The stuff you need to know about loan schemes......

[geoff from contracta IOM]

No, I promise you, it won't get embarrassing.

It may be short though...

I think it already has CJ !

I don't think it's unreasonable for a professional in an industry to limit their advice to their area of expertise ?

If I started a thread entitled "The stuff you need to know about useless contractor accountants" and then proceed to offer advice on an area I know little about would it not be reasonable for all the hardworking and competent accountants on here to jump on me ?

[porrker]

All good advice, the reality is it is too soon for any provider to have gained a full understanding of the implication of the GAAR consultation released yesterday. As soon as I have a response from our tax counsel I will share it for all ( good or bad )

Sorry I should have been clear. You should understand how the scheme works under current legislation.

[geoff from contracta IOM]

As per this post below.



And please try to remember that that this is Accounting rather than General. If you want to have a pop at me (or anyone else) then please do it in general. Its a serious question.

I was only asking for clarification not having a pop !

I don't think they are naff , I obviously represent one. What lifespan they have following the GAAR consultation published yesterday is too early to say, I will be honest though when I get an updated opinion.

[BrilloPad]

What does "Redding" mean?

You asked for a name. you got it. Try looking at redding under search. Or have a look at this thread. http://forums.contractoruk.com/busin...anagement.html

[BrilloPad]

I don't think they are naff , I obviously represent one. What lifespan they have following the GAAR consultation published yesterday is too early to say, I will be honest though when I get an updated opinion.

I might be biased as I was in Montp and facing bankruptcy (see s58 thread). But I am very concerned by loan schemes. I do hope you have advised all on your loan scheme to get a CTD.

At Montp we had QC opinion it would all be fine. Some have now been facing 12 years of uncertainty (only 6 in my case) with strong likelihood of paying tax in next year or so.

[geoff from contracta IOM]

You asked for a name. you got it. Try looking at redding under search. Or have a look at this thread. http://forums.contractoruk.com/busin...anagement.html

BP these were loans from a company, not a trust where the trustees are bound by the law governing their obligation to act in the best interest of the beneficiaries at all times.

[geoff from contracta IOM]

I might be biased as I was in Montp and facing bankruptcy (see s58 thread). But I am very concerned by loan schemes. I do hope you have advised all on your loan scheme to get a CTD.

At Montp we had QC opinion it would all be fine. Some have now been facing 12 years of uncertainty (only 6 in my case) with strong likelihood of paying tax in next year or so.

I obviously understand the position of those who used the MP scheme but I'm sure all involved would admit that it is a pretty unique example. No less horrific for everyone affected but not typical of most of the tax mittigation schemes that have been properly constructed and run.
My personal suspicion is that the attack was on MP for being good at what they did rather than the poor souls who are probably viewed as collateral damage as far as HMRC are concerned.

I personally never gloss over the potential risks to users, I just encourage them to do their homework and form their own opinion.

[BrilloPad]

I obviously understand the position of those who used the MP scheme but I'm sure all involved would admit that it is a pretty unique example. No less horrific for everyone affected but not typical of most of the tax mittigation schemes that have been properly constructed and run.
My personal suspicion is that the attack was on MP for being good at what they did rather than the poor souls who are probably viewed as collateral damage as far as HMRC are concerned.

I personally never gloss over the potential risks to users, I just encourage them to do their homework and form their own opinion.

But the Montp scheme was properly constructed and run. It required a retrospective law change to defeat it. And I believe loan schemes will face retrospective legislation one day.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I obviously understand the position of those who used the MP scheme but I'm sure all involved would admit that it is a pretty unique example. No less horrific for everyone affected but not typical of most of the tax mittigation schemes that have been properly constructed and run.
My personal suspicion is that the attack was on MP for being good at what they did rather than the poor souls who are probably viewed as collateral damage as far as HMRC are concerned.

I tend to agree, although I have a concern that the loan schemes which are operating now are flying in the face of the disguised remuneration legislation introduced in Dec 2010. MP are running one of these loan schemes.

Technically (letter of the law) they may not be caught by the legislation but that was the position with the DTA schemes pre-BN66 "clarification".

[geoff from contracta IOM]

I tend to agree, although I have a concern that the loan schemes which are operating now are flying in the face of the disguised remuneration legislation introduced in Dec 2010. MP are running one of these loan schemes.

Technically (letter of the law) they may not be caught by the legislation but that was the position with the DTA schemes pre-BN66 "clarification".

The only ones that fit within the DR law in my opinion are those where the individuals are self employed. Unless HMRC can argue that an employee actually means self employed which would require a much more sophisticated time machine than I think even they posess.

I think these schemes are unlikely to be challenged directly ( due to the GAAR legislation expected, which is fairly expansive on first reading ) and if the were to make the GAAR retrospective it would cover so many different schemes and tax mittigation stratagies HMRC would be tied up for decades dealing with the fallout. It would be much easier to just close all of them from the date of announcement and more on into a new era with transparency and certainty for all.
This will be a novelty for HMRC and something they should have experimented with long ago.