MP Greg Mulholland. EBT mis-selling
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Posts 11 to 16 of 16
  1. #11

    TripleIronDad

    BrilloPad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Divorce Courts
    Posts
    97,926
    Thanks (Given)
    22961
    Thanks (Received)
    6000
    Likes (Given)
    22961
    Likes (Received)
    10184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by webberg View Post
    Arguably PAC forced Hartnett to resign over his dealings with a well known bank.

    They also managed to spectacularly confuse Ms Homer on a number of occasions.

    The big difficulty is that HMRC always has the "taxpayer confidentiality" argument to hide behind.
    The biggest difficulty is that when parliament have HMRC issues pointed out to them they do nothing.
    I keep pushing forwards but they keep pushing me backwards. So I have new rules. 1. Don't feed the trolls you know they have no souls. 2. Don't respond to them they'll only post back back again. 3. Don't be their friend they'll only knife you in the back. I have new rules I count them.

  2. #12

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    90
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    11
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    35

    Default

    My view is this and it is QC Approved
    After the decision in Huitson and thereafter in allied cases and appeals it became clear that retrospective legislative action was likely to make it through the courts no matter how sound the "planning" or "structure".
    A number of devisors exited at that point as they knew this.
    Promoters continued regardless often by offering the self employed benefit trusts thereby offering something that was likely to be attacked restrospectively. In my view that's mis-selling.
    It is a bandwagon that needs to roll and there is an opportunity for any politician to get behind it and raise their profile perhaps.

  3. #13

    Nervous Newbie


    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    3
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default

    Agreed - I have written to my MP who has replied and has taken this wholly unreasonable litigation up with the Chief Secretary to the treasury. Suggest all those that can do the same to increase the volume.

  4. #14

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    21
    Thanks (Given)
    12
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    10
    Likes (Received)
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UnixRat View Post
    Agreed - I have written to my MP who has replied and has taken this wholly unreasonable litigation up with the Chief Secretary to the treasury. Suggest all those that can do the same to increase the volume.
    Has this made any progress?

  5. #15

    TripleIronDad

    BrilloPad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Divorce Courts
    Posts
    97,926
    Thanks (Given)
    22961
    Thanks (Received)
    6000
    Likes (Given)
    22961
    Likes (Received)
    10184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Clairol View Post
    Has this made any progress?
    Lobbying MPs was tried with NTRT and got nowhere. HMRC run parliament.
    I keep pushing forwards but they keep pushing me backwards. So I have new rules. 1. Don't feed the trolls you know they have no souls. 2. Don't respond to them they'll only post back back again. 3. Don't be their friend they'll only knife you in the back. I have new rules I count them.

  6. #16
    eek
    eek is offline

    bored now

    eek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    😂
    Posts
    22,617
    Thanks (Given)
    261
    Thanks (Received)
    1252
    Likes (Given)
    1067
    Likes (Received)
    3680

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrilloPad View Post
    Lobbying MPs was tried with NTRT and got nowhere. HMRC run parliament.
    Not quite HMRC has managed to frame this debate so that the public sees anyone who used a tax avoidance as a cheat who should have paid the correct / fair amount of tax... Hence MPs really won't vote against this part of the act for fear of annoying their constituents...
    merely at clientco for the entertainment

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.