Churchill Knight & Boox clients being investigated as Managed Service Companies

[WTFH]

Can you explain this point for me. I am confused why you think it has always been a rock solid win for HMRC. My attorneys and pretty much everyone on this forum were saying that HMRC are wrong and we should all contest it. My attorneys have always maintained very confidently that HMRC are wrong.

You've mentioned "my attorneys", now if you mean a solicitor, then you're paying £300-600 per hour for their advice.
I would like to offer some advice for free: put that £300-600 into HMRC to start reducing your bill, it's not going to go away without you paying.

[eek]

Can you explain this point for me. I am confused why you think it has always been a rock solid win for HMRC. My attorneys and pretty much everyone on this forum were saying that HMRC are wrong and we should all contest it. My attorneys have always maintained very confidently that HMRC are wrong.

I am not trying to be facetious, I am genuinely just wondering why you think this and did you always think this (because I haven’t read all your comments)

Also I would be keen to understand why you think it’s a rock solid win for them. It’s got me quite worried.

Maybe a little state of the nation would be nice for anyone who hadn’t read every comment

I'm at a loss as to why you think everyone on this forum think HMRC won't get the money - I've just re-read the first 4 pages and all the posters are ones who know that HMRC will win at Tribunal (partly because many have been there and lost).

So to cover your points

1) HMRC have removed all the people that are clearly running businesses with employees from the case (Greg has been exonerated)
2) HMRC haven't lost a tribunal like this for years and are picking the test cases - which means they are going to be picking the people who have dropped themselves in it (probably without realising in their initial letters to HMRC).
3) with the idiots as HMRC's test cases you are doomed.

[SwissSaffa]

It really doesn't matter anymore anyway, this case is rock solid win for HMRC (it always has been).

Can you explain this point for me. I am confused why you think it has always been a rock solid win for HMRC. My attorneys and pretty much everyone on this forum were saying that HMRC are wrong and we should all contest it. My attorneys have always maintained very confidently that HMRC are wrong.

I am not trying to be facetious, I am genuinely just wondering why you think this and did you always think this (because I haven’t read all your comments)

Also I would be keen to understand why you think it’s a rock solid win for them. It’s got me quite worried.

Maybe a little state of the nation would be nice for anyone who hadn’t read every comment

[dayd08]

How is no media outlet all over this.


Really needs more traction.

Have written multiple letters to local MP

[GregRickshaw]

Yes, this is what I meant. As I said, I seem to recall a year or so back that they weren't allowing people to do this (possibly because they hadn't figured out how to calculate exactly how much people owed).

Depending on individual circumstances, I imagine this calculation could be quite convoluted.

If you want to pay the uncontested bill they will let you. So convoluted or not the figure they gave you is the one they will accept.

A lot of us have done just 'this' but just as a POA which is really us saying okay there's the money (the bill) so now Foxtrot Oscar....

The difference between POA and as you are proposing paying the bill is... whatever the outcome (jeez I crack myself up) ha ha ha....
When HMRC win you won't have to face the extra interest charge which will be 8 years of interest by the time this is done and not at the BoE rates.

So if you have the money to 'settle' to effectively pay the bill I would advise don't do that but instead... POA.... as there is one in a million chance HMRC lose ("so you're saying there is a chance?")

[woody1]

If you mean settle in full pay what HMRC have billed which yes would 'settle' and mean your case is closed, HMRC are very open to these. This would be your bill and any interest accumulated.

Yes, this is what I meant. As I said, I seem to recall a year or so back that they weren't allowing people to do this (possibly because they hadn't figured out how to calculate exactly how much people owed).

Depending on individual circumstances, I imagine this calculation could be quite convoluted.

[GregRickshaw]

Has HMRC let anyone settle yet? I seem to recall a while back that they weren't allowing settlements, only payments on account.

If you mean settle in full pay what HMRC have billed which yes would 'settle' and mean your case is closed, HMRC are very open to these. This would be your bill and any interest accumulated. Possibly if you call them and say you want to pay the amount owed in full they might consider removing the interest, it's been done before but it's a huge MIGHT.

However if you are referring to previous horse trading style settlements then no.

HMRC believe every £ owed has to be paid. These cases are very different to the loan charges/EBT schemes which we did see settlements mainly because many of those cases never really got fully overturned or ambiguous at the very least and HRMC played a little fast and loose with the rules at times.

FYI I paid on account, got two years thrown out fairly 'quickly' in Glacial HMRC terms, not seen a single penny back.

I am sure there will be accommodating TTP arrangements when this is all over. It seems cases are going to court early 2026 so expect final rulings around 2030?

[woody1]

Has HMRC let anyone settle yet? I seem to recall a while back that they weren't allowing settlements, only payments on account.

[GregRickshaw]

Received a letter about the current status of things: instead of 5, there will be 1 single lead case

For those who appealed and got the charges stood over, and are still happy to continue with this position, I think there is nothing to do. To me, it looked like it was just a status-update letter. But please do post if any comments/suggestions.

Four from CK one from Boox (maybe) but there are definitely four from CK.

It really doesn't matter anymore anyway, this case is rock solid win for HMRC (it always has been). HMRC threw out all the incorrects, didn't bother chasing those who didn't put their heads above the parapets, not even for debt transfer.

HMRC have never cared about this as a monetary raid, as long as they get their legislation.

They sharpened their knives and laser honed in on the target. This had been clinical from day one.

[eek]

A single test case has my spider senses tingling and not in a good way.