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

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

This updated http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/pdfs/cop8.pdf - see section on payments on account

[swede]

Interesting...?

This updated http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/pdfs/cop8.pdf - see section on payments on account

"You have the right to appeal against any assessments or amendments we make, and in some cases you can ask to postpone payment. If we cannot agree, you can ask an independent tribunal to decide how much tax you should pay."

[orientalist]

Scotland

Does scottish independence create a different set of outcomes for uk taxpayers affected by s58?

[Rob79]

http://www.financeandtaxtribunals.go...27/TC03505.pdf

I was looking for something else and stumbled on this. I'm assuming that this is already well known in the thread community here and will not for now comment further.

It is interesting however that the res judicata rules are coming under some pressure and that there are a number of tax cases unconnected to the contractor sector that are beginning to look to what has been done with s 58 FA 2008 and whether the decisions on the constitutional point are valid.

As an example. There is a film tax scheme called Eclipse. Tax relief claimed £1.2bn. Has lost in Court twice and is in Court again in January. APN's not applicable for the majority of the amount at stake. The scheme has lost on the facts and is now looking for new arguments. Introducing new arguments at Court of Appeal stage is rarely allowed. However it is being tried in a number of "discovery" cases and given the values involved in Eclipse is certain to be attempted again.

If a major value tax scheme is using s58 argument and revisiting the decisions such as above, then it is possible (not probable or likely) that the added weight and value will have some impact.

[lucozade]

http://www.financeandtaxtribunals.go...27/TC03505.pdf

I was looking for something else and stumbled on this. I'm assuming that this is already well known in the thread community here and will not for now comment further.

It is interesting however that the res judicata rules are coming under some pressure and that there are a number of tax cases unconnected to the contractor sector that are beginning to look to what has been done with s 58 FA 2008 and whether the decisions on the constitutional point are valid.

As an example. There is a film tax scheme called Eclipse. Tax relief claimed £1.2bn. Has lost in Court twice and is in Court again in January. APN's not applicable for the majority of the amount at stake. The scheme has lost on the facts and is now looking for new arguments. Introducing new arguments at Court of Appeal stage is rarely allowed. However it is being tried in a number of "discovery" cases and given the values involved in Eclipse is certain to be attempted again.

If a major value tax scheme is using s58 argument and revisiting the decisions such as above, then it is possible (not probable or likely) that the added weight and value will have some impact.

Thanks Rob, unless I've read this incorrectly you are saying this is possibly a positive thing for those affected ?

[Rob79]

Yes.

If other groups with big money at stake are looking to use some of the principles being argued in retrospection cases, then it is to be hoped that they can turn up something new that will make a difference.

[lucozade]

Yes.

If other groups with big money at stake are looking to use some of the principles being argued in retrospection cases, then it is to be hoped that they can turn up something new that will make a difference.

Yes that makes sense - thanks for bringing it to the attention of us plebs. Perhaps our campaign should be discussing this with the other parties if they haven't already.

[Buzby]

scottish independence

Does scottish independence create a different set of outcomes for uk taxpayers affected by s58?

never really thought this would be relevant, but given the latest polls (Scottish Referendum: No Vote's Lead Narrows) then I guess it could change things for people living in Scotland.

Would a rUK (London) court be able to bankrupt someone in a Country outside rUK and take his home?

[centurian]

Would a rUK (London) court be able to bankrupt someone in a Country outside rUK and take his home?

Possibly, if that's agreed as part of the divorce talks - that previously enforceable debts in the old UK can be enforced in Scotland/rUK and vice versa.

Even if not, such a person would be in debt to the Scottish government instead. Independence is not going to suddenly make the bill vanish.

However, it might buy a bit of time while the lawyers sort out the mess - the only ones that will really get rich from independence.

[reckless]

never really thought this would be relevant, but given the latest polls (Scottish Referendum: No Vote's Lead Narrows) then I guess it could change things for people living in Scotland.

Would a rUK (London) court be able to bankrupt someone in a Country outside rUK and take his home?

I would think that each country's debtors would be taken into account in the respective final balance sheets when they are drawn up for the two countries. It would then be up to each country to pursue these debtors within their own country, should they feel that is the right course of action. The interesting thing though is that an independent Scotland would have a constitution. If this is to be like those of other countries with constitutions, it may well outlaw retrospective changes in the law. Had the UK had such a constitution, this may well have prevented the entire debacle we are currently faced with.

In any event, I think independence would result in the can being kicked well down the road, and probably would be low on the priorities of a new independent Scotland, pursuing perhaps a couple of hundred citizens with complex historical tax histories.

All in all, probably a reason to vote Yes.