BN66/S58 update

[AtW]

Idiot.... why did they change the law then retrospectively?

Maybe they just got tired of cheats like you? Change it once, win in courts and make example from some small group of big cheats to strike fear in hearts of others.

It's great really - now those who are being offered 3.5% tax instead of 40% tax would have a chance to say - "hang on, remember those BN66 people who got done with retro change that got upheld in courts?"

Rest assured though that if I was in charge of HMRC then I would not use retro approach in this case

[Old Hack]

Maybe they just got tired of cheats like you? Change it once, win in courts and make example from some small group of big cheats to strike fear in hearts of others.

It's great really - now those who are being offered 3.5% tax instead of 40% tax would have a chance to say - "hang on, remember those BN66 people who got done with retro change that got upheld in courts?"

Rest assured though that if I was in charge of HMRC then I would not use retro approach in this case

Thin edge ATW, that's the point. If they can do it for this, they can do it for anything.

[moira under the stairs]

I never had any truck with BN66/S58 so I have no specific financial interest in this case.

However AtW, your childish nonsense is completely beside the point, and adds nothing to the debate. Only a cretin (tm) cannot appreciate that the issue at stake here is not the morality of people minimising their tax bill, but HMG applying what seems to be retrospective taxation and/or law-changing. I should not need to explain this, but the principle goes far beyond a couple of thousand contractors.

At last someone who really understands the situation.

As MPs Gauke and Osbourne believe retrospective legislation is wrong as Ministers that view has changed... Politics is a strange beast.

[AtW]

Thin edge ATW, that's the point. If they can do it for this, they can do it for anything.

Well, there is precedent set in court now.

Even if Govt removes or amends BN66 it still got court cases to rely upon in the future.

[SantaClaus]

ATW, does your employer, err... sorry client, know that you spend all day on CUK.

If anyone knows the identity of ATW, please send me a PM.

Cheers

Santa

[eek]

ATW, does your employer, err... sorry client, know that you spend all day on CUK.

If anyone knows the identity of ATW, please send me a PM.

Cheers

Santa

If you don;t know the identity of Atw then that is your own issue. As a hint he created, runs and owns a large SEO company. He can do what he wants in his own time because its his own time.

Also you've turned what was an argument into a personal issue. I would have thought that was one thing Whitehouse would have advised you not to do.

[adubya]

ATW, does your employer, err... sorry client, know that you spend all day on CUK.

If anyone knows the identity of ATW, please send me a PM.

Cheers

Santa

Nasty.

[SantaClaus]

If you don;t know the identity of Atw then that is your own issue. As a hint he created, runs and owns a large SEO company. He can do what he wants in his own time because its his own time.

Also you've turned what was an argument into a personal issue. I would have thought that was one thing Whitehouse would have advised you not to do.

Well it's beginning to resemble a children's school playground in here. So I'll leave you kids to fight it out on the swings.

[Cliphead]

Pay yer way or get tae ****. You want to fck Hector? Never gonna happen.

You think you can? Then you have no say anymore in how this country is run and should have no vote.

Bye bye...

[BolshieBastard]

I have money set aside for that eventuality.

However much you have put aside, double it and some more. If you do get banged to rights for IR35, you'll find you wont just have back taxes to pay. You'll have penalties plus interest.