“ I owe £180,000 in tax and I haven’t told my wife”

[AtW]

Whose sockie are you?

This is a _V_ery good question...

[DealorNoDeal]

Unfortunately, retrospection is a necessity because HMRC seem to sit on things for ages. I can't see that changing so they'll probably need to fire up the time machine again in a few years.

[AtW]

Unfortunately, retrospection is a necessity because

... financial benefits of dodgy taxes will always be bigger than what civil servants can do, plus it's the only practical deterrent to legal tactics delaying decisions for "schemes" (AKA tax evasion conspiracies) for many years, it's not HMRC's fault that courts won't issue summary judgements on the spot and order immediate execution (of the harsh but fair (to the taxpayer) sentence).

HTH

[DealorNoDeal]

... financial benefits of dodgy taxes will always be bigger than what civil servants can do, plus it's the only practical deterrent to legal tactics delaying decisions for "schemes" (AKA tax evasion conspiracies) for many years, it's not HMRC's fault that courts won't issue summary judgements on the spot and order immediate execution (of the harsh but fair (to the taxpayer) sentence).

HTH

Making it a criminal offence to run schemes would be a better deterrent. The risk of jail time would soon put a stop to the scheme pedlers.

[AtW]

Making it a criminal offence to run schemes would be a better deterrent. The risk of jail time would soon put a stop to the scheme pedlers.

Jail is already available for tax evasion - “schemes” fit perfectly into evasion, not avoidance, or at least they ought to be and if the law disagrees then it should be changed.

[NowPermOutsideUK]

But for the grace of god go i - Thankfully never signed up to these loan schemes

There is also a file on 4 podcast which is very interesting and that le me to read the 66 page loan charge forum

I d still like to know what the guy must have billed to result in a 180K loan charge? Assume no penalties and no interest which I know is incorrect but what sort of billing amount would leave that liability

[AtW]

A better question is what did he spent roughly £ 360k (minus 10% “scheme provider” fee)

That’s like what - 15 years of average UK wage?

[Paralytic]

But for the grace of god go i - Thankfully never signed up to these loan schemes

There is also a file on 4 podcast which is very interesting and that le me to read the 66 page loan charge forum

I d still like to know what the guy must have billed to result in a 180K loan charge? Assume no penalties and no interest which I know is incorrect but what sort of billing amount would leave that liability

Might not be that much. Assuming the £180K is the loan charge added to the tax year. Assume he's already in the 40% tax bracket and that the £180K will have put him over the £150K threshold, so using 40% and 45%, that puts his taxable income at between £400K and £450K for the years he used the scheme.

If he used the scheme for 10 years, that's less than £50K per year

[AtW]

20 years if it was BrillioPad

[DealorNoDeal]

I d still like to know what the guy must have billed to result in a 180K loan charge?

Assuming 40% tax, then he'd have received £450k in loans. The scheme provider probably took about a 10% fee, and there would have been a small salary as well as the loans. So, all in all, north of £500k.

Then it depends how long he was in the scheme. Could have been 10 years at £50k p.a., or 5 years at £100k p.a. etc.