Artic in the Lords today

[Troll]

I am contemplating driving an articulated HGV down to the House of Lords, could anyone please advise the best routes, and whether I can avoid the Congestion Charge

[dang65]

They said on the radio this morning that the hearing is going to take four days. Will be very interesting anyway. Also, they said that most tax related test cases are paid for by HMRC, but this one is being funded by the couple themselves (and their supporters). I wasn't quite clear what this was supposed to imply, but they did seem to think that was an important point when it was mentioned in the radio article??

[wendigo100]

AIUI, the situation is that Arctic lost their case, won their appeal, and now HMRC are counter-appealing with a Judicial Review.

Imagine what the outcome would be when Labour bring the judiciary into the cabinet.

[Ardesco]

They said on the radio this morning that the hearing is going to take four days. Will be very interesting anyway. Also, they said that most tax related test cases are paid for by HMRC, but this one is being funded by the couple themselves (and their supporters). I wasn't quite clear what this was supposed to imply, but they did seem to think that was an important point when it was mentioned in the radio article??

PCG have been backing it

[brianc]

Extensive coverage on BBC Radio

HMRC Arctic Appeal to the House of Lords

Extensive coverage on BBC Radio. Geoff Jones interviewed.

BBC Radio - Five Live (Live/Download/Podcast)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/fivelive/programmes/wakeup.shtml

Wake Up To Money - Download as a podcast.

BBC Radio 4 - Today Programme - Listen again.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/

[malvolio]

The funding issue is interesting, actually. Arctic, PCG and one or two individuals provided the money for the cases to date, around half a million quid all told. With the final victory at the HC Appeal, those costs would have been borne by HMRC as the losing party. However, by taking it to the Lords, that funding is still needed.

But HMRC refuse to treat this as a test case, which would have meant them funding the HoL process, instead it is being fought as an extension of the last appeal. If Arctic wins, HMRC pays, if not there's a big bill - not all of it but quite substantial nontheless - to be paid by Arctic, PCG and the others.

The other interesting point is that the HoL case will cost around £0.6m when it's finished, and the total tax actually in dispute is about £7k, since HMRC decided only to pursue one year's taxation. Bit disproportionate for something that is not actually a test case, don't you think?

[Bagpuss]

If it's not a "test case" then how is winning it going to make any difference to anyone?

Be nice Mal!

[maximus]

The other interesting point is that the HoL case will cost around £0.6m when it's finished, and the total tax actually in dispute is about £7k, since HMRC decided only to pursue one year's taxation. Bit disproportionate for something that is not actually a test case, don't you think?

My knowledge of the legal system may be ropey, but surely if you argue all the way to the HoL, the result becomes de-facto a test case - the only further avenue would be Euro Courts

[ChimpMaster]

The other interesting point is that the HoL case will cost around £0.6m when it's finished, and the total tax actually in dispute is about £7k, since HMRC decided only to pursue one year's taxation. Bit disproportionate for something that is not actually a test case, don't you think?

Yes but isn't that what HMRC, and the wider government in general, are best at? i.e. wasting huge amounts taxpayers' money to generate tiny returns.

[maximus]

The other thing - my experiance of using courts is that you are never able to recover 100% of costs... if Artic win would they be able to treat any shortfall as legit business expense, if Artic lose - could the Courts pursue the directors personally for recovery of costs?