Excluded from the McCann settlement

[s684]

My loan years were in the 2000s so McCann doesn't benefit me but I still have nothing but huge admiration for LCAG. Without them and the APPG we wouldn't even had the Morse review which meant we weren't forced into settling to avoid the loan charge. They have worked tirelessly over so many years and I take my hat off to them. I'm ashamed to say I haven't contributed anything to the cause but it's sad to see someone else who has also done little or nothing criticizing from the sidelines just because it doesn't benefit them.

[loanchargehurt]

My loan years were in the 2000s so McCann doesn't benefit me but I still have nothing but huge admiration for LCAG. Without them and the APPG we wouldn't even had the Morse review which meant we weren't forced into settling to avoid the loan charge. They have worked tirelessly over so many years and I take my hat off to them. I'm ashamed to say I haven't contributed anything to the cause but it's sad to see someone else who has also done little or nothing criticizing from the sidelines just because it doesn't benefit them.

You make a good point, without LCAG the APPG would not have happened and without the APPG there would have been neither 'Review'.

However, if you go back and read the APPG proposals, which undoubtedly come from LCAG, and which they undoubtedly got from WTT, you will find that the focus is so often on things that could not be achieved, made no sense, or spilt the group. The consequences of this have been that a huge number of people have been left behind.

The initial aims through 2018 and 2019 were all about making Promoters liable for the tax and removing years in which there was no open enquiry.

Closed years to be closed (in the words of LCAG spokesman). So pre-2011 population ended up being split with those who disclosed nothing, and so had no open enquiries, being pardoned, while those who had disclosed and had a subsequent enquiry notice are still on the hook even now. HMRC objected saying those were exactly the more egregious ones that the Loan Charge was designed to catch, but the Review was aimed at appeasing the MPs.

Have a look for yourself
https://www.loanchargeappg.co.uk/wp-...-July-2019.pdf


Then after the Morse Review the APPG further proposed a flat rate 10% rate of tax to be applied - whether the person had loans of £5,000 or £1 million and ignoring the fact there was no such rate of tax so would require further legislation, and no forward interest.

This flat rate of 10%, as the document shows, was based on this madcap WTT idea that a person's tax liability could somehow be shared four ways with HMRC themselves being one of the four.

Have a look, this document was issued in August 2020, one month before the settlement deadline:

https://www.loanchargeappg.co.uk/wp-...ugust-2020.pdf



So yes without LCAG there would have been no APPG and therefore no MP pressure and no Reviews. It is just unfortunate that LCAG's allegiance to WTT meant arguing many of the wrong things. Some people benefitted hugely. WTT benefitted hugely. But many people have been left behind.

At the same time as encouraging the APPG down the line of this 10% flat rate in August 2020, LCAG were also selling non-disclosure of loans. LCAG promoted and sold through webinars to their own members: Robert Venables; Ray Trew; Setu Kamal; WTT; and Andrew Thornhill.

Then LCAG continued to control the access to the APPG. Have a look at the minutes for how often WTT were invited compared with anyone else. Loan Charge & Taxpayer Fairness APPG - Publications - Reports, Letters, Meeting Minutes, etc.

So now the McCann Review has offered better terms for those who were unable to settle, not realising, because LCAG would not have confessed to the APPG in their behind the scenes meetings, that LCAG (& WTT) encouraged, promoted and sold non-compliance/non-disclosure (tax avoidance).

One additional thing I need to mention. LCAG are pushing for a PAYE credit, saying the agencies should pay the PAYE even though the agencies never had the money, and agencies did not deduct the PAYE. LCAG are arguing that it would be more fair if someone who may have merely received an agency fee paid all the PAYE.

This ties in with WTT promoting & selling JR's arguing for a PAYE credit despite the fact that there has been legislation since November 2017 that prevents a PAYE credit the for post-2011 loans (which is why Hoey and Higgs only ever argued in relation to pre-DR years. Anyone selling the idea of post-DR PAYE credit is ignoring the legislation. In regard to pre-DR one would have to overcome the Court of Appeal decisions in HMRC favour.

[woody1]

Yes but what, if anything, do YOU propose doing about any of this? Critiquing here isn't likely to change or achieve anything.

[loanchargehurt]

Yes but what, if anything, do YOU propose doing about any of this? Critiquing here isn't likely to change or achieve anything.

Well I could raise the matter directly with HMRC and Ray McCann. But that could jeopardise the position of those who did not declare their loans on their 2019 Tax Return and who currently are able to access the better settlement terms.

Or I can appeal to LCAG and appeal to my own MP about the unfairness and demonstrate the result of the lobbying and the Reviews is perverse.

I could write directly to the APPG, but of course that goes via LCAG who act as secretariat.

Or I can furnish other Loan Charge victims who have also been left behind, with the information that LCAG & WTT may have omitted, so that they join me in appealing to LCAG and appealing directlty to their own MP.

[sadkingbilly]

'could', 'can', - what WILL you do??

[woody1]

Well I could raise the matter directly with HMRC and Ray McCann. But that could jeopardise the position of those who did not declare their loans on their 2019 Tax Return and who currently are able to access the better settlement terms.

Surely HMRC couldn't have missed the same wording, in the white space, on hundreds (thousands?) of tax returns in lieu of declaring loans?

Were any of these people challenged about it by HMRC? If not then one can only assume that was a conscious decision on their part.

[loanchargehurt]

Surely HMRC couldn't have missed the same wording, in the white space, on hundreds (thousands?) of tax returns in lieu of declaring loans?

Were any of these people challenged about it by HMRC? If not then one can only assume that was a conscious decision on their part.

Don’t mistake HMRC incompetence for deliberate strategy.

see this is where the lobby group LCAG should be stepping up on behalf of the 24,000 victims who are not being offered these better terms.

But LCAG can’t do that because it was they who encouraged, promoted and sold the non-disclosure & non-compliance & then misled the APPG and didn’t tell the McCann Review.

[woody1]

But LCAG can’t do that because it was they who encouraged, promoted and sold the non-disclosure & non-compliance & then misled the APPG and didn’t tell the McCann Review.

Those are pretty serious allegations. Potentially unfounded. From an unknown person on the internet with who knows what agenda. I'm starting to think eek was right about you not being who/what you purport to be.

Anyway, I'm not going to lend any credence to this by keeping it going, so that's me done.

[loanchargehurt]

Those are pretty serious (and unsubstantiated) allegations.

I'm not going to lend any credence to them by keeping this going, so that's me done.

Not unsubstantiated at all.

LCAG provided written guidance for non-disclosure of loans in the 2019 Tax Return. I have a copy. LCAG promoted and sold tax avoidance, and possibly worse than that because they absolutely would have known that the loans required disclosure under the law and that they were using a loan scheme promoter (Andrew Thornhill) for advice on how not to comply. That is not unsubstantiated.

We also know that LCAG met with both the APPG & the Ray McCann Review after the terms were announced. Do you think that LCAG said to either the APPG or the McCann Review that they can't just offer better terms to those who haven't paid because they'd be wrong to think that only consisted of people who couldn't pay, given what LCAG had promoted and sold?

It is also factual that LCAG hosted separate webinars with both Setu Kamal and Ray Trew. It is also factual that WTT, with LCAG, attended more APPG meetings than anyone else.

One guess as to who got invited to the key meeting to discuss the outcome of the McCann Review.....yip it was WTT, their partners in crime who also promoted and sold non-disclosure of loans in the 2019 Tax Return. Do you see any sign in the minutes of either LCAG or Tom Wallace from WTT confessing to MPs that it was they who encouraged and sold non-disclosure and that the Review has resulted in an perverse and unfair outcome?

Indeed the minutes of the APPG meeting criticise HMRC for the lack of settlements between 2020 and 2026 and the cost to HMRC (the taxpayer), yet neither LCAG nor WTT appear to have taken the opportunity to confess their part in causing that situation. That could be considered rather misleading.

2025-12-02-Minutes-of-the-Loan-Charge-and-Taxpayer-Fairness-APPG-Meeting.pdf


So it doesn't need you to lend it any credence, but maybe you are starting to realise the nature of what has happened here.

[s684]

AI is 90% confident you're GB (former scheme promoter). Which would explain a lot, and especially your beef with WTT, LCAG.

https://armadillo-support.co.uk/who-are-we
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/h...ance-promoters