Joint action on APN

[DotasScandal]

I've heard a figure of 10, and there will be a lot more to come. Promoters can't apply for a JR until clients receive an APN.

I know of another two who are just about to apply.

ps. make that another three.

Interesting. Wondering what the impact of all of this will be.
Good to see that not all are resigned to cough up and fade away.

[lilikins1]

Interesting. Wondering what the impact of all of this will be.
Good to see that not all are resigned to cough up and fade away.

My tax advisor said that the judge at the pinsent case may just say that all APN s are void. But that s hopeful thinking etc etc. if they see a tsunami of APN judicial reviews coming their way maybe...

Personally I think they picked on the wrong scheme to start with Ingenious have the capital to fight the APN and would not take it lying down so they re leading the way setting example

[DotasScandal]

My tax advisor said that the judge at the pinsent case may just say that all APN s are void. But that s hopeful thinking etc etc. if they see a tsunami of APN judicial reviews coming their way maybe...
Personally I think they picked on the wrong scheme to start with Ingenious have the capital to fight the APN and would not take it lying down so they re leading the way setting example

We live in hope! In hope that this North-Korean style legislation backfires spectacularly.

Agree with you on HMRC biting off a chunk that may be too big to swallow. Please choke on it and die, HMRC.
Obviously the temptation to start with Ingenious must have been immense given the amounts of the APNs in question. And as we know, HMRC and our dear leader are not exactly very good at resisting the opportunity of a good money grab when they see one...

[lilikins1]

We live in hope! In hope that this North-Korean style legislation backfires spectacularly.

Agree with you on HMRC biting off a chunk that may be too big to swallow. Please choke on it and die, HMRC.
Obviously the temptation to start with Ingenious must have been immense given the amounts of the APNs in question. And as we know, HMRC and our dear leader are not exactly very good at resisting the opportunity of a good money grab when they see one...

Seems like they got super greedy just before the elections.

[lilikins1]

Seems like they got super greedy just before the elections.

Get the dough in quickly

[DotasScandal]

Get the dough in quickly

Precisely.

[StrengthInNumbers]

My understanding is that HMRC tried to delay Ingenious as much as they could. They are also delaying other strong cases.
Rangers they have already lost twice and I think next would be a lost against Ingenious.
As for APNs I don't think they are going away. All have to pay taxes in advance if you are doing a self assessment. HMRC takes next year tax in this year assuming yes earnings will be the same. And based on this they are saying same should happen with tax in dispute. My issue here only is they should not do it retrospectively and not stall cases going to courts. They should be fair and push forward and support cases to get to courts quickly. And if they want to collect money quickly they should also pay to agree for compensation to all the hardships this will cause if they lose in courts. They bankrupted Rangers for tax which they have not yet proven to be due. And I feel next will be a loss against Ingenious and then again contractor EBT.

[DotasScandal]

My understanding is that HMRC tried to delay Ingenious as much as they could. They are also delaying other strong cases.
Rangers they have already lost twice and I think next would be a lost against Ingenious.
As for APNs I don't think they are going away. All have to pay taxes in advance if you are doing a self assessment. HMRC takes next year tax in this year assuming yes earnings will be the same. And based on this they are saying same should happen with tax in dispute. My issue here only is they should not do it retrospectively and not stall cases going to courts. They should be fair and push forward and support cases to get to courts quickly. And if they want to collect money quickly they should also pay to agree for compensation to all the hardships this will cause if they lose in courts. They bankrupted Rangers for tax which they have not yet proven to be due. And I feel next will be a loss against Ingenious and then again contractor EBT.

Everyone's issue is with the retrospectivity!
Your observations are correct. Anyone with a functioning brain just needs to pay attention to what they (HMRC, government) do, not what they say, to understand what is happening.
As soon as APNs became law, HMRC put the brakes on any sort of resolution through the courts of existing cases (generally by going full on passive-aggressive.)
From that simple observation, one can understand that APNs are NOT, and have never been, about 1/ changing people's attitude towards avoidance nor 2/ encouraging people to resolve matters in court.

As has been said here already, they are a tool to extract money by brute force, and nothing else. The government is broke and needs MONEY. That is ALL They don't give a damn about "fairness" or what have you.

Since the whole thing is based on one big fat lie, there is no discussion possible, and it is perfectly reasonable to refuse being pushed under the bus.

[DonkeyRhubarb]

They probably went for the more wealthy film scheme investors first because they were more likely to be able to pay the APNs. I think I read that HMRC scored a 99% collection rate with the first tranche of APNs.

Of course the downside, if you attack wealthy people, is they also have more money to fight back.

[lilikins1]

They probably went for the more wealthy film scheme investors first because they were more likely to be able to pay the APNs. I think I read that HMRC scored a 99% collection rate with the first tranche of APNs.

Of course the downside, if you attack wealthy people, is they also have more money to fight back.

Seems like they ve taken the low hanging fruit to get good numbers in before the election