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

[DonkeyRhubarb]

So all we can say really is that the only consistency that HMRC have exhibited is inconsistency

The ones where no money went through the scheme I can understand.

The others I'm at a loss to explain.

Maybe the Liverpool lot just screwed up.

[moira under the stairs]

So all we can say really is that the only consistency that HMRC have exhibited is inconsistency

[moira under the stairs]

The ones where no money went through the scheme I can understand.

The others I'm at a loss to explain.

Maybe the Liverpool lot just screwed up.

Maybe the Liverpool Lot saw the truth, that's why it was moved

[Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing]

Maybe the Liverpool Lot saw the truth, that's why it was moved

Perhaps so. Nothing is strictly impossible but at least it would be a first.

What is certain is that HMRC through a senior office / officer accepted DTA claims without a fight or a struggle or even a grunt. Hardly matches what was claimed by HMRC witness testimony at the JR. But it is interesting if not coincidence that HMRC moved the case from SI Liverpool to SI Manchester within weeks of HMRC accepting the DTA claims. Guess that would not have been a pleasant exchange. "Hey whak, you talkin to me or chewin a brick?. Dey are my customers. If I wanna let 'em have relief I will and no Manc can tell a Red Nose otherwise. Try goin and givin yerself some relief. Oh I am a Liverpudlian, I'm from the Spion Kop!"

[smalldog]

Perhaps so. Nothing is strictly impossible but at least it would be a first.

What is certain is that HMRC through a senior office / officer accepted DTA claims without a fight or a struggle or even a grunt. Hardly matches what was claimed by HMRC witness testimony at the JR. But it is interesting if not coincidence that HMRC moved the case from SI Liverpool to SI Manchester within weeks of HMRC accepting the DTA claims. Guess that would not have been a pleasant exchange. "Hey whak, you talkin to me or chewin a brick?. Dey are my customers. If I wanna let 'em have relief I will and no Manc can tell a Red Nose otherwise. Try goin and givin yerself some relief. Oh I am a Liverpudlian, I'm from the Spion Kop!"

And surely as they closed some of the enquiries that means it must have worked, which completely contradicts the current Gauke statement about HMRC stating the contrary.

[moira under the stairs]

And surely as they closed some of the enquiries that means it must have worked, which completely contradicts the current Gauke statement about HMRC stating the contrary.

What a frigging mess... tut tut HMRC... you see what you are exposing yourself too..... total bl00dy incompetence. One up for the civil service.

[OldITGit]

Interesting Article in The Times today

What a frigging mess... tut tut HMRC... you see what you are exposing yourself too..... total bl00dy incompetence. One up for the civil service.

Unfortunately I cannot post link as my Times memnbership expired, but page 34 of Business section reports that Barclays are fighting back on their retrospection (of £300million) - not the only similarity, they used the bond transfer scheme as it was accepted practice in other banks and as such accepted by HMRC as no action had been taken against similar pre existing schemes by others...............hmmmm morally inconsistent

[moira under the stairs]

Unfortunately I cannot post link as my Times memnbership expired, but page 34 of Business section reports that Barclays are fighting back on their retrospection (of £300million) - not the only similarity, they used the bond transfer scheme as it was accepted practice in other banks and as such accepted by HMRC as no action had been taken against similar pre existing schemes by others...............hmmmm morally inconsistent

Yes read a similar article yesterday BBC News - Barclays hits back against tax scheme claims

[lucozade]

Unfortunately I cannot post link as my Times memnbership expired, but page 34 of Business section reports that Barclays are fighting back on their retrospection (of £300million) - not the only similarity, they used the bond transfer scheme as it was accepted practice in other banks and as such accepted by HMRC as no action had been taken against similar pre existing schemes by others...............hmmmm morally inconsistent

Does this mean they paid the money are not paying the money or are refusing to pay the money?

[moggy]

Does this mean they paid the money are not paying the money or are refusing to pay the money?

from the telegraph today it seems that they are simply complaining about the way it was done and then leaked to the papers i.e. the name of the bank involved.

Government 'damaged' Barclays with disclosure on £500m tax avoidance scheme - Telegraph