Joint action on APN

[webberg]

If you do the briefest of searches on Jolyon Maugham QC you'll see that he has previously made public statements that might be viewed as controversial.

There is a piece he wrote a few months back saying that members of the Tax Bar has played a part in the present mess and that they needed to take a hard look at themselves and possibly remove some of those elements (people) who were at the extreme end and who would approve anything.

Such views however do not prevent him from raising all and every argument in favour of his clients, even where those are seen as hopeless (and often declared so by the Judge).

I like that in his approach. Personal integrity and a clear position but professional objectivity and doing his utmost for his client.

(I'm not Mr Maugham QC, don't work for or with him and have never actually met him. I have seen his words and his work and have met plenty of people who know and respect him (and a few who don't).

[DotasScandal]

If you do the briefest of searches on Jolyon Maugham QC you'll see that he has previously made public statements that might be viewed as controversial.

There is a piece he wrote a few months back saying that members of the Tax Bar has played a part in the present mess and that they needed to take a hard look at themselves and possibly remove some of those elements (people) who were at the extreme end and who would approve anything.

Such views however do not prevent him from raising all and every argument in favour of his clients, even where those are seen as hopeless (and often declared so by the Judge).

I like that in his approach. Personal integrity and a clear position but professional objectivity and doing his utmost for his client.

(I'm not Mr Maugham QC, don't work for or with him and have never actually met him. I have seen his words and his work and have met plenty of people who know and respect him (and a few who don't).

I have been reading his blog and he does seem to have fairly balanced views.
I remember an article where he was pleading for HMRC to adopt a more reasonable/pragmatic approach to historical cases if they are, as they claim, serious about clearing the "backlog of avoidance cases".

I was just intrigued by this enigmatic, bold, and prompty/silently retracted statement of his about the Pinsent Masons JR.

[flamel]

There is a piece he wrote a few months back saying that members of the Tax Bar has played a part in the present mess and that they needed to take a hard look at themselves and possibly remove some of those elements (people) who were at the extreme end and who would approve anything.

Such views however do not prevent him from raising all and every argument in favour of his clients, even where those are seen as hopeless (and often declared so by the Judge).

I like that in his approach. Personal integrity and a clear position but professional objectivity and doing his utmost for his client.

Agreed. He has great integrity and I fear gets misquoted occasionally.
When faced with the unreasonable cold boot of HMRC, licensed by the current Gov't, it is too easy to forget common principles, which JM QC articulates rather well.

[squirrel]

All true, but the time for "fighting the general principle of the APN" was exactly one year ago.
The Government / HMRC placed a bet on the majority of us deluding ourselves that "it will be ok, it won't happen, someone else will take care of it", etc.
And they won.

The majority had probably never even heard of an APN until it was too late!

[DonkeyRhubarb]

But this is a generic one, and if my scheme provider is going to launch a JR anyway, it would seem to not make much sense to join this one also...but for those who's scheme provider is not launching a JR or have disappeared completely, this may be their only hope ... - is that a fair assessment?

Yes.

However, even a scheme specific JR faces major obstacles, since the only grounds I'm aware of is that the scheme was not a notifiable arrangement under DOTAS (despite the fact that it was disclosed).

The reality is APNs were designed to extract money. Preventing that will be very difficult.

[DotasScandal]

The majority had probably never even heard of an APN until it was too late!

Unless one lived abroad or never ever checks the news, it it difficult to have missed the "tax avoidance" hysteria over the past 12-months!
Indeed a lot of people were probably blissfully unaware, but there was also a large faction that adopted the mindset I describe, and for all intents and pruposes, shunned the idea of a group action.
I might be wrong, but I attribute it in part to the freelancer mentality.
HMRC did not have much of their usual "divide and conquer" to do, as we were already divided from the start!

[flamel]

Cyprus started it with a 25% grab from bank accounts. Gauke & Co came up with an even better scam, one that was supported by the right wing press - APNs. Plus, they think they're going to win votes from doing it, which is a masterstroke.

[lilikins1]

Is there a date yet for this Pinsent Mason APN hearing? Feels like it's taking for ever. The ideal situation would be to go through a different JR for the 'joint JR' as, if for example, I join it in a few weeks time and it get s blown out of the water in two months, it s not really buying me any time !

[flamel]

Just read the s58 thread - HMRC like to take their time on these items - years and years in fact.

That the JR is taking a few months is, in the scheme of things, nothing. There'll be a lot more waiting around to come.

The only way is patience.

[lilikins1]

Just read the s58 thread - HMRC like to take their time on these items - years and years in fact.

That the JR is taking a few months is, in the scheme of things, nothing. There'll be a lot more waiting around to come.

The only way is patience.

But surely, if the joint JR sits behind the Pinsent one and that's going to be heard early summer..that only gives us potentially a few weeks of delay if it the judge decides that the APN's must be paid..or am I getting the wrong end of the stick here?