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

[DonkeyRhubarb]

There is a FAQ at dotas-scandal.org (probably in need of a lmakeover, but it exists...)

www.dotas-scandal.org

That's a good summary re. penalties etc.

[centurian]

I hear you & I've thought about it & spoken to the editor and think we should get a fair say; after all it's in the program's interests to show how the issue of retrospection has affected people's lives. Otherwise it won't be a very thought provoking or controversial documentary about the work of a tax inspector, surely?

It's not supposed to be thought provoking - it's supposed to make them a shed load of money. Everything else is just window dressing.

If they want a second series, they must keep HMRC fully on-board - they don't need to keep those affected by HMRC happy to get renewed - there will always be plenty of participants available.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

It's not supposed to be thought provoking - it's supposed to make them a shed load of money. Everything else is just window dressing.

If they want a second series, they must keep HMRC fully on-board - they don't need to keep those affected by HMRC happy to get renewed - there will always be plenty of participants available.

They have struggled to persuade people to take part this time. If they do a hatchet job then no-one would appear in another series.

[BrilloPad]

I agree with your mistrust but I can also see why BP is doing it as he has nothing to lose.

I met the director today. Indeed I have nothing to lose. Plus any dodgy questions they ask and they will only get footage they cannot use. I pointed that out to the director.

[OnYourBikeGB]

I met the director today. Indeed I have nothing to lose. Plus any dodgy questions they ask and they will only get footage they cannot use. I pointed that out to the director.

Any indication on when this will appear, BP?

[Safe]

I met the director today. Indeed I have nothing to lose. Plus any dodgy questions they ask and they will only get footage they cannot use. I pointed that out to the director.

International Adviser: Tax expert labels HMRC proposals 'unconstitutional'

See the link. Don't forget to read page 2 as well. You might need to mention all of these that even tax law firms are against HMRC proposal and retro. These are all proof. Good luck and we are all behind you.

[eek]

It's not supposed to be thought provoking - it's supposed to make them a shed load of money. Everything else is just window dressing.

If they want a second series, they must keep HMRC fully on-board - they don't need to keep those affected by HMRC happy to get renewed - there will always be plenty of participants available.

Hmrc won't win every story, some will make them look good, some will make them look bad. Even they will know and will accept that.

I think the important thing for people here to emphasis is not going to be the amount of money or the grottyness of everything but the fact this has been going on for over 10 years and still no resolution in place.

[smalldog]

International Adviser: Tax expert labels HMRC proposals 'unconstitutional'

See the link. Don't forget to read page 2 as well. You might need to mention all of these that even tax law firms are against HMRC proposal and retro. These are all proof. Good luck and we are all behind you.

My only problem with this is that it attacks HMRC when its Gauke and co making the rules. To be fair to HMRC they just abide by government policy.

[Fireship]

To be fair to HMRC they just abide by government policy.

Hmm, might be true for APN's etc but that's certainly not the case when HMRC were busily bastardising Hansard to get S58 passed!!

[smalldog]

Hmm, might be true for APN's etc but that's certainly not the case when HMRC were busily bastardising Hansard to get S58 passed!!

indeed, HMRC seem to be completely unaccountable to anyone for anything, there is NO regulator of their actions. They seem to be to do what they like (intimidate, bully, insinuate, mistrust everyone, accuse u of lying etc....) and all the treasury seem to think is that they are completely reasonable and act within the rules and have tools and policies in place.

The truth being they act like total nazis, issuing threatening and accusatory letters at the drop of a hat (my wife got one telling her she was "negligent" and threatened her with a penalty for incorrect SA, might have been nicer to ask her to recheck her calcs maybe???!!!!)

I Wonder how many of the treasury have ever been on the receiving end of an HMRC threatening letter, which by the way can be the first communication they ever have with an individual. Lovely bunch....

They call us "customers", blimey their PR team need to be taken out of the dark ages and maybe learn the concept of a customer always being right, at least until proven wrong not the other way round!

RANT OVER!!! for now at least....