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

[Cantthinkof1]

Totally agree ...

trust me I hear you, were all on the same page in terms of our views over HMRC behaviours. I just feel it could end up going this way and if it did, might cause less collateral damage.

Smalldog, totally agree with you. Personally I think that we should look towards some sort of group settlement, hopefully this will still be one option.
I do however concur with other voices too who say that we have been treated really badly and that it is without any shadow of doubt, a case of being singled out for some totally unjust treatment.
At the end of the day though, does anyone really want to loose everything they have worked so hard for? - in my case 40 years of hard work..

[SantaClaus]

New Newsletter 20th January 2014

Dear all

A few members haven't received the latest newsletter (20th January 2014). Most of the time it's due to email being directed to spam folders, so please check that first before contacting us.

I'll upload the newsletter to the website later this evening for anyone who hasn't received it.

Thanks for your patience!

Best regards

Santa

UPDATE: Newsletter now uploaded: http://notoretrotax.org.uk/members-newsletters/

[BrilloPad]

Gittins, a fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants, is said to be the mastermind of the alleged fraud.

[Fireship]

I wouldn't associate HMRC with the word 'sensible' in any context. 'Bullying' and 'vindictive' are much truer. I for one wouldn't want to be part of ANY settlement unless it was truly the last resort. I don't believe it's HMRC's money 'to get'.

The 'sensible' options went out years ago when HMRC didn't take us to the FTT based on the law as it stood at the time, or closed the legal loophole going forward.

Hear, hear!!

Why should there be a settlement when we didn’t break any laws? The only truly sensible option is to remove the retrospective element and allow us to be tried by the law as it stood at the time (which HMRC requested we do – they proposed we wait for the outcome of test cases)!!

A settlement whereby tax is due but interest is not could be likened to the frequently used analogy of retrospectively reducing the speed limit; if such a settlement meant that the fines were still due but the penalty points were removed then we would still be left owing a huge amount of money when no one had broken any laws (and in some cases lead to bankruptcies and possibly further suicides)!

If this were criminal law then retrospection would be illegal!! There’s a damn good reason for that, it’s just plain wrong!

[Rhydd]

HMRC dishonest advert

It may be played on other radio stations but I heard on Kiss FM an HMRC advert which said: "If you have declared all your income, you have nothing to worry about".

That is untrue. We declared all our income and have been worrying for years.

I wonder whether we can complain to the Advertising Standards Authority?

[TalkingCheese]

It may be played on other radio stations but I heard on Kiss FM an HMRC advert which said: "If you have declared all your income, you have nothing to worry about".

That is untrue. We declared all our income and have been worrying for years.

I wonder whether we can complain to the Advertising Standards Authority?

IMO that is an excellent idea Rhydd !

[elpinar]

surely some newpaper would carry the story

on a quiet day of how the HMRC will potentially force people into bankruptcy for a 'retrospective' highly questionable decision and effectively force those people out of will paid work .... there must be some 'friendly' on side journalist who sees the lunacy of that ... we have seen some fair reporting at times ... those acticles must have by lines (so names) and be worth a try for some publiciity musnt they ?

[BrilloPad]

on a quiet day of how the HMRC will potentially force people into bankruptcy for a 'retrospective' highly questionable decision and effectively force those people out of will paid work .... there must be some 'friendly' on side journalist who sees the lunacy of that ... we have seen some fair reporting at times ... those acticles must have by lines (so names) and be worth a try for some publiciity musnt they ?

I spoke to a Telegraph journalist when the India retrospective stuff came out. No interest. And I am not convinced it would not be spun against us.

[SantaClaus]

I spoke to a Telegraph journalist when the India retrospective stuff came out. No interest. And I am not convinced it would not be spun against us.

Of course it would be spun against us. Every newspaper has ties with the government and vested interests. They are as bent as our politicians.

For instance, the owner of the Daily Mail received £250k of subsidies from Europe for his "sporting estate", yet his paper is anti-Europe:

Anti-EU editor pockets European subsidies |

You only got to see how a newspaper whips up one section of society into a frenzy against another section of society to realise what's going on - divide and conquer. They play us off against each other to help the government achieve their aims:

Taxpayers vs tax avoiders
Hard workers vs unemployed
Migrants vs long-term citizens


Then every so often we are fed something false to get worked up about, meanwhile distracting us from the people running the whole show who are making themselves incredibly wealthy whilst the majority of people struggle to make ends meet.

There is an illusion in this country that we have a free press. Nothing could be further from the truth.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

The problem with our case is that 99.99% of the population, including politicians, believe the end result was right, namely that we should have paid UK taxes on the income from the trust.

The only debate is over the means employed (retro legislation). Many MPs and legal professionals believe retro is wrong in principle and undermines the rule of law.

Unfortunately, such "esoteric" arguments wouldn't cut much ice with the general public who will see this in simple black and white terms. That's why the press will always treat it as a story about "tax dodgers".