We're currently receiving a lot of questions about how the above groups interact.
I invite an LCAG representative to comment and/or add to the following, but the below is how Big Group sees the interaction between the groups.
Big Group is looking to find a resolution to the claims from HMRC that contractor loan schemes create a liability for those who used such arrangements.
As part of that process, we consider ALL aspects of the situation, tax, legal contractual obligations and future unwinding of the position, both through the ongoing enquiry process and the effects of the loan charge.
The resolution incorporates an analysis, where appropriate, of the effect, risks and consequences of the loan charge upon the ultimate goal.
Big Group members have regular updates and analysis supplied to them.
Our understanding of LCAG and its objectives, following several discussions with them and regular ongoing contact, is that the group is focused, among other things, upon the loan charge, its effects and how that charge might be used to facilitate a common sense solution to this whole debacle.
Given the intransigent attitude of HMRC at present, the initial actions of LCAG are likely to be legal challenges to the legality of the charge and its operation; building pressure on HMRC via the media to reconsider the charge, which is a vital and valuable exercise.
The media campaign builds upon and furthers work that Big Group has done for the last 3 years (which continues) and we have shared all of our materials and actions with those LCAG members who are also Big Group members, and we see this reflected some of the articles, briefings and interviews given by LCAG.
The ability of LCAG to say things publicly that Big Group cannot, is very useful and is rightly being exploited.
In a situation where senior HMRC officers are briefing MPs in a misleading and damaging way in order to defend the indefensible, frankly the gloves are off. However, Big Group advisers are constrained by professional standards and not all we want to say, can be said, in public.
In an ideal world, changes would be made to the loan charge to create a settlement we can all live with. Whilst even a less than ideal, but practical world, would do that, this is HMRC we are dealing with where the values of fairness, compassion and common sense have all been abandoned in favour of maximum tax revenue.
If LCAG succeed in their initial efforts, then the loan charge may disappear or be delayed - let's hope that happens.
That action will NOT however settle the tax HMRC claim is due.
If Big Group succeeds, the tax will be due but not (wholly) from individual contractors.
We therefore see the two groups as complementary. Big Group benefits from LCAG actions and vice versa.
I invite an LCAG representative to comment and/or add to the following, but the below is how Big Group sees the interaction between the groups.
Big Group is looking to find a resolution to the claims from HMRC that contractor loan schemes create a liability for those who used such arrangements.
As part of that process, we consider ALL aspects of the situation, tax, legal contractual obligations and future unwinding of the position, both through the ongoing enquiry process and the effects of the loan charge.
The resolution incorporates an analysis, where appropriate, of the effect, risks and consequences of the loan charge upon the ultimate goal.
Big Group members have regular updates and analysis supplied to them.
Our understanding of LCAG and its objectives, following several discussions with them and regular ongoing contact, is that the group is focused, among other things, upon the loan charge, its effects and how that charge might be used to facilitate a common sense solution to this whole debacle.
Given the intransigent attitude of HMRC at present, the initial actions of LCAG are likely to be legal challenges to the legality of the charge and its operation; building pressure on HMRC via the media to reconsider the charge, which is a vital and valuable exercise.
The media campaign builds upon and furthers work that Big Group has done for the last 3 years (which continues) and we have shared all of our materials and actions with those LCAG members who are also Big Group members, and we see this reflected some of the articles, briefings and interviews given by LCAG.
The ability of LCAG to say things publicly that Big Group cannot, is very useful and is rightly being exploited.
In a situation where senior HMRC officers are briefing MPs in a misleading and damaging way in order to defend the indefensible, frankly the gloves are off. However, Big Group advisers are constrained by professional standards and not all we want to say, can be said, in public.
In an ideal world, changes would be made to the loan charge to create a settlement we can all live with. Whilst even a less than ideal, but practical world, would do that, this is HMRC we are dealing with where the values of fairness, compassion and common sense have all been abandoned in favour of maximum tax revenue.
If LCAG succeed in their initial efforts, then the loan charge may disappear or be delayed - let's hope that happens.
That action will NOT however settle the tax HMRC claim is due.
If Big Group succeeds, the tax will be due but not (wholly) from individual contractors.
We therefore see the two groups as complementary. Big Group benefits from LCAG actions and vice versa.
Comment