Churchill Knight & Boox clients being investigated as Managed Service Companies

[GregRickshaw]

Your MP needs to go to bang on doors at the Treasury too. The Treasury don't like HMRC acting in ways which breach (or stretch) legislation, if your MP also has any interest in accountancy or has involvement in those bodies all the better (accountancy in general is at scrutiny in someways here and these are going to be landmark cases), this is going to be one of the ways to apply pressure eventually.

My MP demanded meetings and sit downs with HMRC, token gestures (perhaps) and of course shielded by confidentiality on individual cases but it's just another way of applying pressure.

Yes I too have been less than impressed with David Kirk and am considering sacking him off. I have been very pro-active on my own case he seems to have done nothing, however he does have good contacts and what goes on behind the scenes is important and maybe I don't need to know. I would like to see some more reporting back though.

[eek]

Agree with you. I'm no longer self-employed and don't do self assessment so not sure if the POA is an option for me now anyway.

I'm not particularly impressed with either at this moment in time. David promised an update end of May and we're now in July. S0d all from Boox re: their meetings with Hector and what the outcome was and their next steps etc. I appreciate this case is for the long haul but even so - heard nothing from Boox and 1 email from David since early April.

I think it's good that the Cheif executive of HMRC is receiving emails from MPs asking why their constituents are receiving these (in some cases, large) determinations based on Hectors flakey interpretation of the legislation.

I wouldn't say HMRC's interpretation is flaky - the CBS case vastly increased the arguments available to HMRC and they are simply taking advantage of it.

Are the cases fair? Nope but that doesn't make what HMRC is doing irrational, it's perfectly rational given the customers some of these firms were targeting and their marketing.

[Fred Bloggs]

I wouldn't say HMRC's interpretation is flaky - the CBS case vastly increased the arguments available to HMRC and they are simply taking advantage of it.

Are the cases fair? Nope but that doesn't make what HMRC is doing irrational, it's perfectly rational given the customers some of these firms were targeting and their marketing.

Absolutely. And that's going to be very difficult indeed to defend, in my opinion, if Hector can show the accused accountants did anything more than book keeping and submitting statutory documents.

[GregRickshaw]

Absolutely. And that's going to be very difficult indeed to defend, in my opinion, if Hector can show the accused accountants did anything more than book keeping and submitting statutory documents.

I agree it's going to be tough for CK to defend. Especially that damn point A.

However, HMRC do also have to prove CK did anything other than book keeping and end of year etc.,

How they prove that is going to be a challenge but I remember the CK letter wording (which is different to Boox) the 'after speaking with clients' so what does that mean?

IMHO I believe CK are MSCP just not every one of it's clients though are MSC.

[Fred Bloggs]

I agree it's going to be tough for CK to defend. Especially that damn point A.

However, HMRC do also have to prove CK did anything other than book keeping and end of year etc.,

How they prove that is going to be a challenge but I remember the CK letter wording (which is different to Boox) the 'after speaking with clients' so what does that mean?

IMHO I believe CK are MSCP just not every one of it's clients though are MSC.

We shall find out in due course! I still reckon the tiered service levels to be very important in framing a contractor's defence. I would be collecting all my evidence of running my company whilst benefitting only from book keeping and statutory filing from CK or boox. Then if a caught verdict is passed down, I would be pointing at those who had the upper tier service offering and shouting "they're MSC, I am not and this are the reasons why". Of course, what I reckon could be completely hopeless. But I don't think so.

[isaaaaaaaaccc]

Can anybody list what they mean by being pro active?

Everybody I speak to offers different views making it extremely difficult to be so active.

Other than appeal and put in conditional tax reclaims for 17 18 what have people done?

Also what defense have people put together? Showing that they genuinly aren't an employee or basically evidence against the points in the MSC letter? if the latter very challenging to interpret what exactly could be defened due to how vague everything is...

This is the biggest frustration for me. Not really knowing.

[GregRickshaw]

Can anybody list what they mean by being pro active?

Everybody I speak to offers different views making it extremely difficult to be so active.

Other than appeal and put in conditional tax reclaims for 17 18 what have people done?

Also what defense have people put together? Showing that they genuinly aren't an employee or basically evidence against the points in the MSC letter? if the latter very challenging to interpret what exactly could be defened due to how vague everything is...

This is the biggest frustration for me. Not really knowing.

cojak posted very early on the advice in this post to gather everything!!!!

You need to be pro-active, here's some of the things I have done:

Gather everything you have from your years of running your company, everything. From

Business cards, to invoices, to logos, to websites, your actual contracts may help, proof of business address, proof of your bank set up, any directors loans you may have for that year are good, how many clients you had, proof you set up your own company, proof you actually know the name of your company, proof of zero involvement (if you did get pay advice (a current grey area)) then prove you ignored it..., my case I was forced to go LTD (PSC), you chose a FCSA accountant to avoid any dodgy schemes. A lot of your evidence may be anecdotal but printed invoices, directors loans and a general feel you were promoting your LTD company is what you need to portray. Gather every tiny morsel.

Using the Boox (not familiar with) or CK portal is not necessarily a bad thing for you to generate your own invoices, if they did them that could be different.

Just got to prove you were running your ltd company not the accountant, and you were not just a cash cow for whichever accountant.

Don't get me wrong it's going to be very tough if the upper levels come tumbling down towards us but do it anyway.

[isaaaaaaaaccc]

My business has it's own website, service catalogue the lot. Charges multiple clients fixed price jobs, presents at industry event stiring up new business.

But I'm still not sure how showing showing that directly relates to the conditions specifically in the MSC.

This all comes down to the accused conditions in the letter I'm right in thinking? And if so does this refer to only the 17/18 year or does it allow for evidence from other years?

I think people around us have been quiet because at this stage people just don't know....

[GregRickshaw]

My business has it's own website, service catalogue the lot. Charges multiple clients fixed price jobs, presents at industry event stiring up new business.

But I'm still not sure how showing showing that directly relates to the conditions specifically in the MSC.

This all comes down to the accused conditions in the letter I'm right in thinking? And if so does this refer to only the 17/18 year or does it allow for evidence from other years?

I think people around us have been quiet because at this stage people just don't know....

It all matters because you need to prove you are not a MSC or do your best to make HMRC provide evidence you were.

That stuff may help, it will help. Everything which shows you ran your company and not one of the accountants.

Will it work? Who knows it will certainly help though.

It does come down to the points of the letter yes, we are arguing and providing evidence to prove the points. Everything falls down though because of point A.

We are quiet because yes we don't know but because we are busy getting ready to fight.

[GregRickshaw]

Total cock up by the lawyers and advisors then regarding the Corporation tax claims. Seems we can't make conditional claims until the cases are closed (won or lost) if we win then of course it won't matter. Won't stop there being a HUGE bill hanging over our heads with no guarantees.

Latest update on CK portal.

You can't claim relief until after the case is closed and lost/won. HMRC may not accept late claims.

Good news is a few clients have had their cases closed down.

That's about it really just bad news basically.