Rangers Tax Case

[StrengthInNumbers]

Rangers Tax Case

I feared that's what HMRC will be doing. Collect from everyone under APNS and delay any case going to courts. By the time decision comes in years only return where scheme have won. Not many will be able come together and form groups and prove they had similar scheme to ones which won.
But boy if HMRC has calculated it wrong and most went to court, HMRC will have a big problem and current bosses will lose jobs.

[centurian]

But boy if HMRC has calculated it wrong and most went to court, HMRC will have a big problem and current bosses will lose jobs.

More likely they will blame it all on "persistent tax dodgers who are not playing 'fair' by clogging up the courts" and claim they need an even harder crackdown, more powers etc.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

I don't think HMRC will care.

APNs only change where the money sits while a dispute is ongoing. If HMRC lose in court, and have to return the money, then that's what Parliament intended.

Of course, their much vaunted 80% win rate might take a bit of a nose dive but that's a different story.

[StrengthInNumbers]

Even if HMRC cares it does not matter. Once courts decide it is out of HMRC.

Point is if enough groups will get together to challenge HMRC or not.

[Not Losing Any Sleep]

Claimn agaibst the company of the beneficiaries/employees?

Have not posted before as I am not a contractor but rather an employer who used an EBT scheme in 2010.

However thought you would want to know we received a notification letter over the festive period saying we would be getting an APN in the next 2 - 4 weeks.

I had assumed due to Rangers case that EBT cases would be put to the bottom of the pile as there are far easier film schemes to tackle first. Looks like I was wrong and actually HMRC may be trying to get the money in from the EBT schemes before the Ranger case is concluded. Puts them in a much better position to argue holding the cash than not I guess.

Our scheme is almost identical to the rangers one apart from the fact that we put through about 0.1% of the money.

The Rangers/Murray Group case is against the company and not at this point the individual employees.

COMEEONRANGERS, I'm interested if this applies to your scheme which you say is very similar.

[z4thras]

The Rangers/Murray Group case is against the company and not at this point the individual employees.

COMEEONRANGERS, I'm interested if this applies to your scheme which you say is very similar.

it seems there have been a number of requests to find oput how much they have spent on this case, wonder when they will come clean.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/body/...&commit=Search

[StrengthInNumbers]

I have added my request as well. We need to know this.

[comeonrangers]

The Rangers/Murray Group case is against the company and not at this point the individual employees.

COMEEONRANGERS, I'm interested if this applies to your scheme which you say is very similar.

It is against the company.

And to answer a previous question I don't believe the particular scheme we were involved in has gone to the FTT.

We took part in another scheme a year later, which didn't involve an EBT and HMRC have simply bundled them together - two separate letters but sent out on the same day.

From this it looks like they are being no more tactical in their sending of APN's than simply going through the list in alphabetical/DOTAS number or likes order and getting them out in line with their commitment to have all APN's out by the end of tax year 15/16. The two letters we got were identical apart from a few mailmerge bits.

I too listened to Lin Homer and took from her words that due to the Rangers case EBT schemes would be probably targeted later on. However this clearly isn't the case and I really don't think, apart from the first tranche of cases, which were hand picked for the media (i.e. dead certs not to be challenged), HMRC are looking that closely as to the type of scheme each case used. This blanket, mud at the wall approach is probably the most economical as HMRC don't need, under APN's, to prove whether they are right or wrong in holding on to the disputed money, so at this stage they really don't need to go into that much detail as to the scheme and whether they will win or not. It goes back to that old saying "possession is nine tenths of the law!"

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Someone else has just submitted this one.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...ngs_and_others

[dangerouswhensober]

From this it looks like they are being no more tactical in their sending of APN's than simply going through the list in alphabetical/DOTAS number or likes order and getting them out in line with their commitment to have all APN's out by the end of tax year 15/16. The two letters we got were identical apart from a few mailmerge bits.

I too listened to Lin Homer and took from her words that due to the Rangers case EBT schemes would be probably targeted later on. However this clearly isn't the case and I really don't think, apart from the first tranche of cases, which were hand picked for the media (i.e. dead certs not to be challenged), HMRC are looking that closely as to the type of scheme each case used. This blanket, mud at the wall approach is probably the most economical as HMRC don't need, under APN's, to prove whether they are right or wrong in holding on to the disputed money, so at this stage they really don't need to go into that much detail as to the scheme and whether they will win or not. It goes back to that old saying "possession is nine tenths of the law!"

It's true that under APN regime HMRC don't need to prove (in advance) whether they are right or wrong in their view of taxability of a scheme, but I believe that, in deciding how to order the APN issuing, they would still have to have some regard for several factors, including:

(1) The requirement to satisfy the House of Lords 'proof of concept' within six months (i.e. before February this year).
(2) The public perception of how well (or badly) they are using their new powers (especially with the General Election due).
(3) Their ability to (legally) recover funds from scheme users unable to pay APNs.

I suspect that the trumpeted APN collection successes up to December last year (as discussed earlier in this thread) scored highly on all of the above factors:

(1) Money was recoverable quickly from a small group of companies and wealthy individuals, and
(2) No significant publicity was incurred, and
(3) There was (almost) no requirement to resort to strong-arm (i.e. legal) collection tactics.

I still believe that these 'favourable' conditions for HMRC will not persist as they work their way down the DOTAS list, so they will need to be careful on the timing of APN issue. (For example, they will not want to be issuing 2,500 APNs in January, February, and March, then finding that they have to initiate legal proceedings against 7,500 individual non-payers in Summer time. They will also not want 7,500 individual taxpayers screaming at their MPs about their lives being wrecked).

I think it's significant that the APN you are expecting to receive is against a company - not an individual. There could be an agenda to target companies first, in the assumption that companies can better afford to pay up quickly.

Please could any individual reading these boards who has received and APN (or a notice of impending issue) let us know - anonymously, of course ...

(BTW - Have you thought of writing to Lin Homer, reminding her of her testimony, and copying your MP & Gauke ?)