Excluded from the McCann settlement

[eek]

Yes I agree.

However, at the time of the deadline there were no pending post-DR cases nor the likelihood of any legislative changes and the consequences of not taking action before 2020 would be the penal loan charge as per the legislation.

As I said earlier, how easy would it be for the lobby group LCAG to point out that Mr McCann himself encouraged settlement, under threat of the more penal Loan Charge, then he effectively removed the Loan Charge and gave better terms to those who ignored his advice and avoided that tax (tax avoidance).

Why this is not the main focus of the lobby group?

If you don't like what a lobby group focuses on - create your own group...

[WorldOfScams]

Yes I agree.

However, at the time of the deadline there were no pending post-DR cases nor the likelihood of any legislative changes and the consequences of not taking action before 2020 would be the penal loan charge as per the legislation.

As I said earlier, how easy would it be for the lobby group LCAG to point out that Mr McCann himself encouraged settlement, under threat of the more penal Loan Charge, then he effectively removed the Loan Charge and gave better terms to those who ignored his advice and avoided that tax (tax avoidance).

Why this is not the main focus of the lobby group?

I believe they are raising the issue

“LCAG will continue to expose the reality of the McCann Review: that it was never an independent review and that it continues to be a serious waste of taxpayers' money. We will also continue to challenge the unfair exclusion of those facing HMRC action before or after the Loan Charge period, and of those who settled with HMRC prior to the McCann Review.”

[loanchargehurt]

If you don't like what a lobby group focuses on - create your own group...

You are not being very helpful to those who have been badly treated by HMRC, Morse & McCann.

[loanchargehurt]

I believe they are raising the issue

“LCAG will continue to expose the reality of the McCann Review: that it was never an independent review and that it continues to be a serious waste of taxpayers' money. We will also continue to challenge the unfair exclusion of those facing HMRC action before or after the Loan Charge period, and of those who settled with HMRC prior to the McCann Review.”

Yes, but it's not really LCAG's main focus because of course they were directly involved in encouraging the position. They sold tax avoidance.

Even paragraph you quoted shows that those excluded are not the priority. Read it as the two separate sentences in that order of priority.

1. it was never an independent review (there will never be an independent review)
2. it continues to be a serious waste of taxpayers' money (misguided)
3. We will also continue to challenge the unfair exclusion of those facing HMRC action before or after the Loan Charge period
4. and of those who settled with HMRC prior to the McCann Review.

[woody1]

Yes, but it's not really LCAG's main focus because of course they were directly involved in encouraging the position. They sold tax avoidance.

Eh, I thought it was a group of scheme users? What tax avoidance did they (a non profit organisation) sell?


Loan Charge Action Group, a UK non-profit campaign organization

Campaigns against the retrospective UK tax legislation known as the Loan Charge introduced in the 2017 Budget.

• Acts as the secretariat for the All-Party Parliamentary Loan Charge Group (APPG).
• Offers support and guidance to affected individuals, including contractors and freelancers.

[loanchargehurt]

Eh, I thought it was a group of scheme users? What tax avoidance did they (a non profit organisation) sell?


Loan Charge Action Group, a UK non-profit campaign organization

Campaigns against the retrospective UK tax legislation known as the Loan Charge introduced in the 2017 Budget.

• Acts as the secretariat for the All-Party Parliamentary Loan Charge Group (APPG).
• Offers support and guidance to affected individuals, including contractors and freelancers.

In September 2020 LCAG provided 'advice' on white space wording within the 2019 Tax Return, rather than disclose loans in the boxes required, based on claimed litigation with ex-Promoter Andrew Thornhill for which they raised further funds via gofundme:

Fundraiser by Loan Charge Action Group LCAG : LCAG Litigation Action


You mention them being a non-profit organisation but somebody is profiting as their accounts show circa £70,000 of members funds paid in "consultancy fees" every year.

The fundraising request I have linked above specifically says "*However, if the FTT case does not progress, then all remaining funds (if any) will be donated to charity." Yet the accounts show no separate litigation fund. It seems to all be mixed in with members subscriptions and used to pay "consultants". WTT is similar. They raised invoices for a "litigation fund" and then added vat (i.e. it was really a sales invoice). The litigation sold as far back as 2018 has never ever materialised. WTT provided similar non-disclosure 'advice' re the 2019 Tax Return. That seems to me to be avoidance of a legislative tax (tax avoidance).

[eek]

In September 2020 LCAG provided 'advice' on white space wording within the 2019 Tax Return, rather than disclose loans in the boxes required, based on claimed litigation with ex-Promoter Andrew Thornhill for which they raised further funds via gofundme:

Fundraiser by Loan Charge Action Group LCAG : LCAG Litigation Action


You mention them being a non-profit organisation but somebody is profiting as their accounts show circa £70,000 of members funds paid in "consultancy fees" every year.

The fundraising request I have linked above specifically says "*However, if the FTT case does not progress, then all remaining funds (if any) will be donated to charity." Yet the accounts show no separate litigation fund. It seems to all be mixed in with members subscriptions and used to pay "consultants". WTT is similar. They raised invoices for a "litigation fund" and then added vat (i.e. it was really a sales invoice). The litigation sold as far back as 2018 has never ever materialised. WTT provided similar non-disclosure 'advice' re the 2019 Tax Return. That seems to me to be avoidance of a legislative tax (tax avoidance).

And

1) it's the past.
2) I don't think you paid anything into either WTT or LCAG (correct me if I'm wrong but let's be honest here)

Everyone else on here is dealing with today's issues be it West 28th or Boox / Churchill Knight - yet you seem to be obsessed going over historic items whilst (ignoring the money side of things) attacking literally all the (very few) people who have tried to help others ..

So I'm at a loss as to why you are complaining about these things - beyond the fact you seem to be trying to create a completely none important side issue with the intent of spreading disharmony (which is the forte of the person I believe you are).

Edit - I await your reply during working hours tomorrow..

[woody1]

loanchargehurt

You are the only person I know of here who has levelled criticisms of LCAG. My impression was that they were scheme users giving their time for free, and trying to get a better outcome for everyone. I'm sure it's taken a toll on those organising it.

WTT are a different matter. A number here have raised concerns about them. However, the reality is they are a business (for-profit) and it's not surprising they've taken full advantage of the opportunities, over the past 10 years, to market and sell their services.

[loanchargehurt]

loanchargehurt

You are the only person I know of here who has levelled criticisms of LCAG. My impression was that they were scheme users giving their time for free, and trying to get a better outcome for everyone. I'm sure it's taken a toll on those organising it.

WTT are a different matter. A number here have raised concerns about them. However, the reality is they are a business (for-profit) and it's not surprising they've taken full advantage of the opportunities, over the past 10 years, to market and sell their services.

I don't think you are aware how deep this goes.

LCAG have been described by Webber (on here) as a sub-group of WTT. LCAG act as secretariat to the APPG and control who the APPG meets and what they get to hear. More often than not it was WTT who were invited, though Ray Trew also got an invite to sell his wares. The Directors of LCAG are members of WTT. Ray Trew's firm Castlemaine Associates acted as LCAG accountants (before Castlemaine got a winding-up order from HMRC).

At the time of the Morse Review LCAG focused heavily on those with no open enquiries & pushed it with the APPG. The two Directors of LCAG had no open enquiries (because their scheme was undisclosed). HMRC objected and Jim Harra described these as the most "egregious". But Morse effectively pardoned those with pre-DR loans where there was no open enquiry. This left behind those who had an open enquiry. You may recall that HMRC resisted repayments for those who'd settled pre-DR loans where there had not been full disclosure (rather than reasonable disclosure). Those who had no open enquiry and hadn't settled were home-free. Those who had disclosed their loans and so had an open enquiry, though not subject to the Loan Charge, were left behind and are still being pursued by HMRC under s684 notices.

Then in regard to post-DR loans LCAG sold a litigation and with it came 'advice' on not disclosing loans in the 2019 Tax Return other than in the white space. That litigation I think was to be through former promoter Andrew Thornhill. No such litigation has ever materialised but it does look like the funds are dwindling as per LCAG's published accounts. LCAG's accounts are a bit behind perhaps because their accounting firm, Ray Trew's Castlemaine Associates, have a winding-up order from HMRC! Have LCAG used the funds raised for the purpose for which they were raised?
Fundraiser by Loan Charge Action Group LCAG : LCAG Litigation Action
LC ACTION GROUP overview - Find and update company information - GOV.UK
CASTLEMAINE ASSOCIATES LTD overview - Find and update company information - GOV.UK

WTT are certainly another matter.
They sold themselves as experts in the contracting industry and as tax investigation specialists despite no previous involvement in the contracting industry and zero litigation experience. The main Director, G Webber, did have previous experience with Rebus in selling promises of legal action against Promoters which then came to nothing and Rebus evaporated with everyone losing their money. G Webber did have previous involvement with Elysian Fuels which was an unregulated biofuel investment scheme that also collapsed, leaving investors with worthless shares and prompting mis-selling claims.

The first resolution WTT sold was to write-off loans back in 2017. Big Group members were charged for the privilege before WTT seem to have realised that writing-off loans gave rise to the equivalent of a PAYE charge. Oops. Never mind, on with the next resolution sale, promoted with a claim of a 65% chance of defeating the loan charge by arguing employers are responsible for the tax. My friend was charged £160 to join Big Group in 2016 plus £18 per month subscription. Lucky for him he missed the loan write-off. Then in 2018 he was charged a further £1,800 to join this resolution, then in 2019 he was invoiced at least another £900 for a "Contribution to Litigation Fund"(I'm trying to establish if that was a part payment). These figures all include VAT. VAT is added to sales, not to a litigation fund. WTT accounts do not show any litigation fund. The accounts though do show millions in profits for WTT. HMRC would have benefitted by the amount of the vat on sales and the corporation tax on the profits, and WTT benefitted from the profits. My friend saw no litigation. In 2023 my friend asked for the return of his "Contribution to Litigation Fund", but WTT refused quoting the terms of joining the Big Group while saying "Litigation with HMRC will take time..." . I can show you WTT selling their wares via CUK articles where WTT were claiming in 2019 to have cases in the Tribunal system. It has been pointed out to my friend that what WTT have been selling has had zero chance of success since 2017. I have been shown that legislation was introduced in 2017 to deny the PAYE credit. So WTT's claim of a 65% chance of success has been BS since 2017.

WTT also promoted and sold non-disclosure of loans in the 2019 Tax Return.


Eventually WTT did take a Judicial Review in 2025 where they were criticised for making claims but bringing no evidence. They had their backside kicked. Apparently there was an extra fee of £1,200 to WTT to be part of the Judicial Review...plus the legal fees!
It makes for interesting reading: White & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs [2025] EWHC 1600 (Admin) (27 June 2025)
My friend tells me WTT are still selling victims more JR's !

My friend is considering action against WTT. There may be many others in the same boat. I struggle to see how the promotion and selling by WTT differs from any other Promoter? Indeed, it is arguably worse as the law was clear AND people were already in a desperate place. Did WTT check the ability of clients to pay HMRC in the event of defeat, before taking money from them with a promise of 65% of success that WTT just made up and which clearly was complete rubbish.

My original point of this thread was to find out if there are others in the same position of being excluded by McCann who still frequent here. It is very interesting that the lobbying of the APPG has led to the outcome of the McCann Review which gives better terms only to those who still haven't agreed settlement. Did LCAG & WTT tell the APPG that they had promoted and sold non-disclosure, or did they mislead the APPG to think that those who hadn't managed to settle were the only ones who needed help with affordability? Maybe Eek had a point, maybe we do need separate lobbying of the APPG to point out that the outcome is completely perverse in that those who complied have been treated the worst.

[loanchargehurt]

And

1) it's the past.
2) I don't think you paid anything into either WTT or LCAG (correct me if I'm wrong but let's be honest here)

Everyone else on here is dealing with today's issues be it West 28th or Boox / Churchill Knight - yet you seem to be obsessed going over historic items whilst (ignoring the money side of things) attacking literally all the (very few) people who have tried to help others ..

So I'm at a loss as to why you are complaining about these things - beyond the fact you seem to be trying to create a completely none important side issue with the intent of spreading disharmony (which is the forte of the person I believe you are).

Edit - I await your reply during working hours tomorrow..

It is really interesting that you keep trying to consign into the past those who are excluded from the concessions offered by the McCann Review. These people are still here and still paying. Don't they deserve some help? You simply dismiss it as "it's the past". These people have been treated far worse by HMRC than anyone who has benefitted from Morse Review & the McCann Review, so why don't you care about what has happened, is happening, to them?