What's the big deal with BN66?

[AtW]

In principle the retrospective nature of BN66 is wrong and that is why I oppose it.

And HMRC opposes the principle that would allow any UK resident taxpayer to reduce income tax burden to quoted 3.5%.

Who do you think will win?

I have to admin - I did not read up on BN66 until today and had automatic sympathy for people challenging Govt HMRC etc, any time, but now that I see "offshore" stuff and "3.5%" then all that sympathy goes out of the window - if the numbers are true then it was piss take from start and anyone taking part in it should have fully appreciated that tax bill may come at later date, so at the very least sensible position would have been to put money in the bank just in case.

[Churchill]

And HMRC opposes the principle that would allow any UK resident taxpayer to reduce income tax burden to quoted 3.5%.

Who do you think will win?

I have to admin - I did not read up on BN66 until today and had automatic sympathy for people challenging Govt HMRC etc, any time, but now that I see "offshore" stuff and "3.5%" then all that sympathy goes out of the window - if the numbers are true then it was piss take from start and anyone taking part in it should have fully appreciated that tax bill may come at later date, so at the very least sensible position would have been to put money in the bank just in case.

Oh look, here comes another troll

[AtW]

Oh look, here comes another troll

Did you use that scheme?

[Churchill]

Did you use that scheme?

Based on my posts, what do you think?

[electronicfur]

And HMRC opposes the principle that would allow any UK resident taxpayer to reduce income tax burden to quoted 3.5%.

Then they should have taken action to close the loophole earlier. It's not like they didnt know about it.

Just because they were incompetent does not mean they should get away with passing retrospective laws.

[Iron Condor]

Based on my posts, what do you think?

What the hell were people thinking.

Even ignoring the retro element, there was always a chance this scheme could fail in the courts.

The Judge said it was not a clear cut case one way or the other.

I know IR35 was bad, i paid it the first year (2000 tax year) as i didnt know any better but i was never seriously tempted by any of these schemes.

[AtW]

Based on my posts, what do you think?

I'd say no, probably not - you don't come across as the kind of guy who'd fall for that 3.5% offshore stuff. Or were you?

[AtW]

Then they should have taken action to close the loophole earlier. It's not like they didnt know about it.

That's your opinion.

The judge clearly disagreed - I've read the text of the judgement and it's pretty well written, IANAL and maybe judge is wrong on some bits, I can't be certain on that. But what I am certain is that people who reduce their tax from 40% to 3.5% by using offshore scheme should not expect to get away with it.

[Churchill]

I'd say no, probably not - you don't come across as the kind of guy who'd fall for that 3.5% offshore stuff. Or were you?

Got it in one.

I don't agree with the scheme. However I also disagree with what HMRC are trying to do.

[Incognito]

Oh look, here comes another troll

Nothing trolling about it muttley, trolling would be going onto the BN66 thread and getting involved there. I have not and neither has AtW. this is general though and this is all very simple:

The court case centres around self-employed IT contractor Robert Huitson, who started using a scheme set up by Montpelier Tax Consultants (Isle of Man) Ltd in 2001.

This arrangement allowed him to receive an annual fee of £15,000, plus a further sum in his capacity as the owner of a life interest in an offshore trust.

However the government cracked down on this type of scheme following legislation introduced in the 2008 Finance Act which also allowed them to take retrospective action.

The judge found that by exploiting the arrangements, Mr Huitson, who was not resident in the Isle of Man,avoided income tax of £84,980 over seven years and reduced his effective tax rate to 3.5 per cent.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e028b586-0...44feabdc0.html

This is simply HMRC fulfilling their role in collecting the requisite amount of UK tax from all UK taxpayers.