Excluded from the McCann settlement

[loanchargehurt]

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

Ah, now I get it.

People forget that there were a number of accountants who did tax strategies themselves (according to some they deliberately defrauded themselves!), and many were more senior, more experienced and more expert than the individual you think. I know the individual and he had much, much less involvement historically than you realise. People on social media maybe don't like him because he says things they don't want to hear, but those of us who know and understand, know that he speaks the truth.

He has, subsequent to schemes ending, made a lot of good points with which I agree. So rather than immediately think of it as a "beef", maybe actually consider to what is being said and recognise that people have been played for fools for 10 years by those who claim they have some sort of solution to the loan charge. If you could take a step back and seek independent advice then you would see it too.

[WTFH]

He has, subsequent to schemes ending, made a lot of good points with which I agree.

You could have just said "no, I'm not him", but you chose not to.

Has he made any points recently with which you disagree?

[loanchargehurt]

You could have just said "no, I'm not him", but you chose not to.

Has he made any points recently with which you disagree?

No I'm not him. Yet still that is your focus rather than considering the evidence being offered.

Peak didn't have any schemes, they were Premier or EDF (with RV) schemes. Peak had a handful of members of their network who were considered able to provide education on schemes, he wasn't one of them. He came along after it was all over. Saying Peak was a promoter is no different to saying LCAG was a promoter for Setu Kamal, or for Andrew Thornhill, or for WTT.

It is remarkable how resistant people here are to talking about those victims who have been excluded, or examining what beliefs they have been sold most recently.

[cojak]

Let’s summarise the McCann review exclusions once again, shall we?

The scope of the McCann Loan Charge Review has been criticised for excluding taxpayers involved in similar DR schemes, under similar circumstances, but which fall outside the scope of the Loan Charge.

Such taxpayers fall into two broad camps, namely:

1. Those who used pre-December 2010 or post-April 2019 DR schemes; and

2. Those who used DR schemes that were initially within the scope of the Loan Charge but who were excepted from the Loan Charge, either because they disclosed the DR scheme to HMRC and/or because they entered into HMRC's settlement terms (initially published in 2017 and revised again in 2020), in each case under threat of the Loan Charge.

Just in case anyone had forgotten.

[loanchargehurt]

Let’s summarise the McCann review exclusions once again, shall we?



Just in case anyone had forgotten.

Thanks. That’s almost correct except it’s not true to say that anyone who disclosed their loans was excluded. Indeed everyone had a legal obligation to disclose their loans. Those who settled before 1st June 2021 are excluded as are those who declared the Loan Charge and have already paid it all.

Also, if they’ve declared the Loan Charge and paid more towards that liability than the new terms would amount to, then they get no refund! It’s extraordinary.

[s684]

No I'm not him.

AI compared posts on LinkedIn, X etc, with what you've posted here, and the correlation with Gordon Berry was striking.

I guess we'll just have to take your word for it that you're not.

[loanchargehurt]

Not one person has tried to dispute what has been said about LCAG selling Promoters: Setu Kamal, Ray Trew, Graham Webber or Andrew Thornhill. They can’t because it’s factual.

So instead they’ve tried to chase me off or have me removed on the basis that I am
similar to someone they already dislike, because I share the same truths that they don’t want to hear about being taken for fools by those they wanted to believe were here to save them.

Bullying tactics. Blind to the facts.

The accountants know the truth of it. None of what the above list of people have sold since 2017 has ever come to fruition.

[s684]

None of what the above list of people have sold since 2017 has ever come to fruition.

The white space declaration on those 2019 returns didn't turn out too bad.

[WTFH]

Bullying tactics. Blind to the facts.

Yes, your choice of replying to parts of comments and ignoring others, while always going back to your same tactic.

For the second time of asking:
Tell us which of GB's points you disagree with.

[eek]

Yes, your choice of replying to parts of comments and ignoring others, while always going back to your same tactic.

For the second time of asking:
Tell us which of GB's points you disagree with.

you know that
loanchargehurt isn’t going to answer the question because that would reveal who he really is and there is something very off about him.

Put it this way he’s mentioned things in here that only those involved in selling schemes would know and nothing they have posted since my last post changes my view about who the poster is and his motives. GB has form in denying he is GB