Excluded from the McCann settlement

[loanchargehurt]

No but then I don't receive my annual income as loans.

-------

I seem to recall that IHT only applied to some schemes (depending on the type of trust) and the first c.£300k (IHT threshold) was exempt.

Didn't many of these schemes end up not being liable for employer & employee NICs on the loans? That's not something anyone using a PAYE umbrella would have escaped.

Interest is paid by all taxpayers where tax is paid later than when the income was earned.

-------

Since my patience has run out, it's time for some final harsh words.

Stop moaning about being hard done by, and actually go do something about it. Or just let it go.

Not particularly sad that this is your last (harsh) word on something that doesn’t affect you, heck you’re not even consistent: https://forums.contractoruk.com/hmrc...ml#post3025740

[cojak]

I refer to part 1 of my earlier post https://forums.contractoruk.com/hmrc...ml#post3031734
In short: I agree it's unfair that those people who fought back or ignored HMRC altogether, should now be in a more favourable position than those who agreed 'pre-McCann' settlements. I can also see why you think the new McCann terms should apply to all Loans regardless of scheme dates or previous agreements.

I'd love to offer you a solution BUT ...... if you and others in your position still want to argue your (retrospective) case, I think your only remaining chance is via your MP, wider lobbying or legal challlenge. Sadly, I doubt you will succeed.

Finally (for me), the title of this thread is Excluded from the McCann settlement. That does not apply to me so as they say on Dragons Den "Good luck, but I'm out"!

Thank you for your input Diagnose b4 u prescribe , providing clarity on a thread that has become heated on both sides.

[loanchargehurt]

Thank you for your input Diagnose b4 u prescribe , providing clarity on a thread that has become heated on both sides.

What two sides do you refer to when you say "both sides?".

I would refer you back to the original question which seemed a perfectly reasonable question about the unfavourable position faced by those unfairly excluded from the McCann Review (as confirmed by Diagnose b4...).
https://forums.contractoruk.com/hmrc...ml#post3031672

I did give some additional factual information as to what LCAG & WTT had been up to, how much had been extracted by them from loan charge victims since the Loan Charge was announced, and how those funds had been described and then used or misused, but as it is factual there surely can't be two sides?
https://forums.contractoruk.com/hmrc...ml#post3031787

So when you refer to both sides do you mean in reference to yours an Woody1 's controversial comments that those affected should quit moaning and just " settle and pay tax like everyone else"?
https://forums.contractoruk.com/hmrc...ml#post3031844

Can you clarify, where do you see two sides when you say: "a thread that has become heated on both sides."?

[sadkingbilly]

So when you refer to both sides do you mean in reference to yours an Woody1 's controversial comments that those affected should quite moaning and just " settle and pay tax like everyone else"?

controversial?? not at all.

[woody1]

Not particularly sad that this is your last (harsh) word on something that doesn’t affect you, heck you’re not even consistent: https://forums.contractoruk.com/hmrc...ml#post3025740

I still think exactly what I did then. McCann should have applied to all post-2011 loans whether settled or not.

But it's never going to happen is it, so what's the use in wishful thinking.

Better to accept the situation, crappy as it may be, and move on with your life.

[loanchargehurt]

I still think exactly what I did then. McCann should have applied to all post-2011 loans whether settled or not.

But it's never going to happen is it, so what's the use in wishful thinking.

Better to accept the situation, crappy as it may be, and move on with your life.

Thank you. I accept you believe it will never happen and that the other 24,000 should just give in and accept the position. Sadly though many can’t move on with their life because they are waiting on HMRC enforcement making them bankrupt for a debt other people have had excused or materially reduced.

It is crappy.

[woody1]

You should talk to one of the contractors running LCAG. I'm sure they'll tell you what a monumental, draining battle it's been just getting this far. I'd be surprised if they have much fight left in them. So unless someone else wants to pick up the gauntlet...

And BTW, no-one will ever get anywhere lobbying about pre-2011 loans. The only reason there was ever a review was because of the Loan Charge and, following Morse, pre-2011 loans were exempted. Pre-2011 loans are now back where they were, as if the Loan Charge never happened, so the only recourse is fighting through the courts which others have already tried and failed.

[woody1]

Sadly though many can’t move on with their life because they are waiting on HMRC enforcement making them bankrupt for a debt other people have had excused or materially reduced.

This confuses me. These people can't have settled, therefore surely they will benefit from McCann?

Or are you talking about pre-2011 loans?

I know of people many years ago, who used schemes, who were bankrupted. Sadly, this is an unfortunate consequence of getting involved in tax avoidance. These days it's not so common because HMRC accept very long payment plans. Someone on this forum a while back said they got 20 years to pay.

[loanchargehurt]

This confuses me. These people can't have settled, therefore surely they will benefit from McCann?

Or are you talking about pre-2011 loans?

I know of people many years ago, who used schemes, who were bankrupted. Sadly, this is an unfortunate consequence of getting involved in tax avoidance. These days it's not so common because HMRC accept very long payment plans. Someone on this forum a while back said they got 20 years to pay.

Yes I mean pre-2011.

Could you take on a payment plan for circa £100k with penal forward interest and be sure of still being able to meet the monthly repayments 20 years from now?

Remember this is for a period to which both Morse & McCann have said the law was not clear and that HMRC may well not have been successful in Court had they actually taken a contractor scheme to Tribunal. Yet those who acted before the law was clear can’t get the same improved terms given to those who acted after the law allegedly became clear and who then did not act within the legally prescribed deadline to declare their loans.

As I have said before, maybe if the lobby group concentrated on this unfairness and focused on arguing for the same improved terms for all, the MPs would get it.

Instead they are focused on calling themselves victims & arguing for a judge led review which you have effectively pointed out would just follow the recent court decisions and deem them all liable for tax on what they received.

[woody1]

The option has always existed for any scheme user, with pre-2011 loans, who hasn't settled, to ask for their appeal to be heard at tribunal. Pre-2011 loans were before the DR legislation came in, so would be judged on the law as it was at the time (ie. the law that was "not clear").

If you haven't settled your pre-2011 loans, you could do this.

I wouldn't fancy the chances though because I can't recall a single appeal in the last 20 years, involving a tax avoidance scheme, that has ever been successful.