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

[OnYourBikeGB]

and what will you achieve annoying the poor person who is merely doing their job....

You're right. We should send them thank-you notes so they know we love them really.

[eek]

You're right. We should send them thank-you notes so they know we love them really.

I wouldn't go that far but providing incorrect information may result in them deciding to pay a lot more attention to your affairs

[tax is taxing]

what a waste of money

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/research/report191.pdf

An insight to what they think of us and our decision making. I've seen a more detailed analysis somewhere else on the net.

Been there, done that. What a waste of time and money

[SantaClaus]

Just send them back a request for all the data they hold on you under the Data Protection Act.

Don't let the note that some information can be withheld put you off. Just ask for all records that they are legally obliged to provide.

I remember receiving a telephone directory wad of paper from them a few years ago.


Now lets see... 45,000 people x a telephone directory wad of paper = ...

... a large forest.

Not to mention, it will keep them busy until this time next year.

P.S. Might be best to request the info via a written letter to this address. Gives them something to do, rather than just deleting emails.

Data Protection (SAR) Unit
Business Services
Room BP4302
Benton Park View
Longbenton
Newcastle Under Tyne
NE98 1ZZ

[costo]

and what will you achieve annoying the poor person who is merely doing their job....

And that is a bad thing?

If enough people did it. it would create strain on HMRC - you may comment, and what will that achieve? well right now HMRC can do as they like, we may have very little powers but at least its something....

[eek]

And that is a bad thing?

If enough people did it. it would create strain on HMRC - you may comment, and what will that achieve? well right now HMRC can do as they like, we may have very little powers but at least its something....

See my comment in reply to the previous similar reply. If you dislike HMRC now imagine how you will feel when after you have annoyed them they decide to pay really close attention to your affairs. And dodgy information may give them a valid information to do just that.

I think Santa's approach of asking for everything under a data protection request would be a far more sensible plan. Especially if you did it yearly to see what they missed last time around....

[warlord]

See my comment in reply to the previous similar reply. If you dislike HMRC now imagine how you will feel when after you have annoyed them they decide to pay really close attention to your affairs. And dodgy information may give them a valid information to do just that.

I think Santa's approach of asking for everything under a data protection request would be a far more sensible plan. Especially if you did it yearly to see what they missed last time around....

Agree. Always kept it professional. We are better than Hmrc.

[Rob79]

Agree. Always kept it professional. We are better than Hmrc.

Also be aware that a FoI request or frivolous requests for data can be rejected for a myriad of reasons.

Deliberately supplying incorrect information to HMRC is a dangerous course of action. Aside from penalties and potential prosecution you may also be tagged as "high risk behaviour" and that is rarely good.

HMRC does have enormous power and whilst the UK is broke, it will not be reined in by politicians who need all the money they can get in order to spend it on their particular projects. Keeping this apolitical, I'm pretty sure that whatever administration we get next will be no different.

HMRC case officers are not to blame. Often ill trained, under time pressure, demotivated by poor pay and prospects and increasingly driven by unreasonable demands. HMRC senior policy makers are to blame. They have lost touch with the economic reality of many people who were foolish/misguided/missold/victims of crime. They ignore these people on the assumption that EVERYBODY who has undertaken a scheme involving tax did so in full knowledge of the risks and was driven by greed. This core principle drives them.

This ignores the position of many if not most participators.

The answer? I wish I knew.

Certainly a press campaign highlighting the real cost of HMRC policy to the "hard working families" is a good start. But who in the press is interested in a story that could be spun as "tax avoider now complaining about paying tax back"?

Perhaps collecting ideas for a fight back campaign is a separate thread?

[OnYourBikeGB]

But who in the press is interested in a story that could be spun as "tax avoider now complaining about paying tax back"?

Perhaps collecting ideas for a fight back campaign is a separate thread?

I mentioned this before, but that phrase in the recent HR case that it is not acceptable for the Government to retrospectively change the law to win a current case moves the emphasis away from tax avoidance. Most people would not want to back us, but when the emphasis is moved from why they did it to what they did, the spin finds a new direction. I wonder if most people even stop to thing what retrospective laws mean. That little sentence spells it out.

I like the idea of a separate thread. The S58 thread has moved away from its original purpose.

I still haven't received my mail shot, and I'm starting to think it may have only been sent to people using loan schemes. Can anyone confirm?

[eek]

I still haven't received my mail shot, and I'm starting to think it may have only been sent to people using loan schemes. Can anyone confirm?

That seems to be what HMRC say in HMRC warns contractors over offshore loan scheme :: Contractor UK