BN66/S58 update

[ZARDOZ]

Around 2000 very greedy and very stupid numpties...

As a newish contractor around 1999 the general consensus of my fellow contractors was don't touch them with a barge pole. Same advise from most accountants. In the coming years it was more and more obvious they were going to get hit. Anyone expecting to get off up to 2008 is in cloud cuckoo land.

[AtW]

Anyone expecting to get off up to 2008 is in cloud cuckoo land.

Do not underestimate the power of political lobbying ...

[eek]

This is General. Why not fook orf back to the protected BN66 thread where others won't explain reality to you?

FTFY HTH

[vetran]

Actually I'm a BA for a fortune 500 company working on their ERP implementation and EMEA credit control.

and yes 90 days is a tad long. Only the truly big companies get that, the credit team fight to reduce it.

but as you say its probably take it or leave it if you are a small supplier.

As I say if that is your IR35 defence you may need some other options.

IR35 like BN66 is woolly.

both bad legislation.

[Tax_shouldnt_be_taxing]

Marmite

Folks,

If nothing else, one thing that I have found is just how the corridors of power are as liable to the contempt and allegations that have been posted here.

So I'll pass on the name calling and other remarks but whatever your view, rather like the local elections, it's pretty clear that the population aint happy with most of the political system (right or wrong).

I'm not going to get into a "he says she says". What I would observe about this matter and via NTRT what I think is in everyones interest is to know that the folks in Westminster are not always as well informed on a range of matters that relate to people involved in NTRT, immigration, the tax code, the EU or otherwise (like the NHS to Education in case you call me a Tory...). Only when they get chased and folks ensure that they spend a while to actually listen do our MP's become people - whether for or against your particular argument.

Whether you're interested in chasing "tax dodgers" who some call criminals, migrants who are truly nice but don't contribute to the working population, "benefits cheats" whatever that might mean, lazy PAYE staff in the Public Sector etc... there will always be a source and a target in any debate.

Personally I am more worried by the System than the people who live in it. Folks, love or hate NTRT, one thing that makes sense is that to accept the System without asking questions of it is itself wrong. But don't take my word, take that of the voting public last week. Democracy is not perfect and I don't expect anyone to agree with what I think any more than what some here may think. HMRC are well below par across any number of responsibilities, the tax code is a mess and UK Plc won't be saved by a massive tax take happening - avoidance, evasion or anything else. To think this really matters to the Public Purse or to think that paying "you fair share" will actually make a difference in the grand scheme of things is to suggest that "The Wizard of Oz" was a book written for kids about a magical land. Well actually, in a way it was....

I'm a family man with a wife and kids and have the same worries as everyone else. I can see both sides of the argument and I can see the sentiment. But if nothing else, via NTRT, I also see more. And what I see scares me more than the posts here, the tax in question or the rights and wrongs debated of how work and tax go together.

To use a word prescribed here, we are "fooked" but it's not down to legal tax avoidance. We have way bigger problems than that. The world is far more scary than I knew and if nothing else, the efforts of NTRT (love or hate them) has shown me that. I'm glad to have found that out and if nothing else I am grateful to them for this.

[d000hg]

Do not underestimate the power of political lobbying ...

By your own argument, if the lobbying results in the court changing something, it is then perfectly legal and OK.

[centurian]

13 pages today on the subject. Keep this up and we'll overtake the main thread.

Speaking of which, I see that the text of the amendment is exactly the same as the one raised by the Tories and Lib Dems back in 2008 - and the sponsor of that amendment is David Gauke himself, now chief inquisitor - and he voted for the amendment back in 2008 as well.

Now whatever you think about the rights and wrong of BN66 - what an utterly two-faced, weasel toad, piece of...

[BolshieBastard]

13 pages today on the subject. Keep this up and we'll overtake the main thread.

Speaking of which, I see that the text of the amendment is exactly the same as the one raised by the Tories and Lib Dems back in 2008 - and the sponsor of that amendment is David Gauke himself, now chief inquisitor - and he voted for the amendment back in 2008 as well.

Now whatever you think about the rights and wrong of BN66 - what an utterly two-faced, weasel toad, piece of...

Yes, he may well squirm a little, maybe even deep down know he's being duplicitous but dont for one minute think he's going to vote for it. He'll do everything in his remit to either a, get the amendment withdraw (as the previous one was) or b, get it voted down.

[AtW]

By your own argument, if the lobbying results in the court changing something, it is then perfectly legal and OK.

I did not know it is possible to lobby courts to change their decision.

Legal does not always mean OK.

It's not ok for somebody to pay 3.5% income tax when others in same position pay 40% even if it's legal.

[AtW]

He'll do everything in his remit to either a, get the amendment withdraw (as the previous one was) or b, get it voted down.

It's his duty to do so on behalf of taxpayers.

Given his previous history on the matter however I'd agree that he should have delegated decision to somebody else or resigned if he can't explain sudden change of his views.