Surely making us pay tax demands based upon claims so far unproven in the various courts/tribunals will amount to illegal state confiscation of assets and would be contrary to European law??
-
Lord Clyde in 1929: ‘No man is under the smallest obligation, moral or other, so to arrange his legal relations to his business or to his property as to enable the Revenue to put the largest possible shovel into his stores. The Revenue is not slow to take every advantage which is open to it under the taxing statutes for the purpose of depleting the taxpayer’s pocket. And the taxpayer is entitled to be astute to prevent, so far as he honestly can, the depletion of his means by the Revenue.’ -
HMRC say in today's note that they expect legal action such as Judicial Reviews against the legislation.Originally posted by nick4notax View Post
There's bound to be a few amongst the 43,000 that will take them on.Comment
-
I think a large number of us need to understand the enforcement process. I.e. What happens to can't pay in the 90 days? I did read about ttp but does that avoid any failed to pay within the 90 days penalties?Comment
-
Hi
Quick question. I have had a CTD since the original 2008 retro announcement. Was in schema 2001-2008.
1. Is there any change to the interest portion (ie, by having CTD do I still avoid interest for 2008 onwards)
2. What is the situation with NI? Is this included in the figures on the gateway? If not, how can I calculate.
I just want to pay and move on with my life. This whole thing has been a blood nightmare. It's taken 6 years (well 12 since I first submitted a return) for HMRC to sort this out.
Cheers.Comment
-
I'm with you. I need to know what I'm in for. I literally cannot pay, so what's going to happen to me? I'm very worried.Originally posted by smalldog View PostComment
-
What's ttp, Smalldog?Originally posted by smalldog View PostLord Clyde in 1929: ‘No man is under the smallest obligation, moral or other, so to arrange his legal relations to his business or to his property as to enable the Revenue to put the largest possible shovel into his stores. The Revenue is not slow to take every advantage which is open to it under the taxing statutes for the purpose of depleting the taxpayer’s pocket. And the taxpayer is entitled to be astute to prevent, so far as he honestly can, the depletion of his means by the Revenue.’Comment
-
-
I agree, I think the bills will be on the doormat long before any judicial review or legal challenge gets air time. They have obviously constructed it this way by imposing a 90 day limit upon receipt with no appeal subject to legals etc.....Originally posted by retrodeathLast edited by smalldog; 20 March 2014, 08:37.Comment
-
I'm sure that the bills will already be getting prepared even before it becomes law, that way as soon as it becomes law they just put the letters in the envelope and pop them in the post. Its going to be a pre-emptive strike... You could bet that even the consultancy document was not reviewed (how did they have time to document 3000+ responses in 3 weeks?).Originally posted by smalldog View PostComment
-
parliamentary process
Is there any movement to persuade one or many MPs to table/support an amendment to stop this pay-up-first applying to schemes for which tax submissions have already been made, ie: remove the hidden retrospectivity from it? Feel free to PM me if responses are best kept off this "Hectore-monitored" site....Lord Clyde in 1929: ‘No man is under the smallest obligation, moral or other, so to arrange his legal relations to his business or to his property as to enable the Revenue to put the largest possible shovel into his stores. The Revenue is not slow to take every advantage which is open to it under the taxing statutes for the purpose of depleting the taxpayer’s pocket. And the taxpayer is entitled to be astute to prevent, so far as he honestly can, the depletion of his means by the Revenue.’Comment
Comment