A million tax pounds

[BrilloPad]

BBC News - Take That stars could face tax bill of millions after court decision

Lucky sods get their day in court.

[scooterscot]

So the message of goodwill in their music is all just a disguise. How much is enough?

[SpontaneousOrder]

So the message of goodwill in their music is all just a disguise. How much is enough?

I would guess that they've each paid a lot more tax than you have.

[scooterscot]

I would guess that they've each paid a lot more tax than you have.

Hypothetically I paid 30% they've paid 10%. They win I loose. Yes, they really have paid more than me.

[OwlHoot]

BBC News - Take That stars could face tax bill of millions after court decision

Lucky sods get their day in court.

For the hard of thinking round here, from the article:

While tax evasion is illegal, tax avoidance is not a criminal activity, he added.

[scooterscot]

For the hard of thinking round here, from the article:

For those that have a problem reading the article and understanding it's contents:

Judge Bishopp said in his ruling: "The underlying, and fundamental, conclusion we have reached is that the Icebreaker scheme is, and was known and understood by all concerned to be, a tax avoidance scheme."

The point here is organisations fronting themselves as something there are not.

And why else would "HMRC will continue to challenge in the courts anyone who engages in tax avoidance schemes... [Such people] risk not only the high cost of these schemes but also lay themselves open to penalties and, potentially, prosecution."

[OwlHoot]

And why else would "HMRC will continue to challenge in the courts anyone who engages in tax avoidance schemes..

You probably missed it, but the operative word there is "challenge" rather than "prosecute".

[BrilloPad]

While tax evasion is illegal, tax avoidance is not a criminal activity, he added.

I nearly commented on that. But the main point I took away is that they had their day in court without retrospection. Thats all I want for BN66.

[centurian]

I nearly commented on that. But the main point I took away is that they had their day in court without retrospection. Thats all I want for BN66.

That's because Take That were on a loser anyway. HMRC don't need retrospection if they can win.

Can't really fault HMRC on this score - the scheme never was legal in the first place - HMRC challenged that in court, and won.

And it wasn't like they were not warned - HMRC guidance page on tax avoidance even mentions them

HM Revenue & Customs: Tempted by Tax Avoidance?

Do you want to take that risk?

[BrilloPad]

Can't really fault HMRC on this score - the scheme never was legal in the first place - HMRC challenged that in court, and won.

+1