The BN66 thread has broken a record!

[SantaClaus]

Whilst I disagree with a lot of what DR says, I respect the man for the strength of his argument he puts across. You on the other hand are one of the scaremongers that have been discussed in this thread. You will win no friends with an attitude like that.

HMRC do not need to clarify IR35. They have enough of a case after Dragonfly to catch out their intended target, the disguised employee. I have enough faith in my affairs to believe that I do not come under Dragonfly; however I have worked with plenty of people who don't have the slightest clue. For them, it is just a matter of time before they get the letter through the door.

And as for the poster who states this case will create a precedent, retrospective tax legislation has been part of our system for decades.

Wow, you've got an ego the size of your avatar!
I have no intention of arguing with someone who is clearly disinterested in listening to anyone else's point of view.

Good luck with your rather lonely thread.

One last point though on a previous comment you made:

...I run a limited company and I do my hardest to justify the fact that I consider myself a consultancy and not an employee. I have a web presence and I do odd tech stuff at cost to put other clients through my books. ...

Pure window dressing mate. You are just fooling yourself, no-one else.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Whilst I disagree with a lot of what DR says, I respect the man for the strength of his argument he puts across. You on the other hand are one of the scaremongers that have been discussed in this thread. You will win no friends with an attitude like that.

HMRC do not need to clarify IR35. They have enough of a case after Dragonfly to catch out their intended target, the disguised employee. I have enough faith in my affairs to believe that I do not come under Dragonfly; however I have worked with plenty of people who don't have the slightest clue. For them, it is just a matter of time before they get the letter through the door.

And as for the poster who states this case will create a precedent, retrospective tax legislation has been part of our system for decades.

And I respect your right to disagree.

What are your views on the Arctic S660 case? This wasn't retrospective legislation but it was an attempt by HMRC to twist an arcane piece of legislation to levy a retrospective tax.

Dragonfly may set a precedent but it doesn't really help HMRC that much because they still need to investigate each contractor on a case by case basis. The cost of pursuing individual cases doesn't make it attractive, other than to scare other people and spread FUD. HMRC will also be aware that many people have insurance and are unlikely to bow to pressure.

As you rightly point out, retrospective tax legislation is nothing new and it doesn't in itself breach article 1 protocol 1 of ECHR. However, it has to be proportionate and the people affected by BN66 are hoping that the Judge will find it isn't in this case.

Perhaps this post might win you round a bit:

http://forums.contractoruk.com/accou...ml#post1054165

[Incognito]

Wow, you've got an ego the size of your avatar!

I have no intention of arguing with someone who is clearly disinterested in listening to anyone else's point of view.

Quite how you equate my post to the size of my ego baffles me. You've also disregarded the fact where I've stated that DR puts his argument across well even though I disagree with it. However, just so you’re clear, your opinion doesn’t matter to me in the slightest.

I didn't start this thread either. Whilst I wholeheartedly disagree with the way you managed your tax affairs with this scheme, I felt it none of my business to get involved with your discussions on any of the BN66 threads. This was brought up in general though and I feel it is an open thread for anyone to post how they regard this case and its impact on contractors.

And I respect your right to disagree.

What are your views on the Arctic S660 case? This wasn't retrospective legislation but it was an attempt by HMRC to twist an arcane piece of legislation to levy a retrospective tax.

Dragonfly may set a precedent but it doesn't really help HMRC that much because they still need to investigate each contractor on a case by case basis. The cost of pursuing individual cases doesn't make it attractive, other than to scare other people and spread FUD. HMRC will also be aware that many people have insurance and are unlikely to bow to pressure.

As you rightly point out, retrospective tax legislation is nothing new and it doesn't in itself breach article 1 protocol 1 of ECHR. However, it has to be proportionate and the people affected by BN66 are hoping that the Judge will find it isn't in this case.

Perhaps this post might win you round a bit:

http://forums.contractoruk.com/accou...ml#post1054165

I disagree with your interpretation of Arctic. HMRC actually won part of their argument that the arrangement did come under S.660, however, as Mrs Jones shares were seen to be a gift then she was exempt. It’s quite safe to say that that situation will be getting changed in some future finance bill. Would it be retrospectively applied? I’d say it can’t be as you’ve already had a House of Lords ruling regarding the argument.

I can’t really comment on the note. I’m not party as to what weight an advice note will carry. It may strengthen your argument that some part of HMRC were aware of the system, but the fact that this is now at the courts proves that it’s quite a complicated matter that needed looked at in-depth and by specialist parties. How anyone could believe ‘tax isn’t taxing’ amazes me.

I’ve already stated I’d rather not see anyone pursued over this; I take no satisfaction in strangers being bankrupted over money that is unrelated to me. However I do not support your case.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Judgement day

Getting back to the original topic of this thread...

If you thought the site was busy while the JR was taking place, just wait until the judgement is handed down.

The judgement usually only takes 30 minutes or so, and there will be hundreds of people madly pressing F5 on the BN66 thread to learn the outcome.

[Incognito]

Getting back to the original topic of this thread...

If you thought the site was busy while the JR was taking place, just wait until the judgement is handed down.

The judgement usually only takes 30 minutes or so, and there will be hundreds of people madly pressing F5 on the BN66 thread to learn the outcome.

I agree with you on that matter 100%. No matter my opinion, I am interested in the case.