• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

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

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by BolshieBastard View Post
    No, you are wrong there as I think you have been on a number of things you've posted in the past.

    The point Im making is trumping the opposition side's legal argument outside of court. In what can loosely be called negotiations with HMRC, they asserted several 'facts' to substantiate their position. MP could have simply said, they didnt agree and would argue the point in court. Instead, they showed their hand and all their reasoning why.

    HMRC saw this and decided on the balance of probability they might not win so didnt go to court.

    At the end of the day, this is only legal 'argument' and not really evidence. Even in a criminal court, there is no requirement to share your legal argument pre trial.
    Yep, otherwise its a bit like a game of chess where you declare your game strategy with you opponent in advance of the game. You just wouldnt do it, its not sensible even if you think its water tight!

    Comment


      Originally posted by BolshieBastard View Post
      No, you are wrong there as I think you have been on a number of things you've posted in the past.
      .
      As you wish.

      I'm happy to defend things you think are incorrect (or make corrections) either here or via PM.

      Comment


        New Letter

        Received the WG tongue in cheek letter a few weeks back but I've received another today on a much more specific subject. Without wanting to reveal the content in public I'm just wondering if others have received the same letter ? I'm surprised its not mentioned here so far but then as i say its more specific to my circumstances so most likely has limited distribution.
        Sorry to be cryptic to those who haven't seen it but I'm sure you understand not everything is for the public domain

        Comment


          Yes..I assume quite a few people got it today.
          I'm certainly up for it.


          Originally posted by travellingknob View Post
          Received the WG tongue


          in cheek letter a few weeks back but I've received another today on a much more specific subject. Without wanting to reveal the content in public I'm just wondering if others have received the same letter ? I'm surprised its not mentioned here so far but then as i say its more specific to my circumstances so most likely has limited distribution.
          Sorry to be cryptic to those who haven't seen it but I'm sure you understand not everything is for the public domain

          Comment


            Originally posted by travellingknob View Post
            Received the WG tongue in cheek letter a few weeks back but I've received another today on a much more specific subject. Without wanting to reveal the content in public I'm just wondering if others have received the same letter ? I'm surprised its not mentioned here so far but then as i say its more specific to my circumstances so most likely has limited distribution.
            Sorry to be cryptic to those who haven't seen it but I'm sure you understand not everything is for the public domain
            I think I know what it's about. Obviously anyone who receives such a letter, please keep to yourself.

            Cheers

            Santa.
            'Orwell's 1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual'. -
            Nick Pickles, director of Big Brother Watch.

            Comment


              Ditto

              Originally posted by travellingknob View Post
              Received the WG tongue in cheek letter a few weeks back but I've received another today on a much more specific subject. Without wanting to reveal the content in public I'm just wondering if others have received the same letter ? I'm surprised its not mentioned here so far but then as i say its more specific to my circumstances so most likely has limited distribution.
              Sorry to be cryptic to those who haven't seen it but I'm sure you understand not everything is for the public domain
              Same here. Bring it on!!!!

              Comment


                Glad to see things are starting to proceed again...
                merely at clientco for the entertainment

                Comment


                  Letter

                  The suspense is killing - I might go home at lunch-time to see what it's all about!
                  Good to see some pending action again.
                  Onwards and upwards.

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by reckless View Post
                    The suspense is killing - I might go home at lunch-time to see what it's all about!
                    Good to see some pending action again.
                    Onwards and upwards.
                    Ive just got my address updated by the MP team, missing some letters. Cant stand the suspense!!

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by reckless View Post
                      The suspense is killing - I might go home at lunch-time to see what it's all about!
                      Good to see some pending action again.
                      Onwards and upwards.
                      No letter for me yesterday or today. Did get the other letter a few weeks ago

                      Darn. Could do with a bit of good news!

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X