I wrote in the original post:
"Excluded from the McCann settlement
14 August 2026, 12:20
Is anyone else on here excluded from the McCann settlement terms because they did the right thing and followed the law:
1. either by disclosing loans from pre-2011 removed by Morse: or
2. agreeing post-DR settlement terms with HMRC per the Loan Charge deadline of 30 September 2020?
Is anyone (group) raising any actions?
How can a former CIOT President have recommended better terms for those who didn’t settle by the deadline when he himself was recommending settlement previous to the deadline! 😠"
People are distraught, suicidal, and your response is:
"Perhaps it's time to try your grievances out somewhere else? Mumsnet perhaps? I'm sure they'd love you."
What a piece of work.
Incidentally your AI generated response
AI Overview
The "white space" (the "Any other information" box on page TR 7 of the SA100 Self Assessment tax return) was recommended by the Loan Charge Action Group (LCAG) and advisors for taxpayers affected by the Loan Charge to make formal disclosures regarding disguised remuneration/loan arrangements for the 2018/19 tax year (filed in 2019). [1, 2]
Purpose of the LCAG White Space Guidance
is really just more AI nonsense. There was a specific box in which to enter the amount of the loans. LCAG's specific 'advice' was "SA 101 Page Ai Box 21 - Enter £1" (rather than the full amount of the loan which was chargeable under the legislation). LCAG got this advice by paying ex-Promoter Andrew Thornhill with funds raised from victims via crowdfunding for "litigation". WTT's 'advice' was "We recommend leaving these boxes blank". LCAG then led MPs to think, and likely the Review to think, that it was the people who hadn't settled who most needed help. Then in the APPG meeting to discuss the outcome of the McCann Review only WTT were invited, so the MPs never heard about the ruse not to declare their loans in the 2019 Tax Return as required. Some people then received Discovery Assessments, this happens when HMRC discover a shortfall in tax, and were/are facing the penal loan charge, plus six years of interest, plus penalties thanks to having followed that 'advice'. Unless they take McCann's offer. No such litigation has been forthcoming from either LCAG or WTT.
Twice before this you have said you were done responding to my responses. I see you are not a person that can be believed.
"Excluded from the McCann settlement
14 August 2026, 12:20
Is anyone else on here excluded from the McCann settlement terms because they did the right thing and followed the law:
1. either by disclosing loans from pre-2011 removed by Morse: or
2. agreeing post-DR settlement terms with HMRC per the Loan Charge deadline of 30 September 2020?
Is anyone (group) raising any actions?
How can a former CIOT President have recommended better terms for those who didn’t settle by the deadline when he himself was recommending settlement previous to the deadline! 😠"
People are distraught, suicidal, and your response is:
"Perhaps it's time to try your grievances out somewhere else? Mumsnet perhaps? I'm sure they'd love you."
What a piece of work.
Incidentally your AI generated response
AI Overview
The "white space" (the "Any other information" box on page TR 7 of the SA100 Self Assessment tax return) was recommended by the Loan Charge Action Group (LCAG) and advisors for taxpayers affected by the Loan Charge to make formal disclosures regarding disguised remuneration/loan arrangements for the 2018/19 tax year (filed in 2019). [1, 2]
Purpose of the LCAG White Space Guidance
- Disclosure vs. Non-Disclosure: Taxpayers dealing with post-9 December 2010 loans who chose to disclose rather than remain silent were advised to input specific wording in the return's white space to mitigate accusations of concealment or carelessness, and to prompt proper review by HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) inspectors. [1, 2, 3]
- Averting Penalties: Proper white space narrative was intended to establish full transparency regarding loan values and positions, acting as a safeguard while individuals contested or arranged settlements regarding the controversial Loan Charge legislation. [1, 2]
is really just more AI nonsense. There was a specific box in which to enter the amount of the loans. LCAG's specific 'advice' was "SA 101 Page Ai Box 21 - Enter £1" (rather than the full amount of the loan which was chargeable under the legislation). LCAG got this advice by paying ex-Promoter Andrew Thornhill with funds raised from victims via crowdfunding for "litigation". WTT's 'advice' was "We recommend leaving these boxes blank". LCAG then led MPs to think, and likely the Review to think, that it was the people who hadn't settled who most needed help. Then in the APPG meeting to discuss the outcome of the McCann Review only WTT were invited, so the MPs never heard about the ruse not to declare their loans in the 2019 Tax Return as required. Some people then received Discovery Assessments, this happens when HMRC discover a shortfall in tax, and were/are facing the penal loan charge, plus six years of interest, plus penalties thanks to having followed that 'advice'. Unless they take McCann's offer. No such litigation has been forthcoming from either LCAG or WTT.
Twice before this you have said you were done responding to my responses. I see you are not a person that can be believed.
Comment