2019 charge - reporting
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Posts 11 to 20 of 29
  1. #11

    Contractor Among Contractors


    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    WTT Consulting Ltd - London and online
    Posts
    1,656
    Thanks (Given)
    25
    Thanks (Received)
    298
    Likes (Given)
    70
    Likes (Received)
    540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by me206et View Post
    So if the onus is on the employee to inform HRMC or there are fines etc. What happen if you do not have the information. I am sure a lot of people to not keep records for 20 years! I have odd bits of paper relating to things that were possibly loans, and some I know of, but cannot find anything online relating to some of them or any idea of any figures.

    Some I think were written off/ paid off over 10 years ago.
    If you don't have the data or cannot get it, HMRC will make some sort of estimate.

    If they do, then the emphasis is on you to show it's too high.

    HMRC will have data on your scheme and in most instances there is a correlation between salary and loan payments. If they use that, it could be very persuasive to a Judge.

    If you think loans have been written off you will need evidence.

    If you have paid off the loans then surely you would have remembered that?

  2. #12

    Godlike

    ChimpMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Here There and Everywhere
    Posts
    5,059
    Thanks (Given)
    81
    Thanks (Received)
    82
    Likes (Given)
    688
    Likes (Received)
    422

    Default

    I doubt that the government will take any notice of the experts, but this is an interesting discussion from ICAEW:

    http://www.icaew.com/-/media/corpora...d-keeping.ashx

    Their summary is:

    Our recommendations In the interests of fairness, we believe that: 
    • the measure should not affect loans made earlier than when the government announced its intention to take action, 
    • as taxpayers are not normally expected to keep records for more than six years, where the loan was taken out before 6 April 2013 HMRC should have to prove the quantum, 
    • tax should be charged at basic rate, and 
    • bearing in mind that the charge is due to be levied in 2019, this measure should be dropped from this yearís Finance Bill so that proper consideration can be given to it in next yearís.

  3. #13

    Contractor Among Contractors


    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    WTT Consulting Ltd - London and online
    Posts
    1,656
    Thanks (Given)
    25
    Thanks (Received)
    298
    Likes (Given)
    70
    Likes (Received)
    540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChimpMaster View Post
    I doubt that the government will take any notice of the experts, but this is an interesting discussion from ICAEW:

    http://www.icaew.com/-/media/corpora...d-keeping.ashx

    Their summary is:

    Our recommendations In the interests of fairness, we believe that: 
    • the measure should not affect loans made earlier than when the government announced its intention to take action, 
    • as taxpayers are not normally expected to keep records for more than six years, where the loan was taken out before 6 April 2013 HMRC should have to prove the quantum, 
    • tax should be charged at basic rate, and 
    • bearing in mind that the charge is due to be levied in 2019, this measure should be dropped from this yearís Finance Bill so that proper consideration can be given to it in next yearís.
    The above, and similarly reasonable and sensible suggestions, were all pretty much ignored in Public Bills Committee with Mel Stride MP running out the same HMRC "justification" for what is at heart a 20 retrospective law.

  4. #14

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    35
    Thanks (Given)
    3
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    4

    Default Lobby groups and contacts with MPs

    Quote Originally Posted by ChimpMaster View Post
    I doubt that the government will take any notice of the experts, but this is an interesting discussion from ICAEW:

    http://www.icaew.com/-/media/corpora...d-keeping.ashx

    Their summary is:

    Our recommendations In the interests of fairness, we believe that: 
    • the measure should not affect loans made earlier than when the government announced its intention to take action, 
    • as taxpayers are not normally expected to keep records for more than six years, where the loan was taken out before 6 April 2013 HMRC should have to prove the quantum, 
    • tax should be charged at basic rate, and 
    • bearing in mind that the charge is due to be levied in 2019, this measure should be dropped from this yearís Finance Bill so that proper consideration can be given to it in next yearís.

    Is there no lobby groups or organised pressure groups/petitions contacting MPs to highlight the unfairness of this legislation?

  5. #15

    Nervous Newbie


    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    9
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default ACCA

    I've sent an email to my accountancy professional body for some advice also. Being forced bankrupt could result in me losing my membership and pretty much ruining my life! - Good times!

  6. #16

    More time posting than coding


    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    284
    Thanks (Given)
    29
    Thanks (Received)
    26
    Likes (Given)
    127
    Likes (Received)
    43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luxCon View Post
    Is there no lobby groups or organised pressure groups/petitions contacting MPs to highlight the unfairness of this legislation?
    There is, but you won't like the answer

  7. #17

    TripleIronDad

    BrilloPad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Divorce Courts
    Posts
    97,926
    Thanks (Given)
    22961
    Thanks (Received)
    5999
    Likes (Given)
    22961
    Likes (Received)
    10183

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luxCon View Post
    Is there no lobby groups or organised pressure groups/petitions contacting MPs to highlight the unfairness of this legislation?
    I have been through this twice. The first time was a complete disaster. I begged people not to do it a second time round.

    The people on the second time round now preach what a complete disaster it is.

    Save your money. Join BG. Even if just for settlement advice.
    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.

  8. #18

    Contractor Among Contractors


    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    WTT Consulting Ltd - London and online
    Posts
    1,656
    Thanks (Given)
    25
    Thanks (Received)
    298
    Likes (Given)
    70
    Likes (Received)
    540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luxCon View Post
    Is there no lobby groups or organised pressure groups/petitions contacting MPs to highlight the unfairness of this legislation?
    At the risk of attracting a comment along the lines of a triumph of hope over experience, I will share some information.

    There is a group forming to challenge the validity of the 2019 charge.

    This group began from a subset of Big Group members but of their own initiative as Big Group is not a legal adviser. Rather the subset will be seeking to use an experienced legal team who are not Big Group, nor WTT.

    The group is fully aware that the chance of having the charge removed completely is low.

    However, there are a number of features of the charge that render it almost impossible to apply fairly across all those who might be impacted (including actually working out who is impacted). This inherent unfairness of application is an issue that has more chance of success than a simple "I don't care if it's Government policy, retrospection should not be allowed".

    So the group is going into this with their eyes open.

    We have made available to the group some of our administrative resources. In due course, if the action comes together, we may tender for any tax work that becomes necessary.

    In the meantime, the group is looking for expressions of interest in joining - from any contractor past or present - before moving to fund raising and legal action in early 2018.

    Leave a name here and in due course, somebody will be in touch.

  9. #19
    JPB
    JPB is offline

    Nervous Newbie


    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    7
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1

    Default 2019 tax charge

    Although not currently a member of big group, I'd be very interested in a group against the 2019 charge

  10. #20

    Still gathering requirements...


    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    23
    Thanks (Given)
    4
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Given)
    3
    Likes (Received)
    3

    Default

    Similarly not a member of BG but would be interested in joining a group action.

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.