HMRC nudge letter - "Your use of tax avoidance arrangements - an update "

[luxCon]

Another public holiday, another nudge letter !! Got one on 24th December, and now another on the day before Easter break.

It tells me although the Loancharge does not apply BUT in their opinion I owe them tax on pre-2010, and I should go ahead and settle. It tells me about the past and ongoing upper tribunals and how HMRC thinks they are winning, (even if there has been no judgement yet )


Anyone else got one of these?

Another one for the bin?

[Krung Thep]

Yes I received the same letter a couple of days ago. It tells me that HMRC are not entirely confident about their chances of getting me to pay them the tax that they believe I owe them. I made them an offer to put this to bed and it's the final offer. I'm not even responding to it.

[busgrw]

I just received this letter at the weekend and it's actually the first letter i've received from HMRC on any wrongdoings using Quantum etc and that a case has been opened on me so came as a surprise. Doesn't even say on the letter how much they think I owe, for what years etc. I was only involved with Network One in 2009/10.

Are people still using WTT Consulting for Network One/ Quantum advice etc? Any Network One specific forums/ threads I should be joining to find out more info?

Thanks

[luxCon]

I just received this letter at the weekend and it's actually the first letter i've received from HMRC on any wrongdoings using Quantum etc and that a case has been opened on me so came as a surprise. Doesn't even say on the letter how much they think I owe, for what years etc. I was only involved with Network One in 2009/10.

Are people still using WTT Consulting for Network One/ Quantum advice etc? Any Network One specific forums/ threads I should be joining to find out more info?

Thanks

Do you have HMRC Open years where they opened a discovery? If no open years you dont have much to worry.

If you have open years, readup on the Hoey's appeal case which has made some headway, and is looking for financial support to push it further. There are a couple of threads on here. I know nothing about your scheme but it may be that Hoey's case is of benefit to you.

The letter from HMRC basically says we dont currently have any legal powers to take money from you, but will keep bugging and nagging you till you are so anxious and come to us for voluntary settlement

[busgrw]

Do you have HMRC Open years where they opened a discovery? If no open years you dont have much to worry.

If you have open years, readup on the Hoey's appeal case which has made some headway, and is looking for financial support to push it further. There are a couple of threads on here. I know nothing about your scheme but it may be that Hoey's case is of benefit to you.

The letter from HMRC basically says we dont currently have any legal powers to take money from you, but will keep bugging and nagging you till you are so anxious and come to us for voluntary settlement

Thanks for your response LuxCon. Not entirely sure if I have any open years where they opened a discovery.... How would I check? They did come at me in 2016 because i'd used AML for a few weeks in 2011 before setting up my own LTD but I settled with them as was only circa £127 and didn't want to fight it.

Good to get your take on the letter . I'm not overly anxious just yet but will maybe get in touch with WTT for advise.

I'll also read up on the Hoey appeal case as sounds interesting and I could learn

Cheers.

[handyandy]

Got one of these recently that used Covid as an excuse for why nothing has happened - interesting as the last communication I got form them was about 4-5 years ago!

Nothing specific just saying I should contact them to settle and that they will be restarting any investigations they had paused during Covid.

I'm not caught by loan charge and the scheme I was in (Actinium Management Ltd) was way back in 2006/7 and I have no idea whether they have done anything since then as their initial letter opening an inquiry said they were just speaking with the scheme and not to looking for any information from me.

[ns1]

I'm not caught by loan charge and the scheme I was in (Actinium Management Ltd) was way back in 2006/7 and I have no idea whether they have done anything since then as their initial letter opening an inquiry said they were just speaking with the scheme and not to looking for any information from me.

Was that this Isle of Man company?
https://opencorporates.com/companies/im/109509C

If so, I'm surprised you haven't had your collar felt more aggressively already. You say you're not caught by the loan charge, are your sure about that or is this just wishful thinking? Because I could have sworn AML was a loan scheme.

[eek]

Was that this Isle of Man company?
https://opencorporates.com/companies/im/109509C

If so, I'm surprised you haven't had your collar felt more aggressively already. You say you're not caught by the loan charge, are your sure about that or is this just wishful thinking? Because I could have sworn AML was a loan scheme.

Loan charge was payments received post November 2010 (from memory I've not double checked).

[ns1]

Loan charge was payments received post November 2010 (from memory I've not double checked).

I forgot about that.

Pre-2010 must be vulnerable to a Hoey attack now. All HMRC have to do is deem the loans as disguised employment income, which should have been subject to PAYE, then cite the Court of Appeal decision in Hoey to disapply the PAYE regs and transfer the liability to the employees.

I suspect an awful lot of people are about to get a very nasty surprise courtesy of Hoey. And they won't even be able to appeal to a tribunal.

Cue the fallout...

[DealorNoDeal]

All HMRC have to do is (1) deem the loans as disguised employment income, which should have been subject to PAYE, then cite the Court of Appeal decision in Hoey to (2) disapply the PAYE regs and transfer the liability to the employees.

People may not be able to appeal against (2) but surely they can still appeal against (1)?

It's different with Hoey himself, and NTRT, because in their appeals they asserted that it was employment income. The only remaining question was who was liable for the PAYE and, unfortunately, the Court of Appeal ruled that HMRC was entitled to use (2) to transfer it.

Mr Hoey and NTRT may be screwed but I don't see how it changes anyone else's position.