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

[ContractIn]

That's not a daft question when you think about it. Large Corporations engage lobbyists all the time. If my LtdCo could fund the contributions to Whitehouse I would happily increase the values commited by a further 50%. (ker-ching).

Is anyone able to provide guidance? I'll check with my Accountant later too.

So why isn't MontP helping us?

[DonkeyRhubarb]

So why isn't MontP helping us?

They say they don't want to be involved in lobbying while they are pursuing legal avenues.

And to be fair, the JR (HC, CoA, SC) will have already cost them a pretty penny, especially having to pick up HMRC's costs for all the proceedings.

They have just lodged an application with the European Court of Human Rights and they are committed to defending us through the Tax Courts.

[moira under the stairs]

So why isn't MontP helping us?

No doubt they are... its just that there is a leak amongst us with information getting into the wrong hands......... allegedly

[Clare@InTouch]

That's not a daft question when you think about it. Large Corporations engage lobbyists all the time. If my LtdCo could fund the contributions to Whitehouse I would happily increase the values commited by a further 50%. (ker-ching).

Is anyone able to provide guidance? I'll check with my Accountant later too.

It's unlikely - unless you win as then you may have a chance to appeal to HMRC's good nature (given the case involves them though, I doubt they will grant any concession!).

From HMRC:

You should disallow the expenses incurred directly in connection with appeals to the Commissioners or the Courts against IT, CT or CGT assessments.

BIM46455 - Specific deductions: professional fees: tax, rating & VAT appeals

Finlay J having decided that the issue involved consideration of what is now ICTA88/S74 (1)(a) goes on to describe what is required for the expenditure to come within what is now ICTA88/S74 (1)(a), ‘wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the trade’. Not every expense, which a prudent trader meets, is deductible. Finlay J relies on the House of Lords dicta in Strong & Co of Romsey Ltd v Woodifield [1906] 5TC215 (see BIM37300). Finlay J says that the statutory test means that it is not enough that the expense should arise out of, or be connected with, the trade, but the expense should be for the purpose of earning the profits of the trade.

BIM37840 - Wholly & exclusively: expense of earning or application of profits?: legal costs in connection with an appeal

Lord Porter then explained why the specific costs claimed in this case were not allowable; the costs were incurred solely for the purpose of ascertaining a tax liability and nothing else.

Wholly & exclusively: expense of earning or application of profits?: accountancy fees in connection with an appeal

[ASB]

No doubt they are... its just that there is a leak amongst us with information getting into the wrong hands......... allegedly

If there is a leak does it really matter? The legal arguments have to be put forward in the pre trial submissions anyway so sooner or later the other side will get all the information anyway.

[Toocan]

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.

I think that is misleading. Here is a definition of a 'probing amendment', albeit for the Scottish Parliament. See section 4.2

Part Four: Amendments - Parliamentary Business : *Scottish Parliament

The probing amendment was a success as far as it went - it's just a shame that there was not more time for the matter to be debated. However, another oppertunity will be found.

It is rather unfair for BB to state that someone 'cocked up' and perhaps BB would like to reconisder his post?

[BrilloPad]

If there is a leak does it really matter? The legal arguments have to be put forward in the pre trial submissions anyway so sooner or later the other side will get all the information anyway.

IANAL - but I have fought a few legal battles. My Mackenzie friend (who is generally considered the best in the family court field) reckons you keep your cards as close as you can for as long as possible. You hope your research is a bit better than the other sides.

Also, during the JR the on the other side kept producing messages from the forum. I wonder why?

Here is a quote for court - I am going to <mod snip : any more of this BP and you will be banned>

[travellingknob]

IANAL - but I have fought a few legal battles. My Mackenzie friend (who is generally considered the best in the family court field) reckons you keep your cards as close as you can for as long as possible. You hope your research is a bit better than the other sides.

Also, during the JR the on the other side kept producing messages from the forum. I wonder why?

Here is a quote for court - I am going to <mod snip : any more of this BP and you will be banned>

and your friend is correct BP, all arguements best kept close to chest until the final moment. For the other, whilst depression sets in we still have to keep our refraint. Apparently its not personal and we weren't targetted unfairly .. even though it feels very much like we were .... and still are, otherwise there'd have been private negotiation and a deal offered long ago.

[moira under the stairs]

If there is a leak does it really matter? The legal arguments have to be put forward in the pre trial submissions anyway so sooner or later the other side will get all the information anyway.

naivety at its best

[lucozade]

Makes my blood boil

It's not personal why we are being treated like we are - so they say.

However, I does make your blood boil when you read this kind of report:

How much longer can Google escape the UK tax system? | News | PC Pro