• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.

Hoey - Court of Appeal legal fees

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Hoey - Court of Appeal legal fees

    Anyone seen the Hoey - Court of Appeal legal fees page on Gofundme? If not, I've put an extract of the page below. I'm assuming I'm not allowed to put a direct link to it, so you'll need to search for it yourself.

    _____________
    I am a former contractor caught up in the "Loan Charge" scandal.

    Many individuals who received loans before 9 Dec 2010 incorrectly believe that as the Loan Charge no longer applies, HMRC cannot and will not tax them. This is false comfort.

    HMRC is continuing to pursue income tax (and NIC) from me and thousands of others with 'open' years - those with existing enquiries or discovery assessments.

    I have acted as a 'lead case' and appealed those demands to the First Tier Tax Tribunal ('FTT') (heard in July 2019 ) and to the Upper Tribunal in October 2020. Funds used to meet the costs of those appeals have now been exhausted.

    There are three key issues under appeal that will have wide implications for the many thousands of taxpayers being pursued by HMRC for tax on 'pre-DR' arrangements.

    1) HMRC's ability to exercise a claimed discretion to recover PAYE from individuals that ought to have been deducted by the employer/end user/agency (notwithstanding that HMRC did not carry out the necessary steps to protect its position within the statutory time limits).

    2). The availability of a credit to contractors for the PAYE that employers/end users/agencies ought to have deducted (it matters not which).

    3) The application of the Transfer of Assets Abroad legislation to income received by the (offshore) employer which HMRC asserts contractors had a 'power to enjoy'.

    The FTT found that the income of the person abroad was nil for these purposes.

    These issues were argued before Judge Raghavan and Mr Justice Johnson in the Upper Tribunal in October 2020. The decision of the Upper Tribunal is awaited.

    Whilst my legal team is cautiously optimistic of victory we all expect HMRC to appeal in the event that we succeed. As I wish to in the event that HMRC's arguments prevail in the Upper Tribunal.

    This page therefore seeks to raise funds for any such appeal.

    A letter sent by my solicitors, RPC, to my tax advisor setting out those costs can be accessed here:

    RPC letter re costs

    All funds raised will be remitted to RPC

    No other parties will be paid from the funds raised.

    I am being assisted by my tax advisor, Matt Hall, on a pro bono basis. He does not charge me for his own assistance.

    If funds raised exceed the costs of the appeal (for example if the appeal is successful and I am able to recover some of my own legal costs), any surplus will be contributed to MIND in recognition of the mental health issues many facing HMRC's pursuit of taxes not properly due from them have suffered.

    #2
    One of the only ones that is actually worth contributing to IMO. Watch for the result of UTT due soon. If HMRC loses, which there is a good chance and therefore binding, it will need the ability to defend in SC.

    Just my thought.

    Comment


      #3
      That to me sounds like the agency argument which already has an appeal tribunal decision see

      https://www.contractoruk.com/forums/...tt-appeal.html
      merely at clientco for the entertainment

      Comment


        #4
        There are 3 cases on broadly the same technical issues. Higgs, Lancashire & Hoey. All consider broadly the same legal arguments (although Higgs didn’t consider the ToAA provisions.

        Hoey is the most advanced. It was the first FTT decision (and the most promising given the findings on the ToAA provisions AND the first to the Upper Tribunal. That decisions, expected before Christmas, will bind those promising to take other cases to the FTT.

        Hoey is THE lead case.

        And no, there’s absolutely nothing in this for me. I’m helping Mr Hoey pro bono.

        Originally posted by eek View Post
        That to me sounds like the agency argument which already has an appeal tribunal decision see

        https://www.contractoruk.com/forums/...tt-appeal.html

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Saleos View Post
          There are 3 cases on broadly the same technical issues. Higgs, Lancashire & Hoey. All consider broadly the same legal arguments (although Higgs didn’t consider the ToAA provisions.

          Hoey is the most advanced. It was the first FTT decision (and the most promising given the findings on the ToAA provisions AND the first to the Upper Tribunal. That decisions, expected before Christmas, will bind those promising to take other cases to the FTT.

          Hoey is THE lead case.

          And no, there’s absolutely nothing in this for me. I’m helping Mr Hoey pro bono.
          good luck. Unfortunately I have signed and agreeing a settlement. I would however love to see a few bloody noses if not for me but for those that are still fighting. Best of luck and am following this closely.

          Comment


            #6
            Bump. If you have open years pre-2010 you should be supporting this, not those that are still on the starting grid or practice lap which will become moot.

            Comment


              #7
              Pre 2011 APNs and Open years coverd?

              Let me get this right, the outcome of this case will determine the pre 2011 open years and has an impact on the APNs paid or still outstanding?

              Can someone in the know please fill the gaps for me.

              If this is the case members of the BIG GROUP who have paid in to the litigation pot and WTT should be very interested in this. As such could some members please post your thoughts as to if WTT and BIG GROUP will be supporting this case to maximise it succeeding?

              Any member from Big Group?

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by luxCon View Post
                Let me get this right, the outcome of this case will determine the pre 2011 open years and has an impact on the APNs paid or still outstanding?

                Can someone in the know please fill the gaps for me.

                If this is the case members of the BIG GROUP who have paid in to the litigation pot and WTT should be very interested in this. As such could some members please post your thoughts as to if WTT and BIG GROUP will be supporting this case to maximise it succeeding?

                Any member from Big Group?
                Yes for the first point about pre-2011. UTT decision will be binding so keep a look out for that as appeals ( either way ) need to be done quickly.

                Look to twitter ( armadillo support ) for a view on the latter regarding APNs as I don't know. Not sure I am allowed to link anything on this site.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by dammit chloe View Post
                  Yes for the first point about pre-2011. UTT decision will be binding so keep a look out for that as appeals ( either way ) need to be done quickly.
                  Its one of those "too good to be" scenarios. So any PRE 2011 APN has to be paid back by HMRC?

                  In that case I would have thought many members on this forum would be all over this. And like I said the original pre 2011 BIG GROUP members will directly benefit, so am surprised how little traction this case has on the board here

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by luxCon View Post
                    Its one of those "too good to be" scenarios. So any PRE 2011 APN has to be paid back by HMRC?

                    In that case I would have thought many members on this forum would be all over this. And like I said the original pre 2011 BIG GROUP members will directly benefit, so am surprised how little traction this case has on the board here
                    I think there are various factors at play. There have been so many requests for cash with so little to show so far for it. The only thing that has made a difference is the LCAG/political route but only partially. Some are victims of sunk cost mentality. Some don't like the players involved. HMRC division tactic is working etc etc etc.

                    As someone who spent so much time working in LCAG, I say f all that, this is the best chance for a legal defeat of HMRC that we are likely to see ( even if it is far from guaranteed ).

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X