are more likely to support us on principle than economics. I can't see any of them convincing HMRC to take pity on us with a 'repealed sentence'.

Those MPs alarmed by the retrospective element from letters, face-to-facing and lobbying will simply have to band together and amend it in one of the following Finance Acts.

Knowledge of the Suo Motu circa 2001 should serve to highlight HMRC's ineptitude in legislating on similar [Montpelier] schemes and a disregard for legitimate expectation and the Rees rules. Cutting a deal for SM clients soon after just seems to cement the case.

I have spoken to HMRC several times about these issues. On comparing Suo Motu with MP, they considered the schemes to be 'similar if not identical'. On whether they could disclose details about the SM deal, they said they 'did not have the authority from those clients' to do so. On whether clients that have settled would get their money back if the retrospective element is overturned, their response was 'no, we'd consider their affairs closed'

After speaking to Whitehouse Friday, I'm happy to stay the course.

[OldITGit]

While it is encouraging to hear of a "deal"

I personally have neither the funds or the intention of cutting a deal with HMRC In fact I wont be happy or appeased unless I have a full apology from them and financial compensation from them for what they have attempted and indeed have done with regard to their questionable methods and behaviour regarding S58. Unlike them I have not misled a finance minister, or misled Parliament or misinformed a high court judge ( no matter that he was HMRC biased). I have acted at all times within the law, before the pervertion of S58 and not withstanding the principles of MP's when in opposition and now in power, my principles do not change as such my position does not change.

[BrilloPad]

I personally have neither the funds or the intention of cutting a deal with HMRC In fact I wont be happy or appeased unless I have a full apology from them and financial compensation from them for what they have attempted and indeed have done with regard to their questionable methods and behaviour regarding S58. Unlike them I have not misled a finance minister, or misled Parliament or misinformed a high court judge ( no matter that he was HMRC biased). I have acted at all times within the law, before the pervertion of S58 and not withstanding the principles of MP's when in opposition and now in power, my principles do not change as such my position does not change.

Personally I would discuss a deal as I want to put this behind me and move on. However HMRC have made their position quite clear. In other words, what either of us think does not matter.

But they are making a huge mistake. I want my own appeal tribunal. I bet the rest of you do too. My circumstances are unique. We are all individuals. (Awaits obvious response).

[p4nd4b34r]

Personally I would discuss a deal as I want to put this behind me and move on. However HMRC have made their position quite clear. In other words, what either of us think does not matter.

But they are making a huge mistake. I want my own appeal tribunal. I bet the rest of you do too. My circumstances are unique. We are all individuals. (Awaits obvious response).

i feel the same Brillo, i want my own tribunal, do i need to respond to the last hmrc letter advising them i dont wish to be bound by a test case?