BN66/S58 update

[AtW]

Over the years I too was a sucker (your word not mine) using a Ltd company and paid more than a 'Fair share' of Tax.

How did you manage to pay MORE than fair share, did you overpay or something? Should have asked for tax credit then.

I don't get sick pay, holiday pay, company pension etc. .

You had your own Ltd and did not have any of this? Should have gotten new employer then.

I also paid a fairly substantial fee to the promoter

That's between you and them.

If the average person were given an avenue to pay less Tax I'm sure the majority of those would use it.

Most people don't have such avenues because most of those who are lucky to have jobs in the first place can't escape PAYE.

Given a chance I reckon most people would sensibly avoid risk of getting into one of those schemes.

Every Citizen has the right to legally arrange their Tax affairs in order to pay less tax.

And the State has got plenty more rights to hammer people who are foolish enough to fook with the taxpayer - legally also as the courts have confirmed now

[moira under the stairs]

How did you manage to pay MORE than fair share, did you overpay or something? Should have asked for tax credit then.





You had your own Ltd and did not have any of this? Should have gotten new employer then.



That's between you and them.



Most people don't have such avenues because most of those who are lucky to have jobs in the first place can't escape PAYE.

Given a chance I reckon most people would sensibly avoid risk of getting into one of those schemes.



And the State has got plenty more rights to hammer people who are foolish enough to fook with the taxpayer - legally also as the courts have confirmed now

alas a wall would provide a better response and understanding I have given you enough of my time now you may go forth and multiply

[AtW]

now you may go forth and multiply

No thanks.

I went to my company's office to work today in peace and quiet - I want to at least double the amount of tax we pay in new financial year.

[moira under the stairs]

No thanks.

I went to my company's office to work today in peace and quiet - I want to at least double the amount of tax we pay in new financial year.

Alan the problem is if NTRT succeed you will get clobbered !

[fullyautomatix]

Er sorry no that's not correct.

People are confusing the here and now with the position back in 2001 when I joined the scheme. The scheme was legal in 2001. In fact, it was 'legal' until 2008 when a piece of legislation was introduced, backdated to 1987 (IIRC) changing the interpretation of the law.

Then, what we 'did' became illegal. Please tell me how are you supposed to make informed decisions on something legal which is then made illegal 7 or 8 years later?

Twats like atw can harp on all he wants about the 'morality' of these schemes. (I want to know what someone who isnt a contractor is doing on this site). The fact of the matte is, whatever he's doing legally now, could, under a future Government be determined to be tax 'evasion' or 'aggressive tax avoidance' and changed retrospectively.

Let's say a far left Government is formed and decides the intention of company taxation was that SME companies with 10 employees and directors drawing dividends should really have paid a 90% tax rate instead of the 40% they did pay.

The then Government then backdate their new stance on tax to 8 years prior making what our legal director did now illegal. Yeah, nothing wrong there, is there?

Coming back to the present and BN66, the Government didnt prove the scheme didnt work. It never has. its agent, hmrc, never tested the scheme in the courts until it had had the legislation changed.

What are you blubbering on about you silly twat. You BN66 crew sure are a stupid bunch, there is no doubt. Some tax avoidance promoter got you lot sucked into a scheme and tried to exploit a loophole. It was not legal and if it was I am sure millions in this country would do what you idiots did. When the applicable tax rate was 40% and more, some sucker promised that you will pay 3.5% and you believed it and went headlong into the dodgy scheme. Not only that, you lot spent the "avoided" tax and are now whimpering about bankruptcy and losing your houses etc.

Add to all that I find it disgusting that some contractors on here like Doogie etc are trying to support you lot just because you are fellow contractors and belong to this forum. **** it ! I aint following that principle. I am not going to support thieves who tried to rob the country's coffers. Someone has to say to the face and I will say it. You lot should be sent to prison and made an example.

[fullyautomatix]

Alan the problem is if NTRT succeed you will get clobbered !

No, we pay the tax that is supposed to be paid and hence wont get clobbered. Not in a million years. And if some law was changed in future as you imply it wont be applicable to some 20K people but to millions and I am comfortable in the knowledge that this wont happen.

I sleep easy every night knowing I have paid proper tax and no brown envelope will land through the door. I dont think you can say that for yourself.

[Doggy Styles]

No thanks.

I went to my company's office to work today in peace and quiet - I want to at least double the amount of tax we pay in new financial year.

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.

[AtW]

Alan the problem is if NTRT succeed you will get clobbered !

So you really think that Govt would retrospectively increase higher rate of tax???

Well, they'd hit 5 mln people who provide bulk of income tax revenues. It won't happen, but if it does then well, I don't spend all my money just in case something unforseen happens. I reckon wealth tax would be far more likely.

It's safety in numbers, animals understand this concept very well - you've chosen to go to a nice meadow with untouched grass ... and became lions lunch.

[AtW]

However AtW, your childish nonsense is completely beside the point, and adds nothing to the debate.

Well, I pay a lot of tax and entitled to have an opinion about people who blatantly cheat the system. I don't care about their morals but they should be fooking paying taxes that almost everybody else does.

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.

It was argued in court and Govt won up to Supreme Court level. I am not a lawyer but surely that set precedent already and you can thank the greedy people for that. Even if Govt removes BN66 clause they'd still have court decisions in their favour.

I think BN66 people are getting off lightly.

Deliberately using such artificial stuctures like in this case should be treated as tax evasion with very long jail sentences not just for makers of the schemes but also for the users.

People get jailed in this country for petty thefts, why should people who fook the taxpayer for massive amounts of money just pay the fine with interest and walk away?

[moira under the stairs]

It was not legal and if it was I am sure millions in this country would do what you idiots did.

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