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

[the great escape]

But i think the point they are making is tax avoidance is a political hot potato at the moment. The chances of government repealing any retro tax is very unlikely.
The media and the left will have field day with the government seen to be back tracking and helping out rich tax avoider friends in keeping their unpaid taxes.

I saw no reference to 'unpaid taxes' in the Gaurdian article so can only assume it's your own interpretation [IC] of the events. It's these loose associations between what is defined and what is not, whether it be on this forum or by the press at large, that suggests that avoidance is an attempt to pay less than you should.

However, tax avoidanace exists simply because the level of 'what you should' is fluid, vague and, in Britain's case compared to it's Euro peers, arguablly unfair. It is only through bringing these issues to the govt.'s attention through the courts and parliamentary review - unfortunately at our expense - that the govt. can finally crystalise what is fair under those circumstances to the taxpayer, all legalities and moralities considered. Surely our case is testimony to that. I don't know any of the supportive MPs personally, so why bother reviewing my case, except if they themselves see something wrong in principle.

If it takes too long to get it right in the first place Mr Gauke, freeze registration of all new avoidance schemes and prospectively close all those active one-by-one. Is that any worse than catching up with the list of 20,000 odd tax tribunals, which is growing by the day?

I have worked and been taxed in several european countries, two of which definitely enjoy a higher standard of living than the UK. In both, the tax position of an IT&T consultant, like Mr Huitson, is very clear. A specific tax regime created by the govt. that acknowledges the special position of the consultant and affords him a retention rate comparable (after taxes and fees) with the Montpelier scheme - fact.

Raising the profile of tax avoidance again only seeks to highlight what the British tax system needs - not more scandal, more reality.

[Toocan]

I have worked and been taxed in several european countries, two of which definitely enjoy a higher standard of living than the UK. In both, the tax position of an IT&T consultant, like Mr Huitson, is very clear. A specific tax regime created by the govt. that acknowledges the special position of the consultant and affords him a retention rate comparable (after taxes and fees) with the Montpelier scheme - fact.

There it is - the answer to IR35 and the "avoidance" issue. Even if the "retention rate" was less - it would still be far better than all of this.

This is all of HMRCs making - all they had to do was have a system that was certain.

[SantaClaus]

There it is - the answer to IR35 and the "avoidance" issue. Even if the "retention rate" was less - it would still be far better than all of this.

This is all of HMRCs making - all they had to do was have a system that was certain.

That is such a huge point Toocan. IR35 was not certain, there was no certain way of conducting one's tax affairs as an inependent consultant. This is what drove many to use a tax avoidance scheme that oddly gave more certainty than the "straightforward" way of doing things.

Sounds like a Monty Python script, but then anything to do with HMRC usually is.

[Disgusted of Coventry]

There it is - the answer to IR35 and the "avoidance" issue. Even if the "retention rate" was less - it would still be far better than all of this.

This is all of HMRCs making - all they had to do was have a system that was certain.

Was this the motivation for the retrospective element of s58? HMRC's perception of the schemes' relationship with IR35?

[the great escape]

Was this the motivation for the retrospective element of s58? HMRC's perception of the schemes' relationship with IR35?

Well if the validity of the Mont scheme proves IR35 was basically ineffective in tackling the nature of the consultant, surely they can evolve it after this shambles is over into something that is fair and watertight. For all our efforts, the govt. should be grateful that the private sector is footing the bill with external companies, like Mont and Whitehouse, to iron out the finer details.

If it was Labour's idea to start with and the Conservatives were against anyway, just call it a Gordon Brown own goal Mr Gauke and move on.

[marcuss]

No reply from MP

Bob Blackman MP, Harrow East - has anyone got anywhere with him?

I initially wrote to him in Mar12 then a couple of reminders, then last letter from DR 10 days ago... no reply part from acknowledgement :-(

Sent off another reminder today hoping he'd read it before tomorrow!

[bollox]

Reply from MP's PA

"I have spoken to Bob and given him a copy of the amendment. Given the urgency is going to speak to David Gaulke personally in the lobby today and ask him to support the amendment."

He's been away all last week and i've been badgering the assistant - so very pleased with the above - lets hope he does what he says.......

[SantaClaus]

Bob Blackman MP, Harrow East - has anyone got anywhere with him?

I initially wrote to him in Mar12 then a couple of reminders, then last letter from DR 10 days ago... no reply part from acknowledgement :-(

Sent off another reminder today hoping he'd read it before tomorrow!

You could try contacting him on 020 8421 4161

Harrow East Conservatives | Contact Us

[Disgusted of Coventry]

Well if the validity of the Mont scheme proves IR35 was basically ineffective in tackling the nature of the consultant, surely they can evolve it after this shambles is over into something that is fair and watertight.

It's more likely to be the exact opposite.

HMRC's behaviour is like that of a petulant teenager. Whenever it gets something wrong, it embarks on an elaborate argument of self-justification.

[the great escape]

Parliamentary business for Tuesday 26 June 2012

It's all public.

Should be able to listen to the debate live on the Parliament website.

It is the Finance Bill Committee, debating this year's budget.

Finance Bill Committee at 10:30am & 4.30pm
Parliament UK: Parliamentary Calendar

HM Tresury oral questions at 2.30pm, including Topical questions (wonder if it gets a mention)
Parliament UK: Parliamentary Calendar

I take it both are worth listening to.