HMRC getting the big guy providers - arrests made

[cojak]

Three advisers arrested over £132m tax scheme - Citywire

[SueEllen]

Interesting...

[Dylan]

"the arrests signalled intentions to punish those who facilitate illegal tax avoidance schemes"

Tax avoidance isn't illegal though...

[AtW]

About time such things were treated as tax evasion - creation of artificial schemes with main intention to evade tax.

Tax barristers should be focusing on things such as helping determine whether Jaffa Cakes should be VATable or not, rather than help create or defend outrageous schemes that should be treated as tax evasion.

[webberg]

Reluctant as I am to add petrol here, perhaps it's worth remembering that opinion without facts is a dangerous step.

Many film schemes are under the cosh because the film was never made/never intended to be made/hopelessly overvalued. There was a clear dishonest intention behind the creation of the scheme based on an asset that may never have existed. Where those involved knew, or should have known, that the asset was never real, then they are stealing money from investors. In that situation nobody should be in the least surprised that the thieves are arrested and subjected to the attentions of the law.

I don't know the names of the people arrested, nor what they are alleged to have done but if they have indeed done something like the above (as have other before them) then we should have no sympathy.

Where however HMRC's PR machine cranks out misleading information, lapped up by an uncritical press in order to brainwash the gullible, we do need to be more careful.

Perhaps once the facts are known it would be sensible to reassess.

Was this a deliberate attempt to steal money?
Was it just a failed investment?

It might also be worth asking why a Government promotes a tax haven in order to encourage investment and only subsequently realised that it needed active policing IN REAL TIME?

Instead they say that the law was poorly written or explained, but now we see the error of your ways and we'll apply retrospection. In order to make that seem more acceptable, we'll paint EVERYBODY who went anywhere near a Government sponsored tax haven as greedy parasites who deserve all they get. If the sometimes inconvenient facts get trampled in that story, that's unfortunate, but for so long as journalists need to fill column inches and envy of your neighbours remains a fundamental principle of the British mentality, don't worry because we'll get away with it.

As I said, perhaps these people have taken part in a CRIMINAL enterprise and if so, I have no sympathy. I prefer however to wait for the facts before swallowing a story that panders to prejudice.

I'll not defend barristers either. Some are (in my opinion) very good, some not. They only however do what their client asks. They are rarely the designer or inventor of schemes, merely commentators.

Anticipating that feeding this non story is a red rag, the above is my only contribution.

[AtW]

There was a clear dishonest intention behind the creation of the scheme based on an asset that may never have existed. Where those involved knew, or should have known, that the asset was never real

Isn't it pretty much like with those "loans" which aren't really loans?

There was some other scheme that involved making supposed losses on foreign currency trading, and I believe no real trades were made, so losses were totally artificial.