Times : Loan schemes offering help to ruined clients — for a fee

[eazy]

Loan schemes offering help to ruined clients — for a fee
Access Denied

Extract
Myles, 70, a chartered accountant, is among about 50,000 people who signed up to remuneration schemes. Others include pilots, IT workers, doctors, dentists, social workers and nurses. The Sunday Times revealed last week that, under the schemes, they reduced their tax bills by receiving a proportion of their income as pay and taking the rest in the form of tax-free loans.

Many now face huge bills because, under a new loan charge created by HMRC, they are being taxed as far back as 1999. More than 100 MPs are calling for a review of the charge.

The loan charge was drawn up two years ago and comes into force on April 5. Last April, Myles received an email from the “AML Team” recommending a firm, Vanquish Options, that could “provide a mechanism” to reduce the loan charge. It also recommended a second firm, PTS Ltd.

Doug was told one option was for him to pay back just 5% of the loan, with the rest transferred to another entity. This would allow him to avoid the loan charge, but he would have to pay for the service.


See above link for full article

[webberg]

Using scheme B to solve scheme A is never a good idea.

[EBTContractor]

Seems like a perfectly great idea

Said no one ever.

[TSMRTZ]

on the same vein, has anyone been contacted by Insella in Cyprus? It appears to be an "option" put together with the backing of Phil Manley and devised by Robert Venables QC. Again they are asking for a fee, 8% of total outstanding loans. I am struggling to get my head around the two options they have suggested.

Equally, I a bit dubious that Phil M would put his name to one of these schemes....

[mudskipper]

I am struggling to get my head around the two options they have suggested.

I am incredulous that people are even contemplating this stuff.

[here4beer]

I am incredulous that people are even contemplating this stuff.

I'm not surprised at all. One of the (albeit many) calculations I ran, involved me being dead. 8% seems a bargain in comparison.

[Tiger22]

on the same vein, has anyone been contacted by Insella in Cyprus? It appears to be an "option" put together with the backing of Phil Manley and devised by Robert Venables QC. Again they are asking for a fee, 8% of total outstanding loans. I am struggling to get my head around the two options they have suggested.

Equally, I a bit dubious that Phil M would put his name to one of these schemes....

I struggle to believe they have put their names to such a scheme. It sounds like scammers trading on the good name of others.

[GreenMirror]

on the same vein, has anyone been contacted by Insella in Cyprus? It appears to be an "option" put together with the backing of Phil Manley and devised by Robert Venables QC. Again they are asking for a fee, 8% of total outstanding loans. I am struggling to get my head around the two options they have suggested.

Equally, I a bit dubious that Phil M would put his name to one of these schemes....

I am on the hotline to Phil about this....

[GreenMirror]

I am incredulous that people are even contemplating this stuff.

Anyone who has done any research at all should realize that contacting these "people" is a bad move. Though doing no research is bad.

Contacting Graham/Phil is a far better way forward.

[GreenMirror]

on the same vein, has anyone been contacted by Insella in Cyprus? It appears to be an "option" put together with the backing of Phil Manley and devised by Robert Venables QC. Again they are asking for a fee, 8% of total outstanding loans. I am struggling to get my head around the two options they have suggested.

Equally, I a bit dubious that Phil M would put his name to one of these schemes....

I’ve spoke to Phil and despite me being well known to be against such ideas generally, agree with what he says on it, as he states, even if he was an extremely well disguised conman then the enablers penalties would make such pointless.

Insella are not relying upon a judge interpretation of the law, they are utilising the law that Hmrc themselves helped word. It’s an option and people can take or leave.

There won’t be any hard sell from Phil either way other than to state it’s not a qc opinion on a scheme...it’s a qc devised solution.

There’s a world of difference and for anyone to downplay it based on a seeing only a few paragraphs of a >200 page explanation is crazy. Especially so if such person/people have their own agenda to sell.

I guess it’s a case of trusting Phil and rvqc or not but neither can make a penny of failed and (Phil especially) has everything to lose.