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

[screwthis]

I wonder if its more a case that they're thinking why should they fix this? they know the legislation shouldn't have been implemented, however it has been and the courts have upheld it (so far)...the tories know they would look bad (even though they would be doing the right thing!) in reversing this - the publicity for them wouldn't be good - i.e. labour etc would make it look like the tories are allowing 'tax evaders' to get away with it.

before I'm flamed I know any government should do the right moral thing - however being a realist we need to realise they aren't going to fix this just for that reason - maybe the parliament being misled in introducing this legislation in the first place is best hope we have to getting it changed..?

I think it's more to do with ego. We have been writing and writing and annoying and pestering and slagging him off on the forum so it has become an us and them situation.
The ego wants to win and in order to do that others must lose.

The us and them in 2008 was the Tories and Labour. Now it's the tories and us.

[slogger]

I think it's more to do with ego. We have been writing and writing and annoying and pestering and slagging him off on the forum so it has become an us and them situation.
The ego wants to win and in order to do that others must lose.

The us and them in 2008 was the Tories and Labour. Now it's the tories and us.

always need to give the 'enemy' a way out (art of war ;-) ) - if we dont then they have to fight to the death so to speak ... we need to manage this so we get what is right but also current government looks ok (note I said current!)

[moira under the stairs]

I think it's more to do with ego. We have been writing and writing and annoying and pestering and slagging him off on the forum so it has become an us and them situation.
The ego wants to win and in order to do that others must lose.

The us and them in 2008 was the Tories and Labour. Now it's the tories and us.

The political solution would be to look for a WIN WIN situation, I can think of a few, but I'm an Engineer who works on Logic not bollox.

[fubar123]

questions...

Hoping this goes well, but as I tend to try to plan for the worst, what happens regarding forced bankruptcy?

As many work in the financial industry with stringent screening checks, I guess any record of bankruptcy would likely prevent you from working again?

Secondly, as I've seen someone else mention a divorce, would this allow wife/children to rent somewhere to live if there is any equity left in property - then perhaps going on the housing list?

If bankrupt, divorced and unable to work, what happens regarding housing, etc?

[nevergiveup]

Hoping this goes well, but as I tend to try to plan for the worst, what happens regarding forced bankruptcy?

As many work in the financial industry with stringent screening checks, I guess any record of bankruptcy would likely prevent you from working again?

Secondly, as I've seen someone else mention a divorce, would this allow wife/children to rent somewhere to live if there is any equity left in property - then perhaps going on the housing list?

If bankrupt, divorced and unable to work, what happens regarding housing, etc?

1) Yep no chance of getting a job in the financial industry for years to come.

2) No idea but remember they can only take 50% of the anyone's equity.

3) Government will pay you benefits (which is why this whole thing is pure madness).

[fubar123]

...so in theory if you lose your house, they get the auction value on that, but end up paying benefit to you as you can't work for a period of time, plus have reduced ability to get employment in future.
'Ex'-wife and children will be on the housing list to get somewhere to live.
If lucky, you get somewhere to live.

If you don't lose your house but have no monetary assets, you can't work, so who pays the mortgage, council tax, etc? I presume you're allowed to keep a car to get groceries, etc?

With 50% odd interest, penalties, etc, I doubt many will have houses worth more than those figures alone, after taking off the outstanding mortgage.

And even by remortgaging to 100%, will you live long enough to pay it off...?
I guess the lenders will see this coming and refuse it.

[Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing]

...so in theory if you lose your house, they get the auction value on that, but end up paying benefit to you as you can't work for a period of time, plus have reduced ability to get employment in future.
'Ex'-wife and children will be on the housing list to get somewhere to live.
If lucky, you get somewhere to live.

If you don't lose your house but have no monetary assets, you can't work, so who pays the mortgage, council tax, etc? I presume you're allowed to keep a car to get groceries, etc?

With 50% odd interest, penalties, etc, I doubt many will have houses worth more than those figures alone, after taking off the outstanding mortgage.

And even by remortgaging to 100%, will you live long enough to pay it off...?
I guess the lenders will see this coming and refuse it.

First, HMRC cannot make you bankrupt. They can file a petition with the Court. You are invited by the Court to turn up and have the judgement handed down. If the court allows the petition then a liquidator is appointed who then takes legal control of your assets and disposes of them in the best way he/she feels fit to rover the liabilities deemed owed. You are now released from any liability of the court order.

If you have minors living with you and you are their legal gaurdian then the courts must allow 12 months for you to find alternative accommodation.

If you work in the Finance industry, then you'll probably be out of work for a very long time and be living off benefits or on the breadline compared to where you were. This will go on for more years than the "time" done by most criminals.

Simply, put, bankruptcy is no fun and is about as fiscally negative as it gets for HMRC. But also remember that such a scenario is a long way down the line. And if it ever came to pass and you accept the cordial invitation to turn up for your own hanging, then I'm sure telling the court some home truths about certain folk that landed you there would raise the eyebrows of the Judge. It may not change the outcome but invite the Press along and let rip. It's not as though you don't have some rather good ammo aboard the NTRT battleship...

[SantaClaus]

Speaking of the doomsday scenario being a long way down the road, considering there is a backlog of 20,000 tax tribunals, I hope everyone will be doing the decent thing and asking for their own tax tribunal hearing?

After all, every case is different

[Disgusted of Coventry]

Sorry to interrupt the flow of the thread, but I've just figured out what s58 reminds me of.

It's a 1993 party-political broadcast for the Labour Party (ironically), featuring Stephen Fry & Hugh Laurie. The victims of s58 are, entirely unintentionally, represented by the Small Businessman who appears at 3:40s into the video.

Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie Labour Party Political Broadcast 25th November 1993 - YouTube

[p4nd4b34r]

Speaking of the doomsday scenario being a long way down the road, considering there is a backlog of 20,000 tax tribunals, I hope everyone will be doing the decent thing and asking for their own tax tribunal hearing?

should we be doing this now?