HMRC consultation on penalties for scheme developers/marketers

[QCApproved]

I'm not sure it's not retro tbh
DT - its says in section 4 I think any scheme that is agreed to be ineffective will be classed as defeated
I would assume this is a part of settlement - it may not be I would have thought settlement involves agreeing the tax avoidance was ineffective.
Taxpayer settles - promoter subject to charge - I need to re-read that section

Nothing can be ruled out re Ltd Co Avoidance it's treatment is inequitable at the moment as the measures to counteract it failed

[QCApproved]

Section 4.4
If there is an agreement between the taxpayer and HMRC that the scheme doesn't work then that classes as the avoidance being "defeated" triggering the promoter charge
as all this stuff is still outstanding aren't all schemes caught up in it if otherwise not conclusively settled prior to it becoming law backdated or not.

[difficulttimes]

So here is a question for you then??

in the DR proposal the initial liability lays with the employer (trustees) but then can be transferred magically to the employee (us) but in this proposal there is a promoter charge so back to the trustees again but this time HMRC believe they can pay this (no mention of transferring) but they know they won't be able to pay the income tax and NI so this goes back to the employee?

So who are the promoters? Accountants I understand but the promoters.... Most of them have packed up and gone.

V confused..

[DonkeyRhubarb]

This all seems a bit cockeyed to me.

By the time a scheme gets anywhere near to being defeated, the promoter has usually wound everything up and legged it. There wouldn't be any legal entities left to issue penalties to.

They need to stop them selling the schemes in the first place.

[QCApproved]

They need to go after the officers and shareholders of any entities

[AtW]

They need to go after the officers and shareholders of any entities

They will for sure, plus it won't take long for tax avoidance business operation to be forced post some upfront bonds or have 3rd party insurance covering their tax liability - all that should make this "industry" unviable (in UK) for majority of cases when UK tax residents are involved.

[difficulttimes]

Isn't this just another gun being pointed at the contractors head but this time the holder of the gun are the accountants/scheme promoter as they will want the contractor to settle before this becomes law because after this if you settle you both pay? Nice little bit of double-taxation under the disguise of 'penalties'
Throw in the mix the 2019 charge - does that equate to settling? Feels like they don't want us to wait til then you must settle immediately

[DotasScandal]

This document talks about 'being defeated' we all know that this won't happen as it now won't get that far. You can only be defeated as instructed by the judiciary..

This. This is merely a deterrent to "encourage" out-of-court settlements. The details of which will, of course, never be released to the public. The point being, again, to ensure that the arrangements are never examined by a tribunal, so that HMRC's responsibility in the whole fiasco can never be formally established.

[Dylan]

This. This is merely a deterrent to "encourage" out-of-court settlements. The details of which will, of course, never be released to the public. The point being, again, to ensure that the arrangements are never examined by a tribunal, so that HMRC's responsibility in the whole fiasco can never be formally established.

Does it matter? If a court finds a scheme to work does that stop it being a scheme that is caught by the 2019 legislation? (Serious Q as I've not had time to read it).

[DotasScandal]

Does it matter? If a court finds a scheme to work does that stop it being a scheme that is caught by the 2019 legislation? (Serious Q as I've not had time to read it).

No it doesn't. Because in the context of the "2019 charge", HMRC is (again!) Judge, Jury, and Executioner.
BUT it would no doubt create a very uncomfortable precedent for the Government, and open the door to more JR challenges of the "2019 charge". Massive can of worms. HMRC will therefore use every tactic to prevent the contractors' "day in court" to ever come.