2019 tax charge - consultation preparation

[AtW]

(I actually called HMRC to ask what exactly is the deal with these DoTAS schemes and if there may be any problems by using them before I first joined, the answer was "all good").

He meant all good for HMRC...

When DoTAS were introduced I thought that nobody sane would touch anything that involved having to put "I am a tax avoider XXXX" on SA. What the hell were you thinking?

It was obvious that HMRC will at first collect data for a few years to get better understanding and then go for attack.

[Dylan]

Then why does HMRC score so badly in IR35 tax tribunals against contractors with proper representation, given that HMRC are picking off the cases they feel most confident in winning? Surely, HMRC should be winning 90% of cases or thereabouts.

Because the legislation is badly written, implemented and policed and therefore and doesn't properly enforce the underlying meaning of parliament - that 2 people sat on adjoining desks doing the same job for the same boss be taxed at the same rate.

[Dylan]

He meant all good for HMRC...

When DoTAS were introduced I thought that nobody sane would touch anything that involved having to put "I am a tax avoider XXXX" on SA. What the hell were you thinking?

It was obvious that HMRC will at first collect data for a few years to get better understanding and then go for attack.

Unfortunately I fell for the "they issue the scheme number so they can understand how it works and change the law to prevent it working in the future" line, like a ******* idiot

[Old Greg]

Scheme promoters, independent accountants, and HMRC people themselves (I actually called HMRC to ask what exactly is the deal with these DoTAS schemes and if there may be any problems by using them before I first joined, the answer was "all good, no worries", got it from two separate people on the phone). Why do you ask?

Because there is a difference between advice received from a scheme promoter and advice from independent parties.

As for the phone calls to HMRC, I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

[AtW]

There is no crime in being in a scheme either, unless you are now suggesting tax avoidance has suddenly moved to be a criminal offense? Why pick ltd over umbrella?

There is indeed no crime at the moment to use tax avoidance schemes.

I'd pick Ltd over umbrella because there is a lot more control over when one gets paid - business can and should accumulate some profits to ensure smooth salary payments for employees, that's important for mortgage reasons, also Ltd is much more suitable for Plan B.

[SomeDude]

He meant all good for HMRC...

When DoTAS were introduced I thought that nobody sane would touch anything that involved having to put "I am a tax avoider XXXX" on SA. What the hell were you thinking?

It was obvious that HMRC will at first collect data for a few years to get better understanding and then go for attack.

But you do realize, that many people stopped using LTDs and joined schemes strictly to be safe from IR35 (which was also anti-avoidance legislation)?

[AtW]

Unfortunately I fell for the "they issue the scheme number so they can understand how it works and change the law to prevent it working in the future" line, like a ******* idiot

Sales people, big commissions

[AtW]

But you do realize, that many people stopped using LTDs and joined schemes strictly to be safe from IR35 (which was also anti-avoidance legislation)?

I think many people moved from Ltds to schemes strictly because of greed.

[Old Greg]

Because the legislation is badly written, implemented and policed and therefore and doesn't properly enforce the underlying meaning of parliament - that 2 people sat on adjoining desks doing the same job for the same boss be taxed at the same rate.

But wouldn't that depend on whether one person was essentially an employee, and the other running a genuine business? Doesn't Parliament intend to differentiate?

Employee vs Business is a rather different distinction that the distinction between Employee or Business vs Volunteer who happens to get a large loan every month from a Trust that is established in such a way as the loan cannot be recalled.

[SomeDude]

Because there is a difference between advice received from a scheme promoter and advice from independent parties.

As for the phone calls to HMRC, I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Well, of course many independent parties would say "it's all legal, nothing to worry about", as until now nobody has proven that it was in fact illegal... And nobody could have known about retrospective APN laws coming to life years in the future.