Finance Bill 2017-18 V HMRC DR Settlement Terms

[ConfusedEasily]

6 years is a big hit.

So you no undeclared/paid years.

From what I've read on the Loan Charge, you're correct in that you don't need to declare anything in 2019.

Phew - there was me thinking you were an IT contractor. Luckily you're a tax expert.

[ConfusedEasily]

Confused early appears to be HMRC, treat with caution.

Joolsey86 appears to be paranoid.
Get a grip.
If you read something on here you don't like then pay for some advice. I did and that's what (as a group of 4) we got.
If you got differing advice advertise it here.
Don't stick your head in the sand.
That's foolish.

[pimpernell]

I have in writing from the horses mouth, in answer to the specific question I asked about settlement and 2019. I don’t see the need for prof advice personally. If I’m ever pulled up for it I merely need to refer to what I was told.

[ConfusedEasily]

I have in writing from the horses mouth, in answer to the specific question I asked about settlement and 2019. I don’t see the need for prof advice personally. If I’m ever pulled up for it I merely need to refer to what I was told.

If you have something from HMRC that states.For years x,y, and z you are not required to fill in the 2019 loan charge related charge then you're good to go.
The two of us who settled have been told by HMRC that they have to address those closed years (not in the settlement) in the 2019 charge. They were asked to make a voluntary settlement. They were also told that IHT would apply. We also have written opinion confirming that their settlement does not remove the 2019 charge from the closed years.

This doesn't impact me. But really - unless you have something from HMRC explicitly covering the closed years wrt to 2019 then you would be best advised to clarify your position sooner rather than later before it is clarified for you.

[regron]

If you have something from HMRC that states.For years x,y, and z you are not required to fill in the 2019 loan charge related charge then you're good to go.
The two of us who settled have been told by HMRC that they have to address those closed years (not in the settlement) in the 2019 charge. They were asked to make a voluntary settlement. They were also told that IHT would apply. We also have written opinion confirming that their settlement does not remove the 2019 charge from the closed years.

This doesn't impact me. But really - unless you have something from HMRC explicitly covering the closed years wrt to 2019 then you would be best advised to clarify your position sooner rather than later before it is clarified for you.

Totally agree with the above:

Another concern I would have here is ok, back in CLSO1 days the loan charge wasn't even around so due to the fact that they technically couldn't chase closed years, they may have signed them off as done and dusted. However, now the charge is law and HMRC's own mantra is to collect max tax, do you think they won't try and come back saying legislation has changed and now you owe us on closed years ? Did the signed document not mention they have the right to revisit ? Serious questions. Based on the fact that technically and actually lawfully, the APN's issued for EBT's are no longer valid (as some, including myself have argued). Did we expect them rolling over, of course not, but the response received was that at the time the APN was issued, it was valid and therefore stands as is. I for one would not be happy if I had taken CLSO1 with closed years. What is stopping them reversing the logic with APN's to these closed years ? The last thing I want to do is seem as scaremongering, but clearly all trust in HMRC has been lost and if it was me, I would be seeking further clarification, also in writing, that the new 2019 loan charge will not apply to CLSO1 closed years. If they aren't prepared to put that in writing, then that would ring alarm bells to me.

[webberg]

It is contrary to HMRC policy to give certainty over future tax positions.

The original technical notes on the DR charge indicated that where a settlement had been reached (which would have been CLSO 1 - years to 2011) then any year "implicitly" settled (which I read to mean a closed year for which no tax was due or paid) would be excluded from the DR charge.

However, I don't see that in the legislation on the DR charge.

The CLSO 1 contract settlements could not have mentioned DR charge because it did not exist.

I would be surprised if a closed year pre 2011 is excluded from the DR charge.

[jbeer]

I would be surprised if a closed year pre 2011 is excluded from the DR charge.

If this is the case and the closed years from CLSO 1 are not excluded from the charge, I'm wondering why HMRC have not written to those affected asking them to make the voluntary payment for the closed years. From their point of view it would be better trying to get the money in now than wait for a couple of years ?

[pimpernell]

I settled on clso 1 terms in the last 2 months. Webberg you know my case because I took paid help from wtt to help me settle because of HMRC admin delays meant my application on June 2015

[pimpernell]

I settled on clso 1 terms in the last 2 months. Webberg you know my case because I took paid help from wtt to help me settle because of HMRC admin delays meant my application in June 2015 wasn’t processed. So in June 2015 the 2019 charge wasn’t in the public domain. When I settled it was. However when o received what presume was the standard clso 1 settlement terms, there were a couple of clauses I was unsure about and I emailed my case officer and he assured me that ALL years I was in the scheme would be considered settled, and that i would have nothing declare wrt 2019. It can’t get any more final than that wrt income tax. IHT - sure another issue.

[pimpernell]

There have been a number of HMRC technical notes that say if settlement has been reached then end of. I know you ( webberg) are providing s much needed service to people who are in dire circumstances but i have to say I’ve noticed that you have an entirely cynical view of HMRC - it’s almost as though you’re waiting for them to go back on their word, and wrong foot people. I’m sure that comes from as much exposure to them as you’ve had. After all I’m pretty cynical about IT and I’ve probably been in that profession as long as you’ve been in yours. And you may be right. But a legally binding settlement is just that, and I have faith that my HMRC case officer isn’t lying to me, and nor can he. Clso 1 was exceptional although I feel aggrieved for people who NEVER got an enquiry ( all closed years) and wouldn’t have known they have s problem so couldn’t/ wouldn’t have applied for clso1. That is an injustice, and I think you should attack HMRC on these grounds - not to drag those who’ve settled into the mire but to fight for those who could never have gotten clso 1 terms.