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

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Hi DR

I was aware that this had been covered previously, but was also checking whether the letter I received is the latest 'standard' response that was being sent out?

I'll get the responses sent out today.

Cheers

There are a few slight variations of the standard Gauke letter but other people have received the one referring to the amendment being withdrawn.

Regards
DR

[BolshieBastard]

DR, et all

I have received a response from gauke via MP. All seems standard but I haven't seen anyone comment on his last paragraph..

"You may be aware that the amendment referrred to by Mr Contractin, which asked for a review of the impact of section 58, rather than for repeal of its retrospective element, was withdrawn after debate"

Has that now closed the door on this path?

CI

Yes, because the amendment was tabled during committee stage then withdrawn. The bill then went on to complete its 3rd reading in Parliament and became law closing off that avenue.

Im afraid someone cocked up somewhere with this amendment. Some people said it was a 'probing' amendment and it was part of the plan for it to be withdrawn. But, the objective of a probing amendment is to obtain a Government concession not, as some claimed, to raise an awareness (an 'awareness' that gained the square root of nothing) of an issue.

[Richard Splash]

CTDs are interest bearing. There are different rates depending on whether you encash them for tax or not. They will only accrue interest for a maximum of six years or the length of time between when you bought them and when the tax liability becomes due.

For us the due date for tax is when the tax originally became due, ie between 2001 and 2008 assuming we lose.

The CTD will stop interest on the tax bill accruing from when you bought them (or when the liability becomes due - if later). This aspect is not time limited.

Therefore the 6 year rule is only an issue if we win as you could have got a better return elsewhere.

PS google on certificate of tax deposit and read the blurb. The HMRC site explains precisely how they work.

Thanks for the clarity BR I thought my senile mind was misremembering ( as the Americans so quaintly put it) whatever next eh? Next I'll be thinking HMRC have a time machine

[Boycie]

Letter to MP sent

I have been away for the last couple of weeks. My letter plus attached briefing pack has now gone out to my MP via email. I have also let Whitehouse know.

I will be making a further financial contribution to the campaign shortly.

[Dieselpower]

Wrong

Yes, because the amendment was tabled during committee stage then withdrawn. The bill then went on to complete its 3rd reading in Parliament and became law closing off that avenue.

Im afraid someone cocked up somewhere with this amendment. Some people said it was a 'probing' amendment and it was part of the plan for it to be withdrawn. But, the objective of a probing amendment is to obtain a Government concession not, as some claimed, to raise an awareness (an 'awareness' that gained the square root of nothing) of an issue.

Hi BB - your post above is wrong. No-one has cocked up anywhere here - the probing amendment was always meant to be (and this was stated even before it happened) a way of judging the mood amongst MP's and Gauke as to their positions. NTRT achieved that, and it provided great focus for a huge amount of MP communications both before and after - including at least 20 face to face meetings with cross party MPs in Westminster at the time with NTRT. It would be naive to expect a probing amendment on a matter that has been specifically legislated against (and taken to the Court of Appeal) to actually lead to an instant change of heart by the Treasury. It was the first of many steps that NTRT is "voluntarily" taking to resolve this matter for the likes of you and others.

A simple google search will tell you that "In legislative debate, a probing amendment is an amendment tabled by a legislator without the intention of seeing the amendment carried"

Are you an NTRT member? If you were, you would be receiving detailed updates and newsletters, and if you actually read them then erroneous posts like your one above could be avoided.

Just because NTRT doesn't shout from the rooftops as to what progress it has made and is making (for obvious reasons) doesn't mean that the campaign is not going well, and is gaining serious momentum. If this was ever a simple job, then there would have been no need to appoint prominant Lobbyists in Westminster.

[BolshieBastard]

Hi BB - your post above is wrong. No-one has cocked up anywhere here - the probing amendment was always meant to be (and this was stated even before it happened) a way of judging the mood amongst MP's and Gauke as to their positions. NTRT achieved that, and it provided great focus for a huge amount of MP communications both before and after - including at least 20 face to face meetings with cross party MPs in Westminster at the time with NTRT. It would be naive to expect a probing amendment on a matter that has been specifically legislated against (and taken to the Court of Appeal) to actually lead to an instant change of heart by the Treasury. It was the first of many steps that NTRT is "voluntarily" taking to resolve this matter for the likes of you and others.

A simple google search will tell you that "In legislative debate, a probing amendment is an amendment tabled by a legislator without the intention of seeing the amendment carried"

Are you an NTRT member? If you were, you would be receiving detailed updates and newsletters, and if you actually read them then erroneous posts like your one above could be avoided.

Just because NTRT doesn't shout from the rooftops as to what progress it has made and is making (for obvious reasons) doesn't mean that the campaign is not going well, and is gaining serious momentum. If this was ever a simple job, then there would have been no need to appoint prominant Lobbyists in Westminster.

Its a matter of opinion whether someone cocked up over the withdrawn 'probing' amendment. It isnt an opinion on what a 'probing' amendment is and what it's intention within the Parliamentary legislitive process is.

Sorry but if you want to use google over the 'British Constitution & Politics' by MacMillan Press, I can well understand why you misunderstand its purpose.

A probing amendment is a device to elicit a concession from Government during the passage of a bill through Parliament. It's intention is not merely to raise visibility of an issue since that does nothing, as we have seen imo.

[SantaClaus]

Its a matter of opinion whether someone cocked up over the withdrawn 'probing' amendment. It isnt an opinion on what a 'probing' amendment is and what it's intention within the Parliamentary legislitive process is.

Sorry but if you want to use google over the 'British Constitution & Politics' by MacMillan Press, I can well understand why you misunderstand its purpose.

A probing amendment is a device to elicit a concession from Government during the passage of a bill through Parliament. It's intention is not merely to raise visibility of an issue since that does nothing, as we have seen imo.

BB, As you didn't answer my private message or DieselPower's question, I'll ask you again in public...

Are you a member of our campaign?

To be frank, I don't care if you are not a member, but to sit back and just criticize those who are giving their time for free on your behalf is unforgivable.

[p4nd4b34r]

Its a matter of opinion whether someone cocked up over the withdrawn 'probing' amendment. It isnt an opinion on what a 'probing' amendment is and what it's intention within the Parliamentary legislitive process is.

Sorry but if you want to use google over the 'British Constitution & Politics' by MacMillan Press, I can well understand why you misunderstand its purpose.

A probing amendment is a device to elicit a concession from Government during the passage of a bill through Parliament. It's intention is not merely to raise visibility of an issue since that does nothing, as we have seen imo.

Do you have a specific quote because I'm not about to buy that book, and Ive found multiple references that describe a probing amendment to be as described by Diesel power et al. It seemed to me its purpose was not just to raise awareness but also gauge the level of potential support. I understand you may be bitter, especially as they seem to be now using the probing amendments withdrawal against us (anticipated by Whitehouse I assume?), but lets see how it pans out. Personally though, I wouldnt mind knowing what the long term strategy is, or are they just making it up as they go along?

[smalldog]

NTRT Member

BB, its of course your choice and Im not judging, but as you are someone who has been on this thread for so long, been so vocal and is obviously affected by this whole situation I would be extremely disappointed and to be honest shocked and consider it extremely bad form if you are not part of NTRT!

IMHO its a nonsense not to be a member if you are affected by this, its a small amount of money and its quite frankly one of our only chances of having this entire thing resolved.

BB this is not aimed at you as I dont know if you are or arent a member of NTRT, but I actually find it quite offensive if we get this resolved by NTRT and people who havent contributed one iota benefit. Its a cynical free lunch, riding on all the coat tails of those who have joined, made an effort and contributed, difficult as it no doubt is for all of us to come up with contributions in the current climate.

[BolshieBastard]

BB, As you didn't answer my private message or DieselPower's question, I'll ask you again in public...

Are you a member of our campaign?

To be frank, I don't care if you are not a member, but to sit back and just criticize those who are giving their time for free on your behalf is unforgivable.

How dare you accuse me of 'just sitting back'! I've been active in this campaign since day 1.

Do not confuse criticism with someone pointing out under the an authoritive book on the (unwritten) British Constitution & Politics what a probing amendment is.

If you and others wish to depend on a google definition of it, fine. But once again, the purpose of a probing amendment is to elicit a concession from Government on a bill during its passage through its stages. It is not merely to raise an awarenes of an issue.