HMRC consultation on penalties for scheme developers/marketers

[AtW]

HMRC will therefore use every tactic to prevent the contractors' "day in court" to ever come.

How can they stop you?

[eek]

How can they stop you?

Simply by kicking the case into the long grass until April 5th 2019 - and they have years of experience continually finding reasons to delay a first tribunal....

[Dylan]

How can they stop you?

They are incredible, they will take 3 months to respond to a simple letter just because they can, getting them to court is pretty much on their terms or never, power tripping, unaccountable, out of control *****.

I'd love for them to have the courage of their convictions and actually bring taxpayers to court, I openly challenge them to do so.

The fact is that they win 80% of all their cases and it is an utter certainty that these schemes don't work which must be why they are taking so many people to court right now...

[AtW]

Simply by kicking the case into the long grass until April 5th 2019 - and they have years of experience continually finding reasons to delay a first tribunal....

They can delay, but they can't stop you.

Make a CTD and wait patietly for your day in court - if you win, then super, and if you lose then you won't have fines/penalties due to CTD.

[Dylan]

They can delay, but they can't stop you.

Make a CTD and wait patietly for your day in court - if you win, then super, and if you lose then you won't have fines/penalties due to CTD.

If they delay beyond April 2019 then game over, that is the point.

In fact, even if by some miracle they don't delay and you win in court the 2019 legislation will impose a penalty on you regardless of you winning, you couldn't make it up.

Any people still contracting need to plan for this now with a view to earning zero in 2018-19 to minimise the tax this charge will bring...

[AtW]

If they delay beyond April 2019 then game over, that is the point.

I am pretty sure you can ask court to stay any charges until case is resolved. If the court says no, then well, you had your day in court and got the decision.

[difficulttimes]

Opportunity for a more collective approach

Getting this conversation back on track what this charge does do is bring everyone together which is different to the APNs which came in different waves and was very much dealt with on a scheme by scheme basis. This affects everyone at the same time regardless of your scheme/arrangement - all 50 000 of us out there. Some people may owe a few thousands but some will be given demands in the hundreds of thousands but the principle will be the same so if there was ever a case for strength in numbers this is it.

Saying all that baring the APNers out there I'm pretty sure everyone else is pretty much unaware of what is being proposed and how this will financially impact them. Out of those 50 000 will be some powerful and influential people.

Will be interesting to see if people join forces.

[DotasScandal]

I'd love for them to have the courage of their convictions and... .

[webberg]

I've read the paper through once and will need to again.

What strikes me immediately is that there is no clear definition of "avoidance" and a (deliberate?) conflation of avoidance and evasion at every opportunity.

I would also observe that the intention to deter people from using schemes. Great - would agree with that - but why now and why not 10 years ago.

Also why give the guilty a chance to disappear? Is it because HMRC knows it has already missed the boat in chasing these people and is now just engaged in essential orifice protection.

Finally, outside of a few cases involving bonus schemes used by big banks, what avoidance scheme has been defeated allowing the sanction to be applied?

[AtW]

what avoidance scheme has been defeated allowing the sanction to be applied?

https://www.accountancyage.com/2016/...idance-scheme/

So in this case EY would be on the hook